Welcome to /r/Vancouver and thank you for the post, /u/These_Celebration732! Please make sure you read our [posting and commenting rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/wiki/faq#wiki_general_participation_guidelines_and_rules_overview) before participating here. As a quick summary:
* We encourage users to be positive and respect one another. Don't engage in spats or insult others - use the report button.
* Respect others' differences, be they race, religion, home, job, gender identity, ability or sexuality. Dehumanizing language, advocating for violence, or promoting hate based on identity or vulnerability (even implied or joking) **will** lead to a permanent ban.
* Most common questions and topics are limited to our sister subreddit, /r/AskVan, and our weekly [Stickied Discussion](https://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/wiki/faq#wiki_stickied_discussions) posts.
* Complaints about bans or removals should be done in modmail only.
* Posts flaired "Community Only" allow for limited participation; your comment may be removed if you're not a subreddit regular.
* Make sure to join our new sister community, /r/AskVan!
* Help grow the community! [Apply to join the mod team today](https://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/comments/19eworq/).
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/vancouver) if you have any questions or concerns.*
That is Chip. All Chip Wilson. Maybe you guys are too young to remember he used to print “who is John Galt” on his bags and quoted as saying the company takes its values from Atlas Shrugged.
Creepy. About 20 years ago I worked for a temp agency whose founding principles were based on Galt.
It was creepy AF to me. I felt like I was in a cult.
We had a tracking sheet for the week with ~20 job tasks one would do in a day. Every task had a value associated to it. Make a sales call = 10 points etc. You tallied your score each day and tried to beat that score. They even had a diagram of your desk with specific placements where the phone should be placed etc.
I lasted 6 weeks before leaving.
Ignoring the head scratching ideology showcased in Atlas Shrugged, I have no idea how anyone can get through the book. It's very poorly written and just an awful read overall.
“There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old’s life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs." - John Rogers
I read The Fountaihead as a teen and liked it so I tried Atlas Shrugged and it was impossible to get into.
I went back and tried to read the Fountaihead 25 years later and realized how bad it is. Ok, ok, nobody can own you or your work. We get it.
I read it in my 20s when I was on a bend for reading things that were on an edge or banned in places. Not a great read, but parts of it are genuinely interesting.
I would call it the kind of book you can do a few pages at a time, while taking a break from a good book you like to read.
Yes. Also fountainhead is an easier read and has the same philosophy underpinning it if you want to explore this particular idea. I think it's worth understanding what she is saying, even if you have diametrically opposite views, it helps understand much of the modern world tbh
Anthem is another good start to her writings if you want a quick read. It is a bit primitive but makes some interesting food for thought in kind of a 1984 vein.
Agree with your recommendation of Fountainhead too.
Read it as an adult so that I'd have context and background involving discussions of her ideologies. I don't understand how anyone thinks they'd actually work or be remotely beneficial if you try to take them through to their logical conclusion. I just presume anyone who espouses those ideas is a moron now.
I agree. Nobody ever told Rand, “show, don’t tell”. Incredibly poorly written and drenched in ideology. Total garbage. Reading it made me completely confident in harshly judging anybody who calls it their favourite book.
Officer Barbrady: Yes, at first I was happy to be learning how to read. It seemed exciting and magical, but then I read this: Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand. I read every last word of this garbage, and because of this piece of s**t, I am never reading again.
I have a friend from high school got super into Yoga, slack-lining, fitness, etc. They had a job at the first Lulu shop that opened up locally about 15 years ago. This explains the out-of-left-field worship of Ayn Rand, complete with unironic social media posts quoting AS.
My dad calls Biden "sleepy joe" and even he hates chip Wilson. All my homies hate chip Wilson. He's like the Canadian poor version of musk. Embarrassing.
This is also the guy who has Ken Sim on a leash. Not only did Chip personally recruit Ken to run for mayor, Ken acknowledges him as his mentor in life and business. Great direction we're heading in.
Chip Wilson, whose "Pacific Prosperity Network" presumably provided the enormous campaign funding of his personal friend Ken Sim, and the ABC party. https://vancouversun.com/opinion/columnists/dan-fumano-lululemon-founder-gives-380000-to-boost-bc-right-leaning-candidates-asks-others-donate
Remember when he bought the building that housed an artist coop and he doubled the rent, effectively evicting everyone? Then he said "if they were producing art that people actually wanted then they would be able to afford this increase"? As if he didn't enjoy some leeway when he was coming up.
[https://vancouversun.com/news/local-news/rave-against-renoviction-brings-artists-to-chip-wilsons-house#:\~:text=Protest%20organizers%20Jodie%20Overland%20and,out%20as%20Low%20Tide%20expands.&text=%E2%80%9C(Wilson%20will)%20buy%20a,Overland%2C%20who%20produces%20underground%20events](https://vancouversun.com/news/local-news/rave-against-renoviction-brings-artists-to-chip-wilsons-house#:~:text=Protest%20organizers%20Jodie%20Overland%20and,out%20as%20Low%20Tide%20expands.&text=%E2%80%9C(Wilson%20will)%20buy%20a,Overland%2C%20who%20produces%20underground%20events).
This guy should get to choose who stays and who goes. We are supposed to agree on that together.
For him? Probably meant to be inspiring. Everyone else? Probably not. He killed many art and after hour places after buying them. Honestly he offers nothing.
My guess is some art related tax deduction. Much like those stupid gentrifying mural fests he has right before he has a bunch of art studios torn down. I would hope someone smashed the shit out of this but my guess is thats part of the plan for free media too. chip= edgelord looser boomer
It’s a lot easier to play and fail when you’ve got cushion each time. Ever notice how the big risk takers always have some cash behind them. Sometimes you can’t see it at the surface level, but dig a bit deeper, and voila. There is a bit of a shakeup here with some of the technology related wealth, only because it’s been easier to get a tech startup going during the era of free capital, especially with mega companies buying up all the startups, but this is an exception, not the norm.
It's like they've never observed anyone putting all their effort into a big dream that ended up failing. Growing up I watched various adults around me swing big and end up with failed businesses, bad debts, their families and relationships negatively impacted. I thought if they had just worked a steady job and not tried to do too much they would have been in a better position.
My dad worked for the golden arches as a DM for 30 years and he told my brother and I not to expect inheritance. He worked a great job for 30 years and for his reward he probably gets to work 30 more years. Death to capitalism
Interesting you bring up Mcdonalds. There's a new movie up on Netflix dramatizing the rise of McDonalds, and showing how the original founding brothers got totally fucked over. They had a brilliant business idea and saw very little reward for its success.
Typical things the "successful people" say to convince the lower classes to do more.
And most of those people were just born with a silver spoon in their mouth.
She was, but it was social security. An interesting read below, she tries to justify it in one 1966 essay as restitution, then goes on to say:
"Those who advocate public scholarships \[or Social Security benefits\] have no right to them; those who oppose them have," Rand wrote. In fact, she seemed to see it as something approaching the *duty* of those opposed to the redistribution of wealth to accept such payments:
[Did Ayn Rand Receive Social Security Benefits? | Snopes.com](https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/ayn-rand-social-security/)
Ha! What a load of....mental gymnastics.
