• Draces@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    21 days ago

    I’ll ask again, are you arguing that taking social security when you can is not in your self interest? The system doesn’t go away if you don’t take it and you’ve already paid into it. The wealth is already being redistributed and going to be redistributed. She is still going to have pay into the system if she lives. Not her decision for it to exist or pay into it. The decision is to take the money or don’t. Which is the decision that is self interested?

    • GoodEye8@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      21 days ago

      I’ll ask again, are you arguing that taking social security when you can is not in your self interest?

      Yes. That is exactly what Ayn Rand is saying.

      The system doesn’t go away if you don’t take it and you’ve already paid into it.

      And? Paying into it shouldn’t change your ideological stance. Or is a vegan allowed to eat meat if they pay to eat at an all you can eat restaurant that serves meat? After all they’ve already paid for the meat.

      She is still going to have pay into the system if she lives. Not her decision for it to exist or pay into it.

      Yes, she is being forced to participate in the system the same way socialists are forced to participate in a capitalist system. Nobody is calling her a hypocrite for paying taxes.

      The decision is to take the money or don’t. Which is the decision that is self interested?

      According to Rand. A decision made with rational self-interest is a decision that can’t sacrifice others and any redistribution of income is a distribution of sacrifice. That means any action in the redistribution process is not compatible with rational self-interest, because the process itself is sacrificing others. She gets a free pass on paying taxes because that participation is forced upon her. She doesn’t get a free pass on taking out social security because now she chose to participate in a process that is sacrificing others. Rational self-interest doesn’t justify her decision because she is choosing to sacrifice others.

      • Draces@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        20 days ago

        According to Rand. A decision made with rational self-interest is a decision that can’t sacrifice others and any redistribution of income is a distribution of sacrifice

        That is just not true. You can’t reinterpret and stretch a quote to make it defy very simple logic and completely dismisses and leave unaddressed that she did not control those systems and already was forced to pay into. You don’t think taking money you’re entitled to, that you’ve already paid into, is in your self interest. That is literally what those words mean. It is in your self interest to collect on a system you paid into. Full stop. You are completely unreasonable if we can’t agree on that

        • GoodEye8@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          20 days ago

          I can’t use her own words to show how she’s a hypocrite? My bad, I thought we were having a honest discussion. Go enjoy your successful defense of Ayn Rand and her ideology because I’m fucking done with you.

            • GoodEye8@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              20 days ago

              By deliberately ignoring the meaning given by the author of the term and instead making up your own definition that suits your argument? Such a crusader for correct meanings.

              • Draces@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                20 days ago

                When one speaks of man’s right to exist for his own sake, for his own rational self-interest, most people assume automatically that this means his right to sacrifice others. Such an assumption is a confession of their own belief that to injure, enslave, rob or murder others is in man’s self-interest—which he must selflessly renounce.

                This is a critique of social security as a program it says nothing about what someone who has already paid into the system should do. They were already “robbed”. Taking money you’re entitled to is rational self interested. That’s just what those words mean.

                Go enjoy your successful defense of Ayn Rand and her ideology

                Like how I called her dumb immoral and wrong over and over again? And you think you’re trying to have an honest conversation?

                I’m fucking done with you.

                I wonder what you think this means. You seem to struggle with what words mean

                • GoodEye8@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  20 days ago

                  You don’t have to try so hard anymore, you’ve already defended her ideology. We’re done here, I’ve already tagged you as “defends Ayn Rand” so in the future I’d know who I’m talking to.

                  • Draces@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    20 days ago

                    Please let me know where I defended her ideology? And you’re going to be very confused by that tag if you see me in that lmao. I explicitly have condemned her ideology over and over. Hypocrisy does not equate to moral. You can be hypocritical in a moral way. You clearly just don’t know what that word means