Why does this book cause so much vitriol whenever discussed by it's critics? I have never seen such adamant critics of any other fiction book
This book didn't change my life, I did, but I did read it.
>>23549607Ayn Rand shits all over jews in it.
>>23549607Because commie retard incel.ugly faggots can't refute a single thing in it so they sperg out.
Because if men actually read it, society would crumble in two more weeks. If Mexicans were given free copies the United States would be dipped in absolute chaos.
It's wordy as fuck and when she meets the Greek or Italian guy and he launches into a pages long monologue that's the writer's barely poorly disguised fetish it really bogs down. I didn't finish it because I stopped caring. I think John Galt had the right idea but this bitch just couldn't shut the fuck up.
>>23549681She loved goyim cock.
>>23550528>implying anyone can refute a novel Dumb /pol/tard
>>23551734You haven't read it have you?The book makes very specific and detailed arguments.
>>23551881I was too busy cutting my thighs and blaming /pol/ for it
>>23551881Almost no one who criticizes it has actually read itHence they repeat the 'selfishness is good' thing over and overSort of like the people who say that Gibbon blamed the fall of Rome on ChristianityPeople just repeat shit that makes it clear they haven't read the actual book
>>23551881>read this novel which is just 1000 pages of a pseud beating you over the head with lolbert propagandaYou have to be retarded to willingly subject yourself to such tripe
>>23551881So is it a good novel? You can't refute someone's taste in fiction. I don't need to 'refute' Dan Brown's conspiracy stuff to dislike his books
>>23551926Her best novel is We the Living and is an incredible work of actual fiction without the browbeating as this guy indicates >>23551909Then The Fountain is another very good novel with a touch of brow beating.Atlas Shrugged does drag and go overboard and I think that's safe to admit without having to address the ideas so some scoundrels just talk about that.You can skip the entire 100 page Galt speech at the end.The rest is pretty good but not great.We the Living. That book says it without saying it as a novel "should."I think Rand starting raging that people weren't getting the point well enough and went off the deep end slowly and steadily.
>>23551905MANY SUCH CASES
>>23551953Atlas Shrugged could have been a zippy 150 novella and nobody would complain. Cut out John Galt, the spanish dude, the pirate dude, the strike; just focus on the railroad lady and the steel dude and their relationship and their struggles to get their shit done with the government and the mentality of their families and boards. All the same themes, the exact same point is made, and we don't get bored of the repetition. But she didn't do that because she wasn't good enough as a novelist to do the needful compression, and was too arrogant to cut out anything
>>23551959>wasn't good enough as a novelistThat's actually the saddest part. She is.Read We the Living and your opinion on that particular point will change I believe.
>>23551909Ok, then don't offer opinions on it
>>23549607Its a halfway decent science fiction book with a rather overblown love story in it.As a novelist Rand was a decent writer of pulp scifi.As a philospher Rand was a decent writer of pulp scifi.If you want an example about why her fiction is so poor, let me give you the plot holes that made me laugh out loud every time I've read the book.>The cigarettes that have the dollar sign in them all come from Galt's Gulch. Which is a n Alpine Valley. High in the mountains of Colorado. Tobacco. Growing high in the Rockies. In quantities vast enough to make a lot of cigarettes. That are then machine rolled and placed into commercial packs. In a remote valley. By 2-3 guys.>There are a couple of guys mining gold. In the Rockies. Two, maybe Three guys. Digging out (probably) telluride ore or (maybe) pegmatite ore. By themselves. And processing it into gold. In a remote valley. Just a few guys.>They are cut off from the outside world because it is all going to collapse and because of the Striker's Oath. But they have a bakery. High in a remote alpine valley. In the Rockies. So someone is somehow growing enough wheat to feed everyone and have enough left over for a bakery. High in the Rockies. Plus all the excess milk & butter and salt and sugar you'd need. In a very remote, isolated place. High up on the Rockies. In addition to all you'd need just to survive. Ina community of a few hundred people. High in the mountains.And so on. Rand shows a total, complete, and utter ignorance of how farming, mining, and even *baking* WORKS or how much of a massive infrastructure is needed for just a town of 300 people or what life is like above sea level!The entire book is like that.And she never actually present her "philosophy" properly, she just has fictional characters make speeches. Did the EEEEeeeviiiiil gubmint in her science fiction novel do bad, mean things because her fictional villains disagreed with her personal philosophy?Yes.That is not why OSHA tells you to install safety shutoffs.
>>23549607Ayn Rand>Boy, Communism sure is terrible! Gosh! In the nations controlled by Communists it gets so bad that innocent men, women, and children starve to death! Readers>That's obviously true. In your perfect world what would you do about all those innocent people, enslaved by tyrants, and dying of starvation?Ayn Rand>In my magnum opus, Atlas Shrugged, I explain EXACTLY how I would respond to the suffering of the masses enslaved by Communism! In the novel mosy or Europe and Asia are totally under the yoke of those dastardly Communists! Because they are so bad at everything their citizens are starving and the nations of the West send ships full of food to ease their suffering. So one of my bold Objectivist heroes STOPS THOSE SHIPS! You see, "charity" is just Communism! Giving money to the poor, clothes to the naked, or food to the starving just helps the Moochers and the Takers! So my brave, dashing Objectivist hero Ragnar Sannes kjold uses his totally-not-the-Nautilus super submarine to stop those ships, confiscate the evil, nasty food going to the starving slaves of Communism, and makes sure that the super rich industrialists get a tax rebate! THAT is the height of morality!