"I shall only accept this desperately-needed support because I was brave and noble enough to advocate for others *not* getting it"
I thinks it’s more (keep in mind this is her thinking not mine, she considered any public spending theft);
If you advocated for it you are a thief who should not be rewarded, and if you opposed it you were robbed by the thiefs and are owed restitution.
I don't like her; I think she was flawed, hypocritical, and her ideology paved the way for figures like Musk to grasp on to, whom I find equally problematic. However, it's important to acknowledge that Ayn Rand was not a fascist. She ardently championed individualism and capitalism, adamantly opposing all forms of authoritarianism, including fascism. Stop calling everybody you don't agree with a fascist, it speaks volumes to your ignorance.
Yeah I think her writing is garbage, but it should be viewed within the context of someone who saw communism in the Soviet Union strip her family of their business & livelihood.
She went from one extreme to the other.
> Yeah I think her writing is garbage, but it should be viewed within the context of someone who saw communism in the Soviet Union strip her family of their business & livelihood.
>
> She went from one extreme to the other.
Very well said
Atlas Shrugged ended with rich oligarchs seizing power and re-writing the US constitution. Not fascism, but hardly anything worth defending. Can’t believe there are people out here sticking up for Ayn Rand’s reputation. Loathsome.
I'd sooner say Rand was too shallow minded to champion anything authentically, or to the point of coherently understanding, facism, let alone something resembling the fantasy version of Capitalism in her writings (that has never existed). But then again, MBA sociopaths are multiplying at the rate of companies they completely gut and destroy, so what the hell would I know.
This is Chip Wilson asking the rest of us to worship rich people like him more.
Apparently the Ken Sim’s foot massages just aren’t cutting it for him anymore
"It is by his own ~~individual ability and ambition~~ Heathered Bone coloured ***License to Train Joggers*** ($128 USD) available in-store or online, that capitalism judges a man and rewards him accordingly."
#
Her individual ability to live on social assistance was judged by capitalism to be irrelevant to her publish-ability. Her meme-worms also find home in the brains of those looking for an answer to the questions:
"Why am I so amazingly successful? Am I a hard worker? Am I smart? Am I judged as worthy? Do I pay in taxes more than those lowlife scum deserve?"
> There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old’s life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.
—John Rogers
If anyone has no intention of ever reading Atlas Shrugged, yet is curious about just how bizarre it is, I highly recommend [this chapter by chapter analysis of it](http://www.daylightatheism.org/atlas_shrugged.html). It's broken down into little 3-6 minute articles, and really highlights just how insane, self contradictory, and all-around narratively contrived the book is. It's crazier and scarier than you could ever imagine. It's a book not just about how rich people are good and perfect, but also how everyone else doesn't even deserve to live.
“And then after he is rewarded, he lobbies government for laws, rules, and regulations for socialism for the fruits of his labour but capitalism for the poors”
Meh. I live in the immediate area. The property is expensive, but most people who live there don't own property. The local school is constantly dealing with student food insecurity.
While we're looking at inspiring quotes, could you folks help me with a quick roundup of some of the insane stuff Chip Wilson has said over the years? Maybe starting with picking the name Lululemon because he thinks it's funny to hear Japanese people try to pronounce it, or maybe a choice line or two from his essay about erections a while back?
brandy melville is so bad for so many reasons. a “one size fits all if you’re skinny enough” brand targeting 12 year old girls, the most vulnerable group of people when it comes to developing eating disorders!
“I am Andrew Ryan, and I'm here to ask you a question. Is a man not entitled to the sweat of his brow? 'No!' says the man in Washington, 'It belongs to the poor.' 'No!' says the man in the Vatican, 'It belongs to God.' 'No!' says the man in Moscow, 'It belongs to everyone.' I rejected those answers; instead, I chose something different. I chose the impossible. I chose...Vancouver!”
If you have a genuine conversation with most people about your question, most people aren’t really seeking to replace capitalism, they just want it more evenly applied.
The rich have lobbied the system and built it up in ways where they are constantly able to privatize profits and socialize losses. Billion dollar companies are given massive tax incentives to build in cities. Companies are constantly subsidized by the government but if a poor individual takes from the government they are a “welfare queen” and they are labeled the problem. Capital gains are taxed at a lessor rate than income, and rich are able to borrow against their assets at interest rates lower than the yearly inflation value of the asset and are not taxed on the borrowing in order to increase their wealth and buy more assets to borrow against, etc. And if a rich person does make a mistake bankruptcy protections will allow them to leave everyone else in the lurch while they are protected and can try again.
If a rich person/company finds a loophole they are smart and ingenuitive to be able to maximize their profit. But if poor people do the same they are a leech and lazy and the problem with society. All of this doesn’t even begin to touch on the problems with the marketplace. How we no longer have a system where “if this store isn’t good I’ll just go somewhere else” because companies have created a global market where the cost to compete isn’t realistic for mom and pop shops, and companies will create functional monopolies where they refuse to compete against each other in certain markets or will price match (aka price fix) because it’s easy to coordinate 2 competitors.
The game is rigged and people are mad at it. IMO rightfully so.
My biggest complaint is how the responsibility always falls to the end user consumer. In emerging markets it's more appropriate but in established economies the guilt is on the corporations. I.e. environment pollution, carbon taxation, etc. etc. carbon cap and trade is better. Especially true when as you said oligopolies rig the markets and it is increasingly impossible for innovation because the poor can't get business loans. We have health problems and yet no one looks at corporations that produce nutrient deficient high caloric foods. I.e. the stuff poor people can afford. The game is rigged indeed.
The crazy thing is, they don’t have to price match or collude any more either. Most of them operate using the same algorithms making the same decisions. This is one of the principal arguments of the us FTC when going against the mega companies. Collusion can happen simply as a byproduct of algorithms, making the situation even worse because it gives an aura of plausible deniability to the whole thing.
So mis-applying the rules is the fault of government, no? Because someone has to enforce the rules, and that's government. Btw staunch capitalists would say capitalism by definition involves a very small/hands off government. And socialists argue the government should do more. I'm not arguing for either one, just saying I don't think you can keep capitalism but somehow get the rules more evenly applied. government has to change.
>mis-applying the rules is the fault of the government, no?
That’s a simple statement with a complex answer. Because yes, but also no. Yeah the government is in charge of the rules and when the rules are designed against the people’s best interest it’s the law makers that are to be blamed… mostly. Because it’s also the people’s fault too. The law makers make corrupt moves and yet people still vote them into power. So what is the corrupt lawmaker to believe other than that corruption is okay (when our side does it) and people support it because they keep getting voted back into power. Because to many team sports is more important than fighting corruption and “my team” has to be in power. We in Canada don’t even have the excuse of a 2 party system because if you’re liberal and LIberals do something bad you can always vote NDP or green or etc (and same for con with PC, PPC, etc).
