« HaHaHa the Republicans are against monitoring volcanoes! | Aatos's Blog | Palin '09 Reunion Tour »

Go Galt. Now. Please.


Michelle Malkin trumpets the "Go Galt" movement, a comically self-delusional conservative fad, based loosely on the Ayn Rand protagonist John Galt, whereby conservatives are threatening to cut back, go on strike, abstain from new adventures or otherwise deprive the world of their "productivity." The master plan is to titrate their income below $250,000 to avoid the dreaded Obama tax increases.

Don't let the door hit you in the rear. This guy, who Malkin links approvingly from Stephen Spruiell's commenters, is my personal favorite in terms of comic self unawareness:

I am a tax accountant, don't consider myself to be an idiot, and I am right in Obama's income target range.  I will be joining those looking to limit hours worked so as not to enter that 60% territory.  Part of the motivation will be the self satisfaction of not contributing to the socialist cause.
A tax accountant! His job is to minimize people's tax liabilities, and he's threatening to screw the socialists out of revenue by doing less work! Go Galt. Now. Please.

To join him, I'd also like to nominate:

1. Any five Republican Senators.
2. Rush Limbaugh.
3. Fox News.
4. Karl Rove.
5. Newt Gingrich.


Going Galt is by far the biggest improvement conservatives could make. So what are you waiting for, conservatives? Go Galt. Now. Please.

39 Comments

| Leave a comment
user-pic

Such a galactic flaw in the thinking of Republicans that praise John Galt in Ayn Rand's novel Atlas Shrugged.

John Galt's character is a creator and inventor who embodies the power of the individual. When he recognizes that creativity and individuality are being stifled by collective bureaucracy and egalitarianism, he calls upon the captains of industry who are driven by the rewards of ingenuity and hard work to "stop the motor of the world".

The BIG flaw is that America's capitalism, especially over the last eight years, is not at all the kind John Galt would associate himself with. Because it is no longer being driven by ingenuity and hard work.

If anything, science and discovery and innovation was put on complete hold by Republicans. John Galt would not be saying "Drill baby drill". He'd be saying "Invent baby invent".

Our meritocracy has not rewarded the brightest minds with the most inventive ideas. It has become a system driven by big money influence, mediocrity, cronyism and wide spread corruption.

We've been rewarding manufacturers of fake products like credit default swaps. We've been rewarding stagnation--look at the relics coming out of Detroit.

When you de-regulate industries in a capitalistic society NOT driven by a GENUINE meritocracy, the result is the current financial meltdown. A complete and utter collapse of society.

user-pic

Perhaps you should consider that the "Going Galt" phenomenon has been going on for a while now. High unemployment, tanking home sales, and reduced tax revenues are all the result of spending pullbacks. How's that working for you?

Perhaps you should also consider, that the top 10% of households, control 70% of the income tax revenue. How would you feel about losing a goodly amount of that as well?

What you don't seem to understand is that you need rich people, a lot more than they need you. But feel free to shoot yourself in the other foot as well. Heh.

user-pic

I think you understand that the use of Galt by Republicans to accurately portray what is going on now is largely idiotic.

Beware the great simplifiers, shooter.

Even when painted with the broadest possible brush, and Republicans use this massive brush often, the notion that we're witnessing an ideological battle between capitalism and socialism is astonishingly naive and too deeply infested with hypocrisy to call rational.