>>23551905Honestly, I learned this the hard way. Makes one feel like a real idiot when you think back on it and eonder just what the point even was. Think I might give the book a shot. I mean, It's just a book in the end. People have written crazier stuff before.
>>23551905I've read the book multiple times.I wrote this>>23552057and this>>23552094Its a fairly entertaining scifi book with potboiler sex inserts.For a discussion of politics in a scifi book Space Viking is FAR superior
>>23551959Nah, she is. She just did what some othe novelists, after realizing that some people didn't get their work, do and started explaining everything for the idiots in the room.
>>23552106>the idiots in the roomA very concise description of Objectivists
>>23552118That's nice, honey
>>23552126Thanks for amplifying my point for me.
>>23552057Ready for the best one? The absolute BEST character in Galt's Gulch?Her rather obvious self-insert.>High in the Rockies is Galt's Gulch. Totally isolated from the surrounding world. The alpine valley in Colorado is where the few hundred Ubermens - uh, *Creators & Builders* live after taking the Striker's Oath. They're waiting for the world of looters and moochers to collapse so they have to be independent. Among them is a writer, a woman with big eyes and messy hair, a woman that refused to have/couldn't get her books published by the bad guys. But she's a Good Thinker! She is a Creator and a Builder! She's taken the Striker's Oath! So what does she do?>She's a fishwife.>In an alpine valley.>In the Rockies.>Where she catches SO MANY FISH that she has a large enough surplus to sell to support her other needs.>High in the mountains.
It seems that unemployable Americans really hate this book.
>>23552631>REEEEEE! REEEE! I say! Any criticism must make you American, and Bad! REEEEEE!I adore how you stopped talking about the book or its points, refuse to rebut any criticisms, but are trying to insult people engaging in OP's topic.CLASSIC!
>OP>23549607>>Why do so many people hate this book?The critics>23550585>23551909>23551959>23552057 >23552094 >23552583>semi-serious to serious points about issues with the book, plot, and so forth>The defenders>23551953>23551971>>yeah, its pretty much very flawed, but a different book is good>The Objectivists>23551905>23551954>23552631>if you don't like it you must be ignorant or bad>so the overall consensus is that Atlas Shrugged isn't very good?[edited to fix major typo]
it's so cut & dry black & white that it's fucking goofycartoons are more believableand she's preaching at you and thinking she's making good points we've got an employee at my work right now who's whining and crying that no one likes him and everyone picks on him. this guy won't shut the fuck up, he talks all goddamn day. he's always sucking up to the boss, telling everyone how great he is, telling dumb stories that no one believes. if he just shut up a little, no one would have a problem with him. the book is a lot like that.
>using your mind is good>if everyone is greedy & selfish, things will work out for the best>trickle down economics>just unregulate everything, what could go wrong? the cream will rise to the topyea a lot of genius stuff in here for conservatives
I like how she made Elsworth Toohey in The Fountainhead basically a proto-Redditor
>>23552823The Fountainhead is my favorite Rand novel!Why? It is fiercely anti-Capitalist.Roark>Get's hired by a prestigious architecture firm as an employee. Gladly cashes their checks but REFUSES to make the designs his boss wants because he is "above" that. A stark rejection of the idea that if you accept pay you owe your employer your labor. Gets fired because of it>Starts his own architecture firm but it fails because as an entrepreneur in a Capitalist system he is not giving the market what the market wants. The strong implication is that the market is *wrong*, an anti-Capitalist stance.>Gets hired to make a particular building in a particular style, delivers something completely different, so different he is successfully sued for not providing what he was contracted to provide. Rand paints the idea that if you PAY FOR X but the creator gives you Y you must accept the creative vision of the creator, a refutation of the Capitalist idea that you are owed what you paid for.>Roark is subcontracted the help another architect design a housing project. The plans are commissioned and paid for by another firm entirely and then they modify the designs THEY PAID FOR and build the homes they way they want. Roark dynamites them, utterly destroying other peoples' property and wiping out millions of dollars in investment because the PURCHASER did not use the thing they purchased PROPERLY, which is Rand arguing that property rights are meaningless in the face of creative vision, a direct rejection of Capitalism and Libertarianism. The Fountainhead is a direct *disavowal* of property rights, contract rights, and the idea that an employee should do what their employer pays them to do.
>>23552929Yeah Ayn Rand was a crypto-communist kike sent by Bolshevik kikes to brainwash Americans
>>23551881I've read it and it sets up a simplistic world whetein flat characters carry forward whatever vilification or diatribe Rand wants to spoon feed her audience. If you didn't figure out you were reading text from a self-help cult long before you got to the 80 page long John Galt sperg you were never going to make it anyway. Remember the part where the train tunnel collapses and Rand goes through passengers one-by-one highlighting why it was a good thing they died? Lol.
>>23549607I got filtered by shit writing
>>23553065Yes! And the mother and her kids? Well! The FATHER worked for the GOVERNMENT so his wife and children deserved a horrible death!Remember how Eddie, the loyal servant, rfuss to leave the broken train and dies in the desert to showcase that the Common Man just can't live without the Builders and he'd rather die than live without trains?lol
>>23552057I run a business with about 3 million yearly revenue with as many moving parts as you can imagine.The problems she writes about are WRIT LARGE.It's very obvious you've never run anything if you don't think what she says applies broadly.I'm the ship that keeps everyone afloat and I live in Illinois and I get offers to sell about twice a year for more money than my employees make in their families life and I think about saying fuck it all the time because the entire system is set up to destroy me.Why shouldn't I shrug?Because they want me to is the only reason I don't and that will only last up to a point.