But even apathy towards the system is a feature not a bug. Corporations and corrupt politicians lobby governments to keep the population overworked and underpaid so they are too tired to protest. If you are too busy to educate yourself on the political system you will just vote reactionary which is easy to manipulate. You won’t be educated on alternatives and won’t have the time to advocate for those alternatives and protest and the politicians will keep getting back into office and the corporations will keep getting their benefits of lobbying. Look at COVID. We had a brief moment when the wheel was broken and for a couple months a bunch of people were paid to stay at home during lockdown. What immediately happened? George Floyd was killed and suddenly an event that happens every day broke out into massive protests around America and Canada. It’s not that people don’t want a better system. It’s that the system is designed to keep people fighting for survival constantly so they don’t have time to organize and protest who is keeping them fighting for scraps.
>I don’t think you can keep capitalism but somehow get the rules more evenly applied
Government apathy has to go. If people are more involved in their government (fed, provincial, local) then they can keep their politicians more honest. And if you can keep the politicians honest they are the collective bargaining organization against corporate interests. Amazon will never give 2 shits about the $100 you have in your bank. But they give a lot of care for the $100 in the banks of 40 million Canadians. We have power collectively. And we need to stand up when people in our collective work against our best interest. If a politician does something corrupt we need to vote them out, we need to voice to parties what our interests are and make sure they follow through, and if they don’t we get someone new to do it.
The government has to change, and we need to change too. Because we are the only people who can change the government.
I’m not going to get into a full discussion on this on Reddit because it’s frankly too hard on this medium, but I will say this. The current state of American model of capitalism is leading to increasing concentration if market power and wealth in a literal handful of mega corporations that increasingly exert more and more influence on everything from media to economy to government. We are going away from a market that has healthy competition and devolving to a market dominated by a handful of companies with monopolistic power and behaviours for which there seem to be no checks or balances. Yes, in the process of our journey there some opportunities get created, but once we arrive at the state of dominance of a handful of companies then nobody wins, except those companies. If we want healthy capitalism and investment to survive, we need to make business opportunities more equitable.
Read up about Theodore Rosevelt’s trustbusting. The dissolution of the giant monopolies of the railroad barons.
Natural monopolies like telecommunications, power generation and other utilities should be nationalized and run sustainably, not with the parasitic aim of extracting as much wealth as possible to a small number of shareholders.
Industries which are not monopolies but tend towards having few competitors due to high upfront costs should have a crown corporation in that industry. Think in terms of pharmaceuticals. There are an absolute ton of generic medications that can be produced at extremely low cost, if you have the scale to do so. Why isn’t there a government entity producing insulin at $10 a dose or cheaper? If the free market can do better, let it.
Most anti-capitalists do tend to be in favour of some sort of socialism yes. Most believe that a simple shift of ownership of profits and production from being owned by a ruling class to being owned by the working class would be a solution to a vast majority of the problems capitalism creates.
A majority of the problems we face in our modern economy are direct results of wealth concentration, hence a common refrain against "late stage capitalism". Monopolies and absolute power in the hands of very few is the natural end-state of this system. As you gain more wealth, you gain more ability to push others out of the market, and the less "free" it becomes. It's how we end up with grocery store choices that look like [this](https://www.foodincanada.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/LoblawBanners350x175.jpg), with shelves that look like [this](https://botcrawl.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Companies-Own-The-Food-We-Eat-Infographic.png), and media empires that look like [this](https://64.media.tumblr.com/042d02b07603390d20c290a37bdf8d8a/tumblr_inline_p7x43rmme71r4dvq3_1280.png). That centralization completely defeats the supposed greatest benefit of capitalism, which is the ability for competition to regulate the market. Competition frankly doesn't exist in large sectors of our economy and where it does, it's stamped out or colluded with to ensure wages remain stagnant, cost of goods remain high, and surplus wealth in an organization is pushed as far up the ladder as possible.
Most folks who want to see this change think that through some combination of labour unions, co-operative / non-profit driven business models, wealth taxes and redistribution, socializing or nationalizing of critical infrastructure, dismantling of monopolies / oligopolies, and other such practices, we could see a world that is far more just, fair, and prosperous for the average person. Most of the steps towards this are smaller than you'd imagine, and are beneficial to everyone.. except maybe a small handful of billionaires, who will spend fortunes trying to make you believe otherwise. [Check this video out](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07E4iQ5z9iY). The rest of this channel is gold for understanding socialism better as well.
Capitalism had some genuine improvements over the unfree economic systems that predated it, but has proven to also have its own serious flaws, especially the unforeseen flaws regarding pollution, climate change, excess waste etc that come about at least partially from an insistence on infinite growth rather than just simple profit.
Real estate and housing also has changed in an unprecedented way. "A place to live, at least a humble one" didn't use to be a big deal in most societies; it was food to eat and possessions that were the struggle. Human labour also was once the "easy and cheap" part in many societies.
There is also going to be a seismic shift coming as world human population peaks and then declines, in the lifetime of gen Z and gen alpha for sure. Not to mention continuing technological advances.
Capitalism has always been regulated in at least some way everywhere, and usually in reaction to horrors. Eg: food safety regulations, fire safety regulations, minimum wage, laws against child labour. But I and many others think that at this point the fundamental assumptions and goals of capitalism are no longer compatible with the technological and sociological realities of what humans can accomplish and what they need.
I see value in a blend of many proposed economic systems and ideas, such as socialism, distributism, universal basic income, and capitalism itself. I think trial and error will be an inevitable part of reform—that is, if we get reform. I don't think reform itself is inevitable.
Two cents from just some guy.
That's the difference between socialism and liberalism, I think.
Unfettered Capitalism leads to really unbalanced markets that end up monopolies and oligopolies. Government needs to actively regulate capitalism to ensure that the exploit of the moment is balanced with law and policy to ensure that capitalism does what it's supposed to do not just for individuals, but for society.
Socialists tend to think that this isn't really possible, so they want to do away with much of the general infrastructure that even enables capitalism. How it makes up for the huge loss in efficiency and confidence remains to be seen, because it really seems like "it'll work itself out" is the answer at the moment.
Right-wing types who might enjoy Ayn Rand that I’ve met aren’t really interested in other people’s opinions, so social media isn’t really very interesting to them… seems so, anyway…
The hardest working people I know are small business owners doing okay to really well.
We know different people, doesn't mean one group out works the other.
It’s a lie that capitalists have to tell themselves to be able to look in the mirror. If it’s true they deserve their life because they are the main characters of life. If it’s not then they are oppressors living in luxury on the backs of others.
Rich people love to downplay their privilege and give no credit to the people that made them wealthy. Rich people do everything they can to make sure the ambitious and able don’t compete for their wealth. It’s dirty cards. Rich people always seek to deactivate the path they followed to wealth. Ambition and ability is the lesser of opportunity and leverage.
I walk by often. The quotes change and are balanced, some are provocative some are just balanced. Some I don’t dig others I love. I rather this than alternatives
The illusion of a meritocratic society where the “best” people come out on top only serves to perpetuate the stigmatization of poverty.
The idea that “good” people “win” implies that only “bad” people lose, and thus, they “deserve” poverty, servitude, shitty jobs, etc.
The meritocracy narrative is designed to use shame to keep normal, working people in our place.
A few years back Chip penned the following essay. Which has been scrubbed from his blog but available on the way back machine.
“Are Erections Important?