Have you read any of Ayn Rand's books?

user-pic
the top 10% of households, control 70% of the income tax revenue
I'm assuming that you meant that 10% of American taxpayers cover 70% of the collected income tax revenue. Citation please? Also, I'm interested in just how this breaks down further; ie, how much of the collected income tax revenue does the top 2% of taxpayers cover, as well as wondering what percentage of total individual wealth these same top 10% possess? A stat pulled out of your as...um, hat, might look quite a bit different when analyzed with other releant statistics.
user-pic
I'm assuming that you meant that 10% of American taxpayers cover 70% of the collected income tax revenue.
Six of one.... depending on the circumstance. I use this site and this site for my data. It's the latest I can find in easy to understand tabulature.
user-pic

I have, and yourself?

user-pic

Yes. Perhaps you can read my comment above, (starts out with "Such a galactic flaw...) and let me know what you think about it.

user-pic
If anything, science and discovery and innovation was put on complete hold by Republicans. John Galt would not be saying "Drill baby drill". He'd be saying "Invent baby invent".
He'd be saying both. I'm a fan of nuclear power and there are plenty of new designs that could literally revolutionize the world. But those and offshore oil will likely not see the light of day.
When you de-regulate industries in a capitalistic society NOT driven by a GENUINE meritocracy, the result is the current financial meltdown. A complete and utter collapse of society.
That's a good description of the mortgage underwriting process for the last ten years or so.
user-pic

the mentality of those Republicans chanting "drill baby drill" is regressive and closed to a market driven by innovation--including new designs for nuclear.

Bush/Cheney and neocons do not represent the interests of innovation. Period.

user-pic

I see this morning Obama stopped funding for Yucca Mountain. Not good.

user-pic

I'm a native and current resident of Nevada. Just where the hell to you live, and why don't you propose burying it there? Nevada doesn't use any Nuclear energy; in fact the state doesn't even get its fair share of Hoover Dam's hydroelectric output.

Those who pooped in their kitchen, should make stew with it. Why should Nevada be forced to accept imports of toxic waste from other states. That's real Randian self-reliance for you.

What would John Galt say?

user-pic

ROFLMAO.

Just so.

user-pic

Cool your jets, Jack. Maybe you should check things out before going into a rant. Apparently no nuke waste has been sent there, just a wasted $7.7 billion. Meanwhile ....

Instead, storage is spread over 121 above-ground sites located within 75 miles of more than 161 million people in 39 states.
So now that it's established that you're a selfish whiner whose state took billions of other people's money for nothing....are you happy? This is the model of lefty behavior, right?
As for Galt, he'd have mini reactors up and running by now, while you toss a tantrum elsewhere.

user-pic

shooter, If you support the Yucca project, by all means, make a case for it. But give us enough depth for that support so we can talk about it intelligently.

The abandonment of the project does not in any way equal the complete abandonment of nuclear energy or smarter alternatives.

user-pic

The rich and powerful will always be with us.

user-pic

Define rich and powerful.

Would you put Warren Buffet and say John Thain in the same category?

If not, what separates them?

user-pic

I do not know, really. Why are so many rich and powerful people kind, compassionate, worried about humanity? And why are so many of them so selfish, so condescending of those who have to struggle to get through the day on very little? I do not know.

user-pic

sorry for the rhetorical.

I just sense another oversimplification storm being brought on by some Republicans pitting all rich people on one side and all poor people on the other and claiming that this is an accurate way to frame the current debate.

user-pic

Who is John Galt? And why did he spread lies about Thomas Jefferson? (See Monticello dot org; Jefferson Encyclopedia; Spurious quotes)

user-pic

Atlast, The FountainPinHead Shrugged.

user-pic

Busy ripping his bodice?

user-pic

I am John Galt and I apologize for the mess the world is in, since I've denied the world my exalted talents since I began working in the underclass during the Nixon years.

That's what happens when one is standing at the fountainhead waiting for that interloper who started the Rand Institute with nothing to express but a god-like shrug, I suppose.

http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/blogs/justiceputnam/2009/03/on-starlight-and-fire.php

user-pic

I'll take Ayn Rand, for the whine:

"For the record, I shall repeat what I have said many times before: I do not join or endorse any political group or movement. More specifically, I disapprove of, disagree with and have no connection with, the latest aberration of some conservatives, the so-called ‘hippies of the right,’ who attempt to snare the younger or more careless ones of my readers by claiming simultaneously to be followers of my philosophy and advocates of anarchism. Anyone offering such a combination confesses his inability to understand either. Anarchism is the most irrational, anti-intellectual notion ever spun by the concrete-bound, context-dropping, whim-worshiping fringe of the collectivist movement, where it properly belongs."