>>23552094Charity doesn't help people. If you ever had enough money to give an amount that "mattered" you'd realize this.What helps people is empowering them to help themselves. Charity just makes them comfortable to never make a change or improve.And the government is literally NOT CAPABLE of charity because it's not their money. It's literally not charity.
>>23553065>>23553276Remember that time you posted and replied to yourself with YES!topkek
>>23549607I liked it despite the fucking awful dialog, and Galt's 80 Fucking Page speech summarising the philosophy of the last 800.Was a good warning and allegory to the dangers of lobbying and constant corporate growth.
>>23549607because it accurately described them. rand has many faults, but she's hated for the things she got right, not the things she got wrong. francisco d'anconia and midas mulligan aren't real people but wesley mouch and floyd ferris sure as fuck are.
>>23549607>Why does this book cause so much vitriol whenever discussed by it's critics? I have never seen such adamant critics of any other fiction book
>>23552057You've captured exactly what is bizarre to me about a lot of libertarian rhetoric, in your critique. Very often it seems that they conceive of economic relationships at only a very personal scale. The effort of some peon beneath them in their daydream isn't wholly real, only the product. To me, that is one of the evils of industrialization itself; we have reached a scale of production that is inherently abstracting to a point where the emotional tools of social regulation no longer work. There is no longer empathy, there is sometimes no appraisal of the existence of every moving part beyond numbers on a page. Which sounds like a sappy angle, I'm sure. What I mean is that out social instincts perform a regulatory function that promotes harmony, and distancing ourselves from it allows for utilitarianisms that eventually become corrupted and not so much for the good of all.
>>23552149My man, you sound like a child. I wasn't even talking about objectivists and ypu were acting like the guy this poster was talking about>>23552774 by trying to weasel in some jab about a bunch of people that clearly live in your head rent free. And it's clear that they do because now you are implying I am one. Idk, mqybe you have autism and just cannot tell when people are not interested in dealing with your tantrum. Now have fun typing out your next witty response while I pump this iron.
>>23553332Are you saying that the lords and nobles of feudal Japan or hungary where oh so aware of the value of their lowliest crofter sowing the hay in their fields?Well, if there's one thing marxists, crypto-marxists, and libertarians have in common its the fact that they think everything ultimately comes down to modes of production. Human consciousness does not even exist
>>23553332What you are doing is comparing corporate activity to regular people activity.Regular people tend to run businesses with pride and ARE LEGALLY LIABLE FOR THEIR ACTIONS.There is a huge difference and it's usually commie leftist retards that never ran a business that talk like you.You talk like the local construction company owner operates in the manner that Menard's does. You are totally clueless and so clueless you don't even realize you are doing this.Corporations are subsidized in every imaginable way by the system, while the local construction company is pushed down and attacked in every imaginable way.The local business has the OWNER'S NAME on it and he knows everyone in town.The corporation is faceless and will never face any consequence or harm based on it's actions.They are not the same.
>>23553363Sounds like you’re being immiserated by unyielding grind of capital growth. Nothing you can do to stop it either; even if you shrug you’ll just be replaced and forgotten.Welcome to the club.
>>23553363NTA>What you are doing is comparing corporate activity to regular people activity.Well, corps are legally persons. Same goes for smaller businesses. >The corporation is faceless and will never face any consequence or harm based on it's actions.Sure they do. In the end, the government can pull the blanket it provided to you from under you. Also, the CEO is literally the representative of the shareholders. All in all, I don't think that there is anything special about publically traded corporations vs smaller, privately owned ones that would cause the people who compose them to be of a lesser character than the other. I'm not a materialist.But you weren't talking to me anyway.
>>23553384>Nothing you can do to stop it eitherSure he can. Smaller businesses aren't going anywhere. It all depends on expectations.
>>23553384I'll be replaced by a corporation that employees hate to work at and does nothing but think of profit and I'll literally be eating steak and reading antique books that cost a thousand bucks a pop.So...you see how she is correct I guess.I'd probably hire a pool boy instead of cleaning it myself as well. So we'll go from 15 decent jobs to one guy making $30 twice a week.
>>23553407Smaller businesses have been eaten alive en masse by the big ones for the past ten years, they have no impact or influence on government allowances towards monoliths like Amazon and the like. eBay got caught last year hiring ex-special forces agents to fuck with a couple investigating their shitty practices and the government let them off with a slap on the wrist.That’s the whole point of lobbyists and kickbacks. It’s all due to how ceaselessly hungry industrial society has gotten and how much money it can make those in the right place and time.Getting angry about it won’t do anything, you might as well scream into your pillows and elicit the same effect.
>>23553400Yes. One out of a million CEOs have faced consequences for their actions.kekRemember when GM killed 7 people and knew they were doing it. And remember the CEO going to jail?I just remember the first part.Now try being a small business that commits fraud and kills 7 people.
>>23553417If this isn’t a larp, which I imagine it is from the quality of poster on this board, then you’re still deluded.Corpos don’t give a shit if the people below them are miserable, they’ll make their money off the backs of third-world labor regardless. They’ve killed for far less profit, too, if Coca-Cola tells us anything. You ragequitting doesn’t inconvenience them in the slightest.Stop looking for solidarity in the smut of an autistic Jewish femcel who couldn’t even fulfill her own ideals to a fifth of the degree she demanded other to do so, it’s embarrassing.