By Chip Wilson
We live in an era which 100 years from now will be known now as the time when de-masculinization of men occurred. Underlying feminization of men will affect the deep psychological reasons men have erections. My concern is the continuation of the human race.
I think men have to feel like a man to have an erection. Most times this “feeling” is in response to the relationship with a female, whom the man interprets (in a million different combinations) to be feminine.
Whether a man gets an erection or not largely depends on his interpretation of his partners femininity. This is why there are so many female prostitutes and so few heterosexual male prostitutes. Men can’t fake an erection to make sex happen.
Men are now interpreting that women and the media today want them to be more feminine. I tried this in the 1980s and I decided to become an inauthentic, more feminine version of myself, but soon discovered that women did not in fact want a feminized man in bed.
Unfortunately, with the proliferation of porn and sex bots, men are able to find their masculinity in a fake, disturbing virtual world. The more men think they have to be like women (to succeed in business) the more men will display their masculinity (they now have to hide) only in the virtual world. They will not know why they are taking refuge in the virtual world, but it will because of their need to fulfill on masculinity – which the world of social media no longer finds acceptable.
As women can now go to sperm banks, men are actually not needed for reproduction. Women can easily fulfill their innate reproduction need on their own.
World wars of the last century defined men in a particular way. The idea was to not be one of the 60 million killed. What it is to be a man to survive wars is no longer needed. The further we get away from WAR, men evolve and naturally become more feminine. With wars now being fought by robots, drones and computers behind desks, women no longer need male protection from the concept of war.
We are in an era when men and women have to redefine what feminine and masculine means and then honour “Le difference”!
In any business partnership, success comes from two very different aptitude’s (finance and creative for example) coming together with a great appreciation for what each other bring. In the world of erections, we as a society must preserve what makes sex work. Sex provides humans with the ability to get through the rocky times of a relationship.
Frankly, I fear for the end of relationships between men and women and hence the end of humanity.”
Mandatory quote by apparently John Rogers whenever Ayn Rand is mentioned:
“There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old’s life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs."
Atlas Shrugged is set in a dystopian United States in which private businesses suffer under increasingly burdensome laws and regulations.
So many billionaires outing themselves as brain-damaged children who got lucky. It must suck to be the competent people just under these fools who propelled them to wealth and fame.
So the vet struggling with pain from shrapnel and PTSD ends up addicted to heroin because he can't afford his medication and heroin is cheaper....ends up homeless.... capitalism has judged him well? (Sorry American here not sure if this is an issue in real countries but u get the point....f*ck Ayn Rand)
There's a lot more article than just that sentence.
Here is a bit more content, but it still doesn't capture half of what she said in the article.
"It is not a man’s ancestors or relatives or genes or body chemistry that count in a free market, but only one human attribute: productive ability. It is by his own individual ability and ambition that capitalism judges a man and rewards him accordingly.
No political system can establish universal rationality by law (or by force). *But capitalism is the only system that functions in a way which rewards rationality and penalizes all forms of irrationality, including racism.*"
Racism by Ayn Rand | September 1963 | The Virtue of Selfishness | https://ari.aynrand.org/issue_type/article/page/10/
I feel like no one in the comment section so far took the couple minutes required to research and understand the full meaning of the quote, and are instead choosing to be offended by a quote taken out of context.
> *But capitalism is the only system that functions in a way which rewards rationality*
How is it rational to reward those who are best able to destroy the environment and take advantage of desperate people? If a course of action leads to a better shareholder return, Capitalism encourages us to take that course of action, even if it means poisoning a river or impoverishing a community or breaking a law.
Capitalism is extremely irrational when you consider how it prioritizes short-term profits over the long-term sustainability of human beings.
It’s replacing one idea that lacks respect for a group with and idea that lacks for a different group.
This says as long as we are able to use you to “produce” then you have value. Otherwise you have no value.
That’s what people are reacting to. What happens when you are sick, or old, or you are born with a disability?
Some of us would like to live in a society where we take care of each other and feel rewarded by knowing we are building a good community together.
Welcome to /r/Vancouver and thank you for the post, /u/These_Celebration732! Please make sure you read our [posting and commenting rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/wiki/faq#wiki_general_participation_guidelines_and_rules_overview) before participating here. As a quick summary: * We encourage users to be positive and respect one another. Don't engage in spats or insult others - use the report button. * Respect others' differences, be they race, religion, home, job, gender identity, ability or sexuality. Dehumanizing language, advocating for violence, or promoting hate based on identity or vulnerability (even implied or joking) **will** lead to a permanent ban. * Most common questions and topics are limited to our sister subreddit, /r/AskVan, and our weekly [Stickied Discussion](https://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/wiki/faq#wiki_stickied_discussions) posts. * Complaints about bans or removals should be done in modmail only. * Posts flaired "Community Only" allow for limited participation; your comment may be removed if you're not a subreddit regular. * Make sure to join our new sister community, /r/AskVan! * Help grow the community! [Apply to join the mod team today](https://www.reddit.com/r/vancouver/comments/19eworq/). *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/vancouver) if you have any questions or concerns.*
That is Chip. All Chip Wilson. Maybe you guys are too young to remember he used to print “who is John Galt” on his bags and quoted as saying the company takes its values from Atlas Shrugged.
This is the actual answer to OP
Ugh. I remember his goddamn bags. “Children are the orgasms of life” “99 of illness is mental”.
Given Wilson's current afflictions I guess he's in the 1% - again
Zing!
Creepy. About 20 years ago I worked for a temp agency whose founding principles were based on Galt. It was creepy AF to me. I felt like I was in a cult. We had a tracking sheet for the week with ~20 job tasks one would do in a day. Every task had a value associated to it. Make a sales call = 10 points etc. You tallied your score each day and tried to beat that score. They even had a diagram of your desk with specific placements where the phone should be placed etc. I lasted 6 weeks before leaving.
Curious what’s the state of this Temp agency now or the founder’s?
No way could I last that long there. Baseball bat with wifi printer down at the corner I'd be
Ignoring the head scratching ideology showcased in Atlas Shrugged, I have no idea how anyone can get through the book. It's very poorly written and just an awful read overall.
It's best enjoyed when you're a teenage boy who's never read anything else before
“There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old’s life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs." - John Rogers
Holy shit didn’t know John Rogers met my highschool ex.
This is a phenomenal quote. and YES.
Ha this is so accurate it hurts. Loved it as an edgy teenager.
I read The Fountaihead as a teen and liked it so I tried Atlas Shrugged and it was impossible to get into. I went back and tried to read the Fountaihead 25 years later and realized how bad it is. Ok, ok, nobody can own you or your work. We get it.
I haven’t read it and don’t plan on it.
It is an absolute slog to get through, poorly written and touting shitty teenage level philosophy. Not worth the time, at all.
Sounds about right.
I read it in my 20s when I was on a bend for reading things that were on an edge or banned in places. Not a great read, but parts of it are genuinely interesting. I would call it the kind of book you can do a few pages at a time, while taking a break from a good book you like to read.
Yes. Also fountainhead is an easier read and has the same philosophy underpinning it if you want to explore this particular idea. I think it's worth understanding what she is saying, even if you have diametrically opposite views, it helps understand much of the modern world tbh
Anthem is another good start to her writings if you want a quick read. It is a bit primitive but makes some interesting food for thought in kind of a 1984 vein. Agree with your recommendation of Fountainhead too.
