Timeline for Was Francisco d'Anconia's deliberate destruction of his competitors counterproductive to the purpose of the Strike?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
23 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 26, 2019 at 19:38 | vote | accept | EJoshuaS - Stand with Ukraine | ||
| Apr 18, 2019 at 3:43 | comment | added | EvilSnack | Not interested in continuing this, and comments aren't for debating anyway. | |
| Apr 17, 2019 at 4:38 | comment | added | jo1storm | @EvilSnack And back into rabbit hole we go.That is not how lobbying works! " his competitors hired lobbyists in order to get subsidies and what-not." If that were the case, they should have been plenty of steel producers.You can't claim that "getting Hank Reardon to quit was a fatal blow to the steel industry precisely because the environment was so hostile to the industry that only he could cope. " and at the same time claim there were plenty of competitors using government and lobbying to compete with him.And thus we go back to point one: those competitors are imperfect, thus they must fail. | |
| Apr 17, 2019 at 3:33 | comment | added | EvilSnack | Yes, it is a big problem when businesses lobby government in order to have the market distorted in their favor. Rand preached against this very thing throughout the whole work (and outside of it). Rearden paid his lobbyist to keep the government off of his back, and nothing more, whereas his competitors hired lobbyists in order to get subsidies and what-not. | |
| Apr 16, 2019 at 10:45 | comment | added | jo1storm | @EvilSnack That's why I wrote huge "if" in my answer.You have touched another unrealistic part of the novel.In real world, money = power.And it is huge problem when capitalistic and industry interests lobby politicians for the changes they like. Yet, it doesn't work that way in the world Rand has made. Hank Rearden is actually an example of it.He is paying a lobbyist,doesn't control that lobbyist and doesn't fire him after he lobbies against his interest.In fact,Rand ignored social power and demeaned soft skills in her book.Her villains are at the same time corrupt and incorruptible by heroes. | |
| Apr 16, 2019 at 2:46 | comment | added | EvilSnack | One of the plot points in the novel was that only the most highly efficient and capable of the business leaders were able to overcome the burdens that the government was placing on all producers everywhere (high taxes, insane regulations, and the near-complete abrogation of the rule of law). For instance, getting Hank Reardon to quit was a fatal blow to the steel industry precisely because the environment was so hostile to the industry that only he could cope. | |
| Apr 13, 2019 at 20:01 | comment | added | jo1storm | True. That was a bit of Batman gambit. ( tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/BatmanGambit ) He is famous for copper mines. He intentionally spreads that he bought bare hills in Mexico. He doesn't give much technical data about mines themselvves but he did give plenty of information about his plans (building mineshafts and a settlement). He knew how they would react. He indeed accepted money. | |
| Apr 13, 2019 at 16:03 | comment | added | EJoshuaS - Stand with Ukraine | One point: Francisco never actually asked for investments, people invested in the project of their own accord without bothering to find out anything concrete about the project. | |
| Apr 13, 2019 at 9:17 | history | edited | jo1storm | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 61 characters in body
|
| Apr 13, 2019 at 8:17 | history | edited | jo1storm | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 105 characters in body
|
| Apr 13, 2019 at 7:31 | history | edited | jo1storm | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 109 characters in body
|
| Apr 13, 2019 at 7:23 | history | edited | jo1storm | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 5556 characters in body
|
| Apr 13, 2019 at 7:17 | history | edited | jo1storm | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 5556 characters in body
|
| Apr 13, 2019 at 6:15 | comment | added | jo1storm | @EJoshuaS oh, I focused on Dagnar. I wasn't even talking about mines, that one is special case of evil but my answer was running long as it is. Basically, his answer is the one every thief or fraud would give you "If they didn't want me taking it, they would have locked the door with better lock." or "If they weren't so greedy, I would not have been able to trick them." I'll edit my answer to make it more clear. | |
| Apr 13, 2019 at 4:38 | comment | added | EJoshuaS - Stand with Ukraine | Excellent points. One point, though (and I'm curious as to your opinion of this) - Francisco at least claims to have been following the Looter morality literally (e.g. in hiring a third-rate mining specialist because he really needed a job, and according to the morality of the day his need was more important than his ability). Any thoughts on whether he's right, and if so if that would reduce the apparent hypocrisy? | |
| Apr 12, 2019 at 15:11 | history | edited | jo1storm | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
edited body
|
| Apr 12, 2019 at 15:03 | history | edited | jo1storm | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 51 characters in body
|
| Apr 12, 2019 at 14:15 | history | edited | jo1storm | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 4 characters in body
|
| Apr 12, 2019 at 13:46 | history | edited | jo1storm | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 40 characters in body
|
| Apr 12, 2019 at 13:25 | history | edited | jo1storm | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 4 characters in body
|
| Apr 12, 2019 at 7:20 | history | edited | jo1storm | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 578 characters in body
|
| Apr 12, 2019 at 6:55 | history | edited | jo1storm | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added two sentences.
|
| Apr 12, 2019 at 6:37 | history | answered | jo1storm | CC BY-SA 4.0 |