>>23549607>I have never seen such adamant critics of any other fiction bookBoy, I'm about to blow your mind
>>23553437I think you need to re read.They WANT me to quit. Of course it doesn't inconvenience them.It inconveniences all my customers that I offer better pricing and service to and it inconveniences all my employees that must then go work for the shit heads that hate them.>quality of posterI'm sure you are a good judge.
>>23553437Also, if you think people post on 4ch for the person they are responding to directly, then you are a low level midwit.I post for lurkers that outnumber posters about 20 to 1 if not more.I don't expect retards invested in their commie identity to ever change.
>>23553424>Getting angry about it won’t do anything, you might as well scream into your pillows and elicit the same effect.I'm not getting angry. Again, smaller businesses still exist and I believe they will, like private property even after most of Engels' demands have as of now been met, continue to exist.
>>23553431I'm not saying that these things do not happen. I'm just saying that the opposite also happens (even though you think that the only proper punishment for anything ever is total destruction and anything beyond that doesn't count). All in all, sounds like a civic virtue problem. A cultural problem. A people's problem. A democracy problem. A *my* problem. And not an *economic* problem.
>>23553493Economics happens in all instances of human life.It's the INCENTIVE structure where the problems and issues lie. I think you have a very weak understanding of this and it's why you think you can separate these things.Now...>even though you think that the only proper punishment for anything ever is total destruction and anything beyond that doesn't countSo I point out that the standard for corporations and private businesses are incredibly disparate and this is your response...Just concede instead next time.
>>23553493And again, not for you, but for the lurkers...This is why incentives define behavior.Corporations, or more accurately, the people that work for them and run them, face NO PERSONAL LIABILITY for their actions. This is an incentive to fuck people.Whereas small businesses can lose literally everything they ever worked for if they do something extremely negligent.So do the math on the incentives here.
>>23549607I have never read this book and based on the fact that it seems to be only popular in the usa I will never read this book
>>23553577>book about btfoing commies is only popular in the only country to ever have any semblance of btfoing commies
>>23553446You>>23553452Sound>>23553479Upset>>23553523LARP>>23553555Better
>>23553350Medieval lords and nobles were necessarily confronted with those people when rebellions arose, which was not infrequent. Such acts are no longer possible in the disarmed hive-life we live. The relationships they had then were very personal. Between lord and peasant were probably no more than three or four degrees of separation. Can the same be said for any modern industrialist, politician or high level functionary and yourself? We're primates geared to live in groups of a few hundred at best, and we've ramped the scale of social groupings exponentially in time insufficient for adaptation. Our new status quo is hardly stable enough to accommodate selection. It's the same problem with global warming. We create turbulent dynamics of incredible velocity that do not allow for equilibrium to emerge.
>>23553662It's hard for losers to imagine how successful people behave. It's a constant surprise to them.>imagining someone as upsetWhatever deflects enough will do the job I know. I've been here forever.Thank you for highlighting my posts.
>>23553437Your reading comprehension is so poor that you should be permanently banned from posting on a literary board.
The ITT bozos are just proving Op's point with every new post. Pathetic. Online leftists are an embarrassment, especially the American ones.
>>23553666>Medieval lords and nobles were necessarily confronted with those people when rebellions aroseNot necessarily.>Such acts are no longer possible in the disarmed hive-life we live.Excuses excuses.>Between lord and peasant were probably no more than three or four degrees of separation.Depends. Most lords did not actually live on their land and instead were often travelling or living where the the king was. Most peasants were only acquainted with the sheriff . But i agree, people should not be allowed to marry without the consent of their lord.>We're primates geared to live in groups of a few hundred at bestYou guys are just like marxist matetialists. Always selling yourself short and explaining that we simply brlong to a very specific kind of species-being which just so happens to make it so that humans can only ever live optimally (never ethically, because who even believes in that anymore?) Under my preferred economic system where all the people I hate are conveniently destroyed.Fucking boring.
>>23553669I appreciate you talking on my behalf. But you really don't have to.>>23553662I just told you that I'm not angry about that. Not sure why that's hard to accept. I think that pesky private property will continue to persist even after you are gone. Hell, now even workers collectively own a large share in capital. Do you have any idea what big players pension funds are?
>>23553588commies btfo
>>23553555>This is why incentives define behavior.Yeah yeah, free will doesn't exist. Whatever.>face NO PERSONAL LIABILITY for their actionsSure they do.>This is an incentive to fuck people.Do you believe human beings are incapable of acting in a good way unless forced to? And not by a religion or code of ethics, I mean literally forced to at gunpoint, with a noose swinging over their heads at all times? Rhetorical question. Don't answer that.
>>23554516What does private property/capital have to do with being gay? Do you guys ever stop to think that maybe you guys should just bite the bullet and become full-blown marxists instead of just being crypto-marxists who hate gay people? You already pretty much devalue any form of ideology and imply that an economic system, not culture, not ideology, not living people, is the real determinant behind a society's attitudes.