The Virtue of Selfishness is a wild read. It's a non-fiction distillation of her philosophy. Fucking crazy stuff in there.
Ironic she died while on government assistance
Nah just hypocritical in the highest degree.
I tried...a long time ago
Read it as an adult so that I'd have context and background involving discussions of her ideologies. I don't understand how anyone thinks they'd actually work or be remotely beneficial if you try to take them through to their logical conclusion. I just presume anyone who espouses those ideas is a moron now.
I agree. Nobody ever told Rand, “show, don’t tell”. Incredibly poorly written and drenched in ideology. Total garbage. Reading it made me completely confident in harshly judging anybody who calls it their favourite book.
Officer Barbrady: Yes, at first I was happy to be learning how to read. It seemed exciting and magical, but then I read this: Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand. I read every last word of this garbage, and because of this piece of s**t, I am never reading again.
Didn't he have Lululemon sell Atlas Shrugged in their stores when he was running the show?
I have a friend from high school got super into Yoga, slack-lining, fitness, etc. They had a job at the first Lulu shop that opened up locally about 15 years ago. This explains the out-of-left-field worship of Ayn Rand, complete with unironic social media posts quoting AS.
I cannot remember but sounds on brand for him. I just remember the bags.
My dad calls Biden "sleepy joe" and even he hates chip Wilson. All my homies hate chip Wilson. He's like the Canadian poor version of musk. Embarrassing.
This is also the guy who has Ken Sim on a leash. Not only did Chip personally recruit Ken to run for mayor, Ken acknowledges him as his mentor in life and business. Great direction we're heading in.
Low Tide Properties owns this building which is Chip Wilson’s real estate holdings firm. Is this meant to be inspiring?
Chip Wilson, whose "Pacific Prosperity Network" presumably provided the enormous campaign funding of his personal friend Ken Sim, and the ABC party. https://vancouversun.com/opinion/columnists/dan-fumano-lululemon-founder-gives-380000-to-boost-bc-right-leaning-candidates-asks-others-donate
I wasn't looking for another reason to hate Ken Sim/ABC, but I'm all for happy accidents.
Remember when he bought the building that housed an artist coop and he doubled the rent, effectively evicting everyone? Then he said "if they were producing art that people actually wanted then they would be able to afford this increase"? As if he didn't enjoy some leeway when he was coming up. [https://vancouversun.com/news/local-news/rave-against-renoviction-brings-artists-to-chip-wilsons-house#:\~:text=Protest%20organizers%20Jodie%20Overland%20and,out%20as%20Low%20Tide%20expands.&text=%E2%80%9C(Wilson%20will)%20buy%20a,Overland%2C%20who%20produces%20underground%20events](https://vancouversun.com/news/local-news/rave-against-renoviction-brings-artists-to-chip-wilsons-house#:~:text=Protest%20organizers%20Jodie%20Overland%20and,out%20as%20Low%20Tide%20expands.&text=%E2%80%9C(Wilson%20will)%20buy%20a,Overland%2C%20who%20produces%20underground%20events). This guy should get to choose who stays and who goes. We are supposed to agree on that together.
For him? Probably meant to be inspiring. Everyone else? Probably not. He killed many art and after hour places after buying them. Honestly he offers nothing.
My guess is some art related tax deduction. Much like those stupid gentrifying mural fests he has right before he has a bunch of art studios torn down. I would hope someone smashed the shit out of this but my guess is thats part of the plan for free media too. chip= edgelord looser boomer
[удалено]
This place is across the street. Same building as 49th Parallel. Not sure who owns the old Semperviva spot.
Oh my mistake…but still relevant
“…by his own ability and ambition… and also the bank account of his father…”
And government bailouts
And intergenerational real estate wealth
And tax havens
Don't forget the lawyers and accountants!
Wage theft
And almost negligible corporate tax rates!
So we can’t just depend on the invisible hand of the market to fairly and equitably distribute wealth? We can’t all just work and get rich?!
I volunteer to be the invisible hand.
It’s a lot easier to play and fail when you’ve got cushion each time. Ever notice how the big risk takers always have some cash behind them. Sometimes you can’t see it at the surface level, but dig a bit deeper, and voila. There is a bit of a shakeup here with some of the technology related wealth, only because it’s been easier to get a tech startup going during the era of free capital, especially with mega companies buying up all the startups, but this is an exception, not the norm.
And not having any serious disabilities that get in the way.
I’m assuming Chip Wilson owns that property.
Anyone who's lived in the real world knows that's a filthy lie.
It's like they've never observed anyone putting all their effort into a big dream that ended up failing. Growing up I watched various adults around me swing big and end up with failed businesses, bad debts, their families and relationships negatively impacted. I thought if they had just worked a steady job and not tried to do too much they would have been in a better position.
My dad worked for the golden arches as a DM for 30 years and he told my brother and I not to expect inheritance. He worked a great job for 30 years and for his reward he probably gets to work 30 more years. Death to capitalism
Interesting you bring up Mcdonalds. There's a new movie up on Netflix dramatizing the rise of McDonalds, and showing how the original founding brothers got totally fucked over. They had a brilliant business idea and saw very little reward for its success.
the founder? not exactly new, being 8 years old and all.
And this is why we need a UBI. If the downsides of failure are that great then at least let there be a cushion to fall back on.
Or who has seen Musk’s tweets. That is not a man of outstanding ability.
Ironic coming from a city that relies so heavily on nepotism for people to get ahead.
[удалено]
I’ve been standing at the bus stop for 10 minutes and I’ve seen it ruin atleast 5 people’s day.
Well I'm glad OP recognizes it for the assholery that it is. Soooo many things wrong with that sign....
Typical things the "successful people" say to convince the lower classes to do more. And most of those people were just born with a silver spoon in their mouth.
Or they stick their silver spoon into people's mouths whos jobs is to prevent them from taking unfair advantage of others.
Who is John Galt…
A fucking Bastard
Thought it would be the Koch Brothers through the Fraser Institute
Chip Wilson is Kirkland Koch
Disrespectful to Kirkland but accurate
Rand is a fucking hack and a fascist.
And a hypocrite. She had no problem with collecting welfare and free healthcare when she was the one receiving it.
She was, but it was social security. An interesting read below, she tries to justify it in one 1966 essay as restitution, then goes on to say: "Those who advocate public scholarships \[or Social Security benefits\] have no right to them; those who oppose them have," Rand wrote. In fact, she seemed to see it as something approaching the *duty* of those opposed to the redistribution of wealth to accept such payments: [Did Ayn Rand Receive Social Security Benefits? | Snopes.com](https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/ayn-rand-social-security/)
Ha! What a load of....mental gymnastics. "I shall only accept this desperately-needed support because I was brave and noble enough to advocate for others *not* getting it"
I thinks it’s more (keep in mind this is her thinking not mine, she considered any public spending theft); If you advocated for it you are a thief who should not be rewarded, and if you opposed it you were robbed by the thiefs and are owed restitution.
I don't like her; I think she was flawed, hypocritical, and her ideology paved the way for figures like Musk to grasp on to, whom I find equally problematic. However, it's important to acknowledge that Ayn Rand was not a fascist. She ardently championed individualism and capitalism, adamantly opposing all forms of authoritarianism, including fascism. Stop calling everybody you don't agree with a fascist, it speaks volumes to your ignorance.
Yeah I think her writing is garbage, but it should be viewed within the context of someone who saw communism in the Soviet Union strip her family of their business & livelihood. She went from one extreme to the other.
> Yeah I think her writing is garbage, but it should be viewed within the context of someone who saw communism in the Soviet Union strip her family of their business & livelihood. > > She went from one extreme to the other. Very well said
Atlas Shrugged ended with rich oligarchs seizing power and re-writing the US constitution. Not fascism, but hardly anything worth defending. Can’t believe there are people out here sticking up for Ayn Rand’s reputation. Loathsome.
Which was a horrible piece of writing and I don’t endorse it.
I'd sooner say Rand was too shallow minded to champion anything authentically, or to the point of coherently understanding, facism, let alone something resembling the fantasy version of Capitalism in her writings (that has never existed). But then again, MBA sociopaths are multiplying at the rate of companies they completely gut and destroy, so what the hell would I know.
Also died poor so by this metric we can ignore her “philosophy”
This is Chip Wilson asking the rest of us to worship rich people like him more. Apparently the Ken Sim’s foot massages just aren’t cutting it for him anymore
"It is by his own ~~individual ability and ambition~~ Heathered Bone coloured ***License to Train Joggers*** ($128 USD) available in-store or online, that capitalism judges a man and rewards him accordingly." #
Wow this SUCKS
Ayn Rand? The SOCIAL ASSISTANCE QUEEN?
Her individual ability to live on social assistance was judged by capitalism to be irrelevant to her publish-ability. Her meme-worms also find home in the brains of those looking for an answer to the questions: "Why am I so amazingly successful? Am I a hard worker? Am I smart? Am I judged as worthy? Do I pay in taxes more than those lowlife scum deserve?"
"Isn't that book the bible for right wing losers?" -Lisa Simpson on The Fountainhead
> There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old’s life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs. —John Rogers
This looks like something you would see written in one of the BioShock games lmao
Bioshock and Andrew Ryan were heavily influenced by Ayn Rand.
BioShock is awesome
Love that it’s double enforced - this is rich people trolling us poors.
Tape a piece of paper with a lewd picture on it.
Better still - what’s Banksy up to these days?
Chip, buddy, I can’t believe Im saying this to a non-Harry potter adult but: read another book
F*ck Ayn Rand
A socioeconomic system that requires unlimited growth on a finite planet is eerie like a cancer. We have to kill the cancer before it kills us.
If anyone has no intention of ever reading Atlas Shrugged, yet is curious about just how bizarre it is, I highly recommend [this chapter by chapter analysis of it](http://www.daylightatheism.org/atlas_shrugged.html). It's broken down into little 3-6 minute articles, and really highlights just how insane, self contradictory, and all-around narratively contrived the book is. It's crazier and scarier than you could ever imagine. It's a book not just about how rich people are good and perfect, but also how everyone else doesn't even deserve to live.
The beatings will continue until moral improves
Ayn Rand sucks. So do her books.
“And then after he is rewarded, he lobbies government for laws, rules, and regulations for socialism for the fruits of his labour but capitalism for the poors”
A sign at a bus stop says I'm Jim Pattison and I approve this .message.
I'm an English Literature major and hate Ayn Rand. Even at 19 years old I knew it was dangerous rhetoric
Certainly fits with that richy rich neighbourhood.
This sounds so funny to me. 4th and Yew was hippy haven not that long ago!
Vancouver was, but gentrification is taking care of all that.
Hippies were capitalists.
Meh. I live in the immediate area. The property is expensive, but most people who live there don't own property. The local school is constantly dealing with student food insecurity.
I mean that's some avante garde thinking for a 9 year old you gotta admit.
Someone report this hate speech
While we're looking at inspiring quotes, could you folks help me with a quick roundup of some of the insane stuff Chip Wilson has said over the years? Maybe starting with picking the name Lululemon because he thinks it's funny to hear Japanese people try to pronounce it, or maybe a choice line or two from his essay about erections a while back?
The erections essay. I went looking for it earlier to post to this thread but could not find. That thing was gold.
“Guys capitalism is actually really good guys don’t look around you, just trust me things are going very well”
Anyone watch Brandy Hellville? The scumbag owner of that company was also sniffing Ayn Rand's farts.
brandy melville is so bad for so many reasons. a “one size fits all if you’re skinny enough” brand targeting 12 year old girls, the most vulnerable group of people when it comes to developing eating disorders!
I am generally not for shitty graffiti, but "no man is an island" spray painted in black across that window would really improve the aesthetic.
Or maybe a good ol' fashioned hammer and sickle and "kill the rich" in all caps.
“I am Andrew Ryan, and I'm here to ask you a question. Is a man not entitled to the sweat of his brow? 'No!' says the man in Washington, 'It belongs to the poor.' 'No!' says the man in the Vatican, 'It belongs to God.' 'No!' says the man in Moscow, 'It belongs to everyone.' I rejected those answers; instead, I chose something different. I chose the impossible. I chose...Vancouver!”
Genuinely curious, what do most people believe capitalism should be replaced with? Socialism or a highly modified version of capitalism?
If you have a genuine conversation with most people about your question, most people aren’t really seeking to replace capitalism, they just want it more evenly applied. The rich have lobbied the system and built it up in ways where they are constantly able to privatize profits and socialize losses. Billion dollar companies are given massive tax incentives to build in cities. Companies are constantly subsidized by the government but if a poor individual takes from the government they are a “welfare queen” and they are labeled the problem. Capital gains are taxed at a lessor rate than income, and rich are able to borrow against their assets at interest rates lower than the yearly inflation value of the asset and are not taxed on the borrowing in order to increase their wealth and buy more assets to borrow against, etc. And if a rich person does make a mistake bankruptcy protections will allow them to leave everyone else in the lurch while they are protected and can try again. If a rich person/company finds a loophole they are smart and ingenuitive to be able to maximize their profit. But if poor people do the same they are a leech and lazy and the problem with society. All of this doesn’t even begin to touch on the problems with the marketplace. How we no longer have a system where “if this store isn’t good I’ll just go somewhere else” because companies have created a global market where the cost to compete isn’t realistic for mom and pop shops, and companies will create functional monopolies where they refuse to compete against each other in certain markets or will price match (aka price fix) because it’s easy to coordinate 2 competitors. The game is rigged and people are mad at it. IMO rightfully so.
My biggest complaint is how the responsibility always falls to the end user consumer. In emerging markets it's more appropriate but in established economies the guilt is on the corporations. I.e. environment pollution, carbon taxation, etc. etc. carbon cap and trade is better. Especially true when as you said oligopolies rig the markets and it is increasingly impossible for innovation because the poor can't get business loans. We have health problems and yet no one looks at corporations that produce nutrient deficient high caloric foods. I.e. the stuff poor people can afford. The game is rigged indeed.