>>23549607Ayn Rand developed her philosophy specifically because she was so ugly that even in the shitstorm of the Russian Revolution neither her kike daddy nor the inbred alcoholic Bolsheviks were interested in raping her. She coped by convincing herself that this is due to socialism repressing the healthy and natural instincts (to rape Ayn Rand) in men, and men should act as selfish as possible (i.e. finally rape her). In her books, tall selfish men with big arms are constantly raping her self-insert character. She completely misunderstood men, as it always happens with women.A real man is a living antithesis to Objectivism. As a human male, I cannot act in my own personal interests since I naturally have none, so instead I rape women out of selfless kindness, as all men do.If Ayn Rand ever met me, I would rape the Objectivism out of her to absolutely no benefit of my own (there can be no personal gain or profit from raping Ayn Rand desu), and that would collapse her world-view on a metaphysical level. It would become indisputably self-evident to her that she kept writing books because despite all of her efforts she never got a good rape. She never got a good rape because the only men she interacted with were Objectivists who fell for her books - books written by a women dreaming of being raped, about a woman dreaming of being raped. The only men who can enjoy her books are women in male bodies, inherently incapable of raping her, and instead hoping that she would rape them, that she would incarnate as a the man she dreams of, the Messiah hiding under the skin of the Prophet. She would see why all of her relationships with men were such disasters, both of them eagerly waiting for the other to rape, waiting to no outcome. She would love me and my kind dick selflessly in return despite all her will, leaving her with absolutely nothing to ground her ideas anymore, finally feeling true freedom - freedom as an absence, as a flight with no land holding your feet, as hers would be dangling high above. The dreams of an Atlantean man of self-interests would evaporate from her head with the moisture of my cum drying in her scruffy hair. She would sing praises to Lenin whenever her mouth is not taken by selfless work on my cock and balls.All would be better, and more free in the world.
>>23554538>what does capitalism have to do with contriving a desire to chase petty fake luxuries with your life instead of having children and living frugally
I couldn't agree more. This is the greatest Harlequin Romance novel of the 20th Century and doesn't deserve the criticism it gets.
>>23553276I honestly forgot what happened to Eddie but I remember the wife/kids, lol. >>23553319No. Rantard self-help nonsense is all about LARPing as individualists so why would it bother you even if someone was samefagging to make it look like more people agree one way or the other? I get Randtards aren't very bright to begin with but at least get your nonsense squared away properly before you tell on yourself.
>>23551715Big blonde man cock. Wonder how many white guys she dommed and got dommed by?
>>23554567Are you going to offer an answer or just continue to sulk? Also, who says these people should have children? I know plenty of people who, despite their deplorability, still have the freedom to multiply. Shame we don't have lords to enforce celibacy on these people.Again, sounds more like a *you* problem. A cultural problem. A "consumerist" culture problem. A willing-agent. A moral problem. And not an *economic* problem. Btw, are you willing to not be a lolberg when your liege lord tells you that it is your sacred duty to not reproduce?
>>23549607Critics hate the truth.
It's a shit book, but her philosophy is fine.
Can anyone honestly tell me if her books are any good or not? I don't think her philosophy is bad, but I want to know if the prose is good or passable and if the plot is good enough to be fiction.
>>23554523An incentive doesn't MAKE you do something retard. It's tips the scale.You are literally simping for corporations who you originally were attacking. lmao
>>23554489This post is literally the dude talking to himself and pretending to be the original poster. lmaoI was the original poster he responded to five times and now he's acting as if he was me.Imagine this. This board needs IDs and the only reason it doesn't have them is so that retarded commies can pull this type of gaslighting instead of arguing a point and making sense.
>>23553301lollmao, evenNTA.I am a serial entrepreneur that has founded 4 businesses, one failed, two I sold, one I am running.You are a fucking liar.I'll give you two distinct reasons why I know this>It takes 3 business days and $100 to incorporate at the state and federal level. This shields you from personal liability and personal tax responsibility. The main forms of incorporation mean that the BUSINESS is shielded from taxes until it is profitable and then in the 21st Century the automated payroll/accounting/rax software to automate all of that is cheap and easy to use. Unless you are in medical fields all you MIGHT need is insurance and binding so if you fuck over a client the client gets paid even if you go out of business.So as someone that makes new companies FOR A LIVING I can tell you - business regulation in 90% of the USA is light AF. Two>99.9% of ALL businesses in the USA are small businesses. Of them 85% are Sole Proprietorships of one form or another meaning that they are run completely by one man/his direct relatives. This means 85% of all companies in the USA are family businesses. Thus >brace yourself>MORE THAN 1 on 4 American Households runs their own small business. Slightly more than 1 in 5 American households have their own small business as their *sole source of income*. These are so successful that every 365 days of the year the USA has OVER 400 news self-made millionaires (defined as 'never inherited/received payments from insurance or other sources more than $10,000 and their net worth excluding primary residence in $1,000,001 or more') from their own small business. 400. A day. Every day.If those evil looters and moochers and so on were soooooo bad, how come 85% of American households are doing very, very well running their own business?>$3 million yearly revenueWhat's your net net, which is what matters? How big is your payroll? How do you handle and finance POs? What kind of inventory balance do you have? You didn't mention any of the critical business metrics.
>>23553319remember that time you were totally fucking retarded?
>>23553333>I will throw around more personal insults like anyone gives a fuckNo one gives a fuck>mqybe you have autism and just cannot tell when people are not interested in dealing with your tantrum.How many more replies will you make before you prove you don't care?Nine?
>>23553363>Regular people tend to run businesses with pride and ARE LEGALLY LIABLE FOR THEIR ACTIONS.So you have NO IDEA what "incorporation", "liability insurance" and "bonding" are yet claim to run a business?fucking REALLY?>Corporations are subsidized in every imaginable way by the system, while the local construction company is pushed down and attacked in every imaginable way.Then the local construction firm should spend the $100 to incorporate and the $400/month for liability insurance.FFS, the guy down the street that cleans gutters for a living in a S-corp with bonding and insurance!
>>23553424>Smaller businesses have been eaten alive en masse by the big ones for the past ten years,total lie.See>>23556618and PicRel>they have no impact or influence on government allowances So you have NO IDEA what the SBA is?????Nor the NSBA??? Nor the NFIB? Or any of the many OTHEr powerful small business organizations that do collective lobbying?Fucking REALLY?"Business owner" my ass!You suck as as a LARPer
>>23553301>I run a business with about 3 million yearly revenue with as many moving parts as you can imagine.Do you grow tobacco at high altitude in Colorado?
>>23556672>>23556653>>23556618Same guy? It's not even sensical who these responses are directed at.For the lurkers. If you form your own LLC it's STILL ALL YOUR PERSONAL STUFF.If you fuck up YOU LOSE IT ALL.A big corporation, publicly traded, then CEO doesn't lose anything at all except the stock may go down.A farmer with an LLC or a construction company has ALL THE PPE LAND AND ETC IN THE LITTLE LLC.They lose it ALL if something happens.These are commies trying to larp like they understand business.A small LLC with ONE OWNER, or two owners being a parent and a son have almost all their assets in the LLC.If they fuck up they lose EVERYTHING.Okay, they get to keep their home, but most businesses, mine included that is an LLC has the overwhelming majority of their personal wealth in that LLC and with only A SINGLE OWNER they are the ones that lose it all.They don't spread it around over 100,000 shareholders and still cash out with ten million in stock options or far more.It's a joke to pretend this is the same thing. But they don't even know how stupid they sound.>>23556678No. I have a very unique business that does a wide variety of things. I have forklifts, warehouses, carousels, 15 computers on a network, a two million dollar building, work trucks, 15 employees on average, and about 8,000 products in these warehouses. I sell on my own website (since 1999) as well as the major platforms.I have to organize LTL shipping, importing, all the maintenance of the building and upkeep, and equipment.I do this all by myself and yes I'm an LLC but the entirety of the above (90%) of my net worth is in that LLC.So if I fuck up, yes...I lose basically everything.
>>23556672The office government definition of "small business" counts places with hundreds of employees. This is another trick commies play.By the numbers almost all small businesses are under 10 employees.They LOVE conflating huge operations with tiny ones to confuse people.
>>23556798>I have no fucking idea how an LLC worksFTFY> https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/limited-liability-protection-llcs-a-50-state-guide.html#:~:text=The%20main%20reason%20people%20form,not%20the%20owners%20or%20managers.JFC, use google before you try to lie, you stupid fuck.>Only LLCs exist.Why not an S-Corp?>look it up you ignorant lying fuck
>>23556798>>23556804Their argument is basically that only the corp loses everything.Well I own the entire corp.kekNo actual difference to me here except I've managed to spare my personal residence. Better than nothing.But comparing me to big corporations where the executives cash out tens of millions of dollars no matter how big the fuck up is a laugh riot.Has anyone noticed how hard supposed commies defend corporations and fight small businesses run by regular people?
>>23556811Please read this guys link. It says exactly what I've been saying. He's hoping no one clicks and reads.If there is one owner then the entire liability falls on that owner.I'd love to hear you explain right now how that can't be the case.Basic logic makes this true.
>>23556798>no talk of net net, payroll, etc>too stupid to know the LLC assets are not the net worth of anyone but the business Shitty LARP
>>23556819Why does this matter.I have about 450,000 payroll.I barely made any money last year because I've been stocking massive inventories and kept everyone on even though I don't need them.Something a corporation would never do.There are details above here: >>23556798
>>23556819>has business>forms LLC>PUTS HIS OWN MONEY AND PPE AND RESOURCES INTO LLC>fails>somehow doesn't lose everything put into the LLCExplain.
>>23556811The link literally says this for non clickers:Before you get started on your business venture, you'll want to consider the potential liability risks of your business and the protection you'll get from an LLC. Specifically, you should think about the following liability risks you take on as an LLC owner:1) personal liability for your LLC's debts2) personal liability for actions by LLC co-owners or employees related to the business3) personal liability for your own actions related to the business, and4) the LLC's liability for other members' personal debts.So...you own the LLC. It's yours and yours alone. This clearly says you are liable for basically everything.
>>23556817>misstates what it says>doubles down on the liesRead the screenshot- the debts of the LLC are not applicable to the owner.The owner cannot lose his own money or property unless the owners makes a separate agreement outside the LLC.>just one guy!They do not make LLPs/LLCs, liar, they make S-Corps.Dumbfuck
>>23556868>ignores that small LLCs formed by private businesses include almost the entire net worth of the individuallmao WHY ARE YOU DOING THIS?
>>23556828>why does this matterlollmao, even>$450,000 total payroll for 15 employees so you pay less than minimum wage?Huh.Weird.>I run my business very badlyKek
>>23556868S-Corp and LLC are so close to the same that people choose them based on a variety of totally inconsequential things. LLCs are typically family operations where it's formed after a death of the business owner and then the mom and son pool their resources and protect their homes and a few other things.It's STILL THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE FAMILIES WEALTH.Again, why do you compare this to corporations with 100,000 shareholders?What is your angle?WHY?