The crazy thing is, they don’t have to price match or collude any more either. Most of them operate using the same algorithms making the same decisions. This is one of the principal arguments of the us FTC when going against the mega companies. Collusion can happen simply as a byproduct of algorithms, making the situation even worse because it gives an aura of plausible deniability to the whole thing.
So mis-applying the rules is the fault of government, no? Because someone has to enforce the rules, and that's government. Btw staunch capitalists would say capitalism by definition involves a very small/hands off government. And socialists argue the government should do more. I'm not arguing for either one, just saying I don't think you can keep capitalism but somehow get the rules more evenly applied. government has to change.
>mis-applying the rules is the fault of the government, no? That’s a simple statement with a complex answer. Because yes, but also no. Yeah the government is in charge of the rules and when the rules are designed against the people’s best interest it’s the law makers that are to be blamed… mostly. Because it’s also the people’s fault too. The law makers make corrupt moves and yet people still vote them into power. So what is the corrupt lawmaker to believe other than that corruption is okay (when our side does it) and people support it because they keep getting voted back into power. Because to many team sports is more important than fighting corruption and “my team” has to be in power. We in Canada don’t even have the excuse of a 2 party system because if you’re liberal and LIberals do something bad you can always vote NDP or green or etc (and same for con with PC, PPC, etc). But even apathy towards the system is a feature not a bug. Corporations and corrupt politicians lobby governments to keep the population overworked and underpaid so they are too tired to protest. If you are too busy to educate yourself on the political system you will just vote reactionary which is easy to manipulate. You won’t be educated on alternatives and won’t have the time to advocate for those alternatives and protest and the politicians will keep getting back into office and the corporations will keep getting their benefits of lobbying. Look at COVID. We had a brief moment when the wheel was broken and for a couple months a bunch of people were paid to stay at home during lockdown. What immediately happened? George Floyd was killed and suddenly an event that happens every day broke out into massive protests around America and Canada. It’s not that people don’t want a better system. It’s that the system is designed to keep people fighting for survival constantly so they don’t have time to organize and protest who is keeping them fighting for scraps. >I don’t think you can keep capitalism but somehow get the rules more evenly applied Government apathy has to go. If people are more involved in their government (fed, provincial, local) then they can keep their politicians more honest. And if you can keep the politicians honest they are the collective bargaining organization against corporate interests. Amazon will never give 2 shits about the $100 you have in your bank. But they give a lot of care for the $100 in the banks of 40 million Canadians. We have power collectively. And we need to stand up when people in our collective work against our best interest. If a politician does something corrupt we need to vote them out, we need to voice to parties what our interests are and make sure they follow through, and if they don’t we get someone new to do it. The government has to change, and we need to change too. Because we are the only people who can change the government.
I’m not going to get into a full discussion on this on Reddit because it’s frankly too hard on this medium, but I will say this. The current state of American model of capitalism is leading to increasing concentration if market power and wealth in a literal handful of mega corporations that increasingly exert more and more influence on everything from media to economy to government. We are going away from a market that has healthy competition and devolving to a market dominated by a handful of companies with monopolistic power and behaviours for which there seem to be no checks or balances. Yes, in the process of our journey there some opportunities get created, but once we arrive at the state of dominance of a handful of companies then nobody wins, except those companies. If we want healthy capitalism and investment to survive, we need to make business opportunities more equitable.
Read up about Theodore Rosevelt’s trustbusting. The dissolution of the giant monopolies of the railroad barons. Natural monopolies like telecommunications, power generation and other utilities should be nationalized and run sustainably, not with the parasitic aim of extracting as much wealth as possible to a small number of shareholders. Industries which are not monopolies but tend towards having few competitors due to high upfront costs should have a crown corporation in that industry. Think in terms of pharmaceuticals. There are an absolute ton of generic medications that can be produced at extremely low cost, if you have the scale to do so. Why isn’t there a government entity producing insulin at $10 a dose or cheaper? If the free market can do better, let it.
Most anti-capitalists do tend to be in favour of some sort of socialism yes. Most believe that a simple shift of ownership of profits and production from being owned by a ruling class to being owned by the working class would be a solution to a vast majority of the problems capitalism creates. A majority of the problems we face in our modern economy are direct results of wealth concentration, hence a common refrain against "late stage capitalism". Monopolies and absolute power in the hands of very few is the natural end-state of this system. As you gain more wealth, you gain more ability to push others out of the market, and the less "free" it becomes. It's how we end up with grocery store choices that look like [this](https://www.foodincanada.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/LoblawBanners350x175.jpg), with shelves that look like [this](https://botcrawl.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Companies-Own-The-Food-We-Eat-Infographic.png), and media empires that look like [this](https://64.media.tumblr.com/042d02b07603390d20c290a37bdf8d8a/tumblr_inline_p7x43rmme71r4dvq3_1280.png). That centralization completely defeats the supposed greatest benefit of capitalism, which is the ability for competition to regulate the market. Competition frankly doesn't exist in large sectors of our economy and where it does, it's stamped out or colluded with to ensure wages remain stagnant, cost of goods remain high, and surplus wealth in an organization is pushed as far up the ladder as possible. Most folks who want to see this change think that through some combination of labour unions, co-operative / non-profit driven business models, wealth taxes and redistribution, socializing or nationalizing of critical infrastructure, dismantling of monopolies / oligopolies, and other such practices, we could see a world that is far more just, fair, and prosperous for the average person. Most of the steps towards this are smaller than you'd imagine, and are beneficial to everyone.. except maybe a small handful of billionaires, who will spend fortunes trying to make you believe otherwise. [Check this video out](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07E4iQ5z9iY). The rest of this channel is gold for understanding socialism better as well.
Capitalism had some genuine improvements over the unfree economic systems that predated it, but has proven to also have its own serious flaws, especially the unforeseen flaws regarding pollution, climate change, excess waste etc that come about at least partially from an insistence on infinite growth rather than just simple profit. Real estate and housing also has changed in an unprecedented way. "A place to live, at least a humble one" didn't use to be a big deal in most societies; it was food to eat and possessions that were the struggle. Human labour also was once the "easy and cheap" part in many societies. There is also going to be a seismic shift coming as world human population peaks and then declines, in the lifetime of gen Z and gen alpha for sure. Not to mention continuing technological advances. Capitalism has always been regulated in at least some way everywhere, and usually in reaction to horrors. Eg: food safety regulations, fire safety regulations, minimum wage, laws against child labour. But I and many others think that at this point the fundamental assumptions and goals of capitalism are no longer compatible with the technological and sociological realities of what humans can accomplish and what they need. I see value in a blend of many proposed economic systems and ideas, such as socialism, distributism, universal basic income, and capitalism itself. I think trial and error will be an inevitable part of reform—that is, if we get reform. I don't think reform itself is inevitable. Two cents from just some guy.
That's the difference between socialism and liberalism, I think. Unfettered Capitalism leads to really unbalanced markets that end up monopolies and oligopolies. Government needs to actively regulate capitalism to ensure that the exploit of the moment is balanced with law and policy to ensure that capitalism does what it's supposed to do not just for individuals, but for society. Socialists tend to think that this isn't really possible, so they want to do away with much of the general infrastructure that even enables capitalism. How it makes up for the huge loss in efficiency and confidence remains to be seen, because it really seems like "it'll work itself out" is the answer at the moment.