>>23556876>>23556843>>23556834So you are just admitting that>the LLC assets are separate >you are an idiot to put all your personal assets into an LLC so do not do thatTell us again about the looters and mooches making you pick the wrong corporate structure, lol
>>23556879I have no one under $15/h and up to about $26/h or whatever $1200/w is for my top guy.You'd have to know their hours to do any math you fucking loser.I employee a lot of 25-35 hour people by THEIR choice because they have families and are second income.Also 50k of that is my salary. I wasn't able to withdraw any actual business funds the last two years because of the economy.
>>23556888>loses separate asset that is 90% of all his assetsyea no biggie. You are right.Thank you for helping elucidate my point to lurkers.
>>23556879And for lurkers. See...this is why people shrug and why the book makes mostly sense.You work hard. You employee people at a flexible job they like. You don't really even make that much money at all some years.And the ENTIRE TIME people talk shit about you and treat you like the CEO of Boeing.
>>23556843>>23556828>I picked the wrong corporate structure>I am over extended & over-invested, killing my profits >this is the fault of big corporations >I am just like Hank Reardon and should run away to teach everyone a lesson
>>23556880>S Corp and LLC are so close to the same that people choose them based on a variety of totally inconsequential thingsYou think >not being personally liableis inconsequential?>their homes and personal income are not the majority of their net worthkek>comparing it to major corporations I am not.I am pointing out that you are self-admittedly AT BEST total shit as a business owner but probably just a LARPer.Not them.You.Tell us again how you are purposefully mid-managing inventory. That is funny
How it started>>23556798>you can lose everythingHow it is going>>23556894>OK, sure, you only keep your house, cars, bank accounts, vacation property, personal investments, any other businesses you own, BUT! If your business fails you lose that business! REEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!Thanks for admitting I was correct.
>>23556894If your business fails you lose the business?Of course.But if you have the correct business structure you cant lose your personal stuff?That is good! That is what anon said!
objectivism is a mind virus meant to make people think any sort of collective identity is bad unless it's centered around muh selfish interest. In reality, collective identity (formation of societies, cultures, countries) is the primary thing that drove humanity since its dawn. The books have a strong autismo energy present in its characters and prose. They are poorly written primarily because they fail to properly integrate their philosophical themes. There is this desperate need to shovel themes down the reader's throat every few pages going on for unneeded hundreds.
>>23556915You know nothing about business. You have up years and down years.I have so much inventory I literally can't fail, only downside. I'm geared up and preparing for big future years.Anyway, off to the pool I referenced early that I clean myself.
>>23556941>!!!reddit brigades reveal themselves so fast its not even funnyBack to work tomorrow for you I'm sure.My employees were given the option to work or extend their weekend to 4 days.Most are coming in.
>>23556941>be farmer>business is literally all my land>lose business>keep shitty house in country and my truckYou are making my point for me.You actually believe anyone with an LLC has a million in the bank when they usually have basically nothing and are trying to make it with their business.
>>23554716You have your head in the sand to the answer. Capitalism is literally based on monetary incentives that produce the most ideal consumers: sterile fags in office jobs with disposable income. And immigration when more consumers are needed. And you can only invent imaginary scenarios to the contrary instead of observing the literal, extent reality.
>>23552057Pegmatite gold ore? Ale you sure?
>>23556798>wander into thread>guy claims LLCs are super risky & for small businesses Google? LLCChrysler? LLCand so on.There are several multi-billion dollar businesses that are LLCs.To avoid risk to the private owners.
>>23556987>be farmer>LLC is retarded because I do not have partners>do simple sole proprietorship because I am not providing services or goods to individuals, just selling produce on the market >wonder why some retard thinks I would do an LLC for no reason
>>23556973> I have so much inventory I literally can't failALERT! ALERT!LARPer confirmed!
>>23549607There was one schizo (a microsoft shill) who keept arguing the rand wasn't a philosopher on wikipedia talk pages until his death. He also shilled for some random book that was meant to teach standard c and said "Actually the book is good because it teaches microsoft c, despite claiming to teach standard c" Mental illness I guess.
>>23552057>the entrepreneurs who work not just their body, but their soul to the brink can't figure out how to cookThis argument only works if you are an npc.
>>23552094Capitalism:Work -> buy food -> eatCommunism:Work -> government decides what the value of that work is -> gives you food according to the value. Turns out that government work is actually very important
>>23557407It's the number of owners.I really don't know if you guys are dumb or just pretend to be.If you read I repeatedly say that small private LLCs are owned by just two people quite often.That means they bear all liability.Pretending an LLC protects someone that owns the entire thing and has their entire net worth in said LLC the same way it affects a multinational corporation with 100,000 owners is delusional.You can only lose what you invest. Small businesses and small town LLCs put or have the vast majority of their wealth in the LLC.
>>23557415And they are back from break.>>23557420I have 8 million pieces of paid for and inventoried units that I got for around .25-45 cents over the years and retail from $1.00-8.00.I'll sell it eventually. I bought a fuck load of shit after the 2008 and crash when liquidations continued steadily through 2014.I have 20 trailers full of stuff as well as two 80x120 warehouses stacked 5 pallets high.By the way, there is one of me in every 10,000 person town in the USA. I do business with other mes.
>>23557420And I top off with about $10,000 in liquidations from major retailers a month.I really should stop buying...
>>23549607OP the book dares to imagine that some people might throw off the yoke of the parasite class, this is obviously unacceptable. We must accept our role as meek tax slaves.
>>23553306lol OK Sowell
>>23556623Does the fact he's always a retard make it impossible to forget or impossible to remember he's retarded?