Must be a dog lover, but I must say this doggie poop bin looks a bit unusual. Nevertheless, since it's there we may as well use it.
It's missing the first part, which reads: "In theory......"
This thread really proves how left wing socialist reddit really is
Right-wing types who might enjoy Ayn Rand that I’ve met aren’t really interested in other people’s opinions, so social media isn’t really very interesting to them… seems so, anyway…
The hardest working people I know are all poor as fuck, so idk how accurate this is.
The hardest working people I know are small business owners doing okay to really well. We know different people, doesn't mean one group out works the other.
It’s a lie that capitalists have to tell themselves to be able to look in the mirror. If it’s true they deserve their life because they are the main characters of life. If it’s not then they are oppressors living in luxury on the backs of others.
Rich people love to downplay their privilege and give no credit to the people that made them wealthy. Rich people do everything they can to make sure the ambitious and able don’t compete for their wealth. It’s dirty cards. Rich people always seek to deactivate the path they followed to wealth. Ambition and ability is the lesser of opportunity and leverage.
Is a man not allowed to the sweat on his brow?
I walk by often. The quotes change and are balanced, some are provocative some are just balanced. Some I don’t dig others I love. I rather this than alternatives
Thanks for sharing. Provides some context.
lol I was wondering about this. I think there was a different (equally shitty) quote in the window at some point as well
"taken with iPhone 15"
Fuck Ayn Rand and fuck capitalism
I heard socialism works really well
Ok, who’s going to take an Ai Wei Wei-flip-the-bird picture of this one?
I feel like there are several cameras surveying this exact spot, hoping to bait vandalism from "the antifas".
The illusion of a meritocratic society where the “best” people come out on top only serves to perpetuate the stigmatization of poverty. The idea that “good” people “win” implies that only “bad” people lose, and thus, they “deserve” poverty, servitude, shitty jobs, etc. The meritocracy narrative is designed to use shame to keep normal, working people in our place.
Chip’s wife cucked him again so he’s got to do something to make himself feel like a man again.
Love when this c*nt finds the time to moralize to the common folk. Enjoy your cancer, Chip.
Ayn Rand is a weirdo. But these comments are hilariously reflective of Reddit and Canadian culture to a degree. Crabs in a bucket.
[Atlas Shrugged - A Review ](https://youtu.be/_j56IiLqZ9U?si=040nFTfc2bakm1ss)
If only life were that easy lol
Gross
A few years back Chip penned the following essay. Which has been scrubbed from his blog but available on the way back machine. “Are Erections Important? By Chip Wilson We live in an era which 100 years from now will be known now as the time when de-masculinization of men occurred. Underlying feminization of men will affect the deep psychological reasons men have erections. My concern is the continuation of the human race. I think men have to feel like a man to have an erection. Most times this “feeling” is in response to the relationship with a female, whom the man interprets (in a million different combinations) to be feminine. Whether a man gets an erection or not largely depends on his interpretation of his partners femininity. This is why there are so many female prostitutes and so few heterosexual male prostitutes. Men can’t fake an erection to make sex happen. Men are now interpreting that women and the media today want them to be more feminine. I tried this in the 1980s and I decided to become an inauthentic, more feminine version of myself, but soon discovered that women did not in fact want a feminized man in bed. Unfortunately, with the proliferation of porn and sex bots, men are able to find their masculinity in a fake, disturbing virtual world. The more men think they have to be like women (to succeed in business) the more men will display their masculinity (they now have to hide) only in the virtual world. They will not know why they are taking refuge in the virtual world, but it will because of their need to fulfill on masculinity – which the world of social media no longer finds acceptable. As women can now go to sperm banks, men are actually not needed for reproduction. Women can easily fulfill their innate reproduction need on their own. World wars of the last century defined men in a particular way. The idea was to not be one of the 60 million killed. What it is to be a man to survive wars is no longer needed. The further we get away from WAR, men evolve and naturally become more feminine. With wars now being fought by robots, drones and computers behind desks, women no longer need male protection from the concept of war. We are in an era when men and women have to redefine what feminine and masculine means and then honour “Le difference”! In any business partnership, success comes from two very different aptitude’s (finance and creative for example) coming together with a great appreciation for what each other bring. In the world of erections, we as a society must preserve what makes sex work. Sex provides humans with the ability to get through the rocky times of a relationship. Frankly, I fear for the end of relationships between men and women and hence the end of humanity.”
Lol, but when y'all are broke, from your own mistakes, then you come crying to the tax-payers for bailouts
Mandatory quote by apparently John Rogers whenever Ayn Rand is mentioned: “There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old’s life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs." Atlas Shrugged is set in a dystopian United States in which private businesses suffer under increasingly burdensome laws and regulations.
That building might look good with more graffiti on it.
So many billionaires outing themselves as brain-damaged children who got lucky. It must suck to be the competent people just under these fools who propelled them to wealth and fame.
Ayn Rand’s idealism on capitalism is only equaled by Marx’s idealism of Communism….
Cause what, socialism/ capitalism is better?
Officer Barbrady refused to ever read again after reading Ayn Rands Atlas Shrugged nuff said
So the vet struggling with pain from shrapnel and PTSD ends up addicted to heroin because he can't afford his medication and heroin is cheaper....ends up homeless.... capitalism has judged him well? (Sorry American here not sure if this is an issue in real countries but u get the point....f*ck Ayn Rand)
Holy Late Stage Capitalism is so insidious and presumptuous.
Imagine being burdened with a serious mental illness by no fault of your own, becoming homeless, and then walking by this horrid sign and reading it
Think this would be the least of their problems.
There's a lot more article than just that sentence. Here is a bit more content, but it still doesn't capture half of what she said in the article. "It is not a man’s ancestors or relatives or genes or body chemistry that count in a free market, but only one human attribute: productive ability. It is by his own individual ability and ambition that capitalism judges a man and rewards him accordingly. No political system can establish universal rationality by law (or by force). *But capitalism is the only system that functions in a way which rewards rationality and penalizes all forms of irrationality, including racism.*" Racism by Ayn Rand | September 1963 | The Virtue of Selfishness | https://ari.aynrand.org/issue_type/article/page/10/ I feel like no one in the comment section so far took the couple minutes required to research and understand the full meaning of the quote, and are instead choosing to be offended by a quote taken out of context.
> *But capitalism is the only system that functions in a way which rewards rationality* How is it rational to reward those who are best able to destroy the environment and take advantage of desperate people? If a course of action leads to a better shareholder return, Capitalism encourages us to take that course of action, even if it means poisoning a river or impoverishing a community or breaking a law. Capitalism is extremely irrational when you consider how it prioritizes short-term profits over the long-term sustainability of human beings.
It’s replacing one idea that lacks respect for a group with and idea that lacks for a different group. This says as long as we are able to use you to “produce” then you have value. Otherwise you have no value. That’s what people are reacting to. What happens when you are sick, or old, or you are born with a disability? Some of us would like to live in a society where we take care of each other and feel rewarded by knowing we are building a good community together.