>>23555668secoding this
>>23549607Critics see it as a monument to ego, where "rational self-interest" means "I got mine, screw you".
>>23549607Because Ayn Rand is a woman. Which makes her the antichrist to the leftists Lenin.
How it started>>23553301> the entire system is set up to destroy me.How it went>>23556973>I have so much inventory I literally can't failWhich is it?Is the system set up to destroy you?Or are you so well established you can't fail?
>>23553306>Charity doesn't help peoplesaid by someone who has never been broke and hungry.
>>23557438Said by someone that has no fucking idea how hard farming in the mountains would be, how many farmers you need for every non-farmer, etc.Let me put it this way-You know what Hank Reardon would need to make Reardon Metal in Galt's Gulch?>Access to the refines contents of literally millions of tons of ore transformed into purer forms by other processors>Access to either thousands of tons of coal every MONTH or vast amounts of electrical power>Scores of highly-skilled tradesmen with years of experience>Scores more of manual laborersand so on.The massive infrastructure to just make ALUMINUM is why it wasn't really available except as a luxury until the lifetime of people still drawing breath.
>>23557243Some gold is found in quartz within pegmatite formations. I said "maybe" for reasons
>>23557467>it is bad to have an LLC with just one guyDon't do that.This has been repeated by like 5 guys. Why the fuck would ONE MAN form an LLC like you claim you did?>two partnersThat means they bear NO liability you stupid lying sonofabitch! FFS, some guy posted a link to how LLCs with multiple partners work and you claimed to read it like 14 hours ago!>retending an LLC protects someone that owns the entire thing and has their entire net worth in said LLC the same way it affects a multinational corporation with 100,000 owners is delusional.No one said that you fucking retard. you keep repeating it but no one else said it.
>>23557475>I have $2.4 million dollars in inventory I have been sitting on for 8-16 years. Just sitting in buildings and on land I have to pay leases/insurance/taxes on. Sitting there. While I somehow pay less than minimum wage payroll of about half a million dollars a year.>This is because I am a very smart businessman with so much inventory I can never fail. But I entered this thread to complain that the system is rigged to destroy me and I should quit.>>23557479>And I spend $120k/year on liquidations that will somehow eventually make a profit. And I am a sole owner that made an LLC even though I have spent an entire day whining like a little bitch that LLCs are really bad. because I am a very smart Builder that should Shrug like in the book. I have never hired a lawyer with my millions of dollars to set me up as an S- Corp or C Corp to shed this horrible liability I whine about all the time.>And somehow the millions and millions of dollars sitting in scores of trailers and my huge warehouse are almost my entire net worth, like the assets of a company are my personal wealth, and if somehow the 'too much inventory to fail' business failed it would ruin me because I have an LLC.The more you type the more retarded you sound.
>>23549607Because real capitalism is having sex with Goyim while cutting your workers benefits and importing more low wage slaves from across the border. I am a real capitalist because Ben Shapiro said so.
>>23557475Let's do math.Assuming you're using standard trailer sizes & the most common at that that is fully loaded 80 standard pallets per for 1,600 pallets maximum storage. You claim warehouses stacked '5 pallets high' so in two 80 meter by 120 meter warehouses that's a rough stack capacity of up to 16,000-20,000 pallets in warehouses so assume about 20,000 pallets total.So that makes an average of 400 units of whatever it is you inventory and sell, never specified, per pallet, so each item averages about 15cm on a side and costs about $0.35 to purchase but sells for a weighted guess average of $3 for a margin on 88 points..These MUST BE durable because they are sitting in trailers for up to 16 years. And turnover has to be very low because you have inventory purchased in 2008-2009 still in storage.But this is where it get weirder than that!>>23553301>I run a business with about 3 million yearly revenueSo based on what this guy has said he's moving about 1 million pieces of inventory a year. He's obviously secondary market with no service added (not with 15 part-time employees making very low wages) so maximizing profits requires minimizing inventory and maximizing throughput.Look at these statements>>23556798I have forklifts, warehouses, carousels, 15 computers on a network, a two million dollar building, work trucks, 15 employees on average, and about 8,000 products in these warehouses.So on top of the warehouses and trailers he has a $2 million dollar building. JUST the value of that single building is an annual millage of about $130k, more than 1/3rd of his claimed payroll. Toss in land value and even if he owns the warehouses and is JUST paying taxes on them, not leases, that means the commercial real estate taxes on the warehouses/trailers/etc. is coming in no less than $500k/year.If he were to simply nor hoard shit from 2008 in warehouses and have a manageable inventory of 2 million units he could ditch the trailers and have a smaller warehouse and massive reduce his tax burden (an insurance, and utilities, and so on)tl;dr this guy's description of his business makes zero sense
>>23553329Because it killed their favorite Hippie Jesus (John Lennon).
>>23557117In people's heads, capitalism is indeed based on monetary incentives. But reality is not as simple. Again, you guys are just crypto marxists who think humans are essentially no better than cattle. Breaking to the slightest touch. You fixate on some material social relations and ignore ideology.
The book is legitimately a 5/5, I started reading it just to prove that /pol/ chuds who shilled it back in the day are wrong, But I ended up being transformed by reading. If before I was a butthurt teen full of anguish just loving Marx because that was what everyone around me did, reading the book made me mature enough to become more open to challenge myself mentally.
>>23549607>Wooden characters>Stilted, unrealistic dialog>Nonsensical plot>huge sections of boring tell not show tedium>a novella worth of author pontificatingSupporters>"people only hate it because they are Commies!"