Ayn Rand, "Brief Summary", The Objectivist, September 1971, As quoted From an Ayn Rand Institute's page:

As yes, those evil and dastardly "hippies of the right". Weren't they firebombed out of their communal bunker in Castro Valley, after they were discovered attempting to gain unauthorized access to The Hudson Institute's policy papers, using forged credentials showing that they were special investigators working for California Governor Reagan's Chief of Staff, Edwin Meese, back in 1973?

user-pic

I remember that!

user-pic

Ahhhh...the Utopian world of Ayn Rand. Where the wealthy behave in a moral and ethical way, pushing innovation and acquiring vast wealth for the benefit of us all. We would be the serfs and have our benevolent Lords. Everybody would be productive and motivated to work hard so they could improve our individual lots in the world.

But that is not the way the world works. The wealthy aren't ethical. They don't believe in competition. They want as much as they can take leaving almost enough for the rest of the people to subsist on. Thus Ayn Rand, Milton Friedman, Hayek, Greenspan, et al tried to hijack the libertarian movement for the benefit of the wealthy. Yeah, there are many 'roads to serfdom' and Corporatism spawned from right-wing libertarianism is one of them. There is no difference between losing ones rights to corporate entities or governmental ones.

Screw right-wing libertarians, The Austrian and Chicago Schools of Economics, and anyone else who tries to let any individual or small cadres of elites (re: The Military-Industrial Complex) have total control over the vast majority of the individuals. In that regard laissez faire, unregulated, capitalism is no different than the Marxism practiced in the former USSR or the Fascism practiced in Nazi Germany.

user-pic

"The wicked are wicked, no doubt, and they go astray and they fall, and they come by their deserts; but who can tell the mischief which the very virtuous do?"

-- William Thackeray
"The Newcomes"

user-pic

"A crime persevered in a thousand centuries ceases to be a crime, and becomes a virtue." - Mark Twain Following the Equator

user-pic
They want as much as they can take leaving almost enough for the rest of the people to subsist on.
This is wrong to the extent that the wealthy influence the size of the pie, not who gets what. Wealth is not a zero sum game. If I make more money this year, it does not mean someone else makes less.

If that were true, we would be subdividing the same wealth available pre-history. Obviously we aren't.

user-pic

Well I am not gonna get into this again with you shooter...because I really do think it is a zero sum game. But that being said even if it isn't the people at the top fix/game the system for that to be the outcome.

user-pic

I can't fix willful ignorance, so if you really feel the need to approach economics from a religious point of view, pray for pennies from heaven.

user-pic

You can't fix willful ignorance? OK I buy that...it is self-evident.

And as far as having a religious pov goes...you still believe in laissez faire as a good economic model even after where we've ended up now and after Greenspan's mea culpa? You probably believe in the tooth fairy too...

user-pic

Also this supposed "Galt Phenomenon" is really nothing new at all. There have always been plenty of folks who cheerfully spend a dollar just to screw the government out of a quarter. They can be funny to watch and their existence is a better reason to close special tax loopholes than to open more.

Realtors (tm) have probably been encouraging people to go Galt (by exaggerating the value of the mortgage interest deduction) longer than they've been trademarking their job titles. But this is just Realtors' (tm) self interest masquerading as sound advice.

It's sort of ridiculous to call this "going Galt" nonsense a trend at all.

Incidentally, the last time I saw my Realtor (tm) she was waiting tables at Jimmy Buffet's Margaritaville. Fetching me my overpriced drink was more work than she did selling me my overpriced home, and it cost me about 6/100,000 as much. Maybe Waitresses should get their job titles trademarked too.

user-pic

I don't believe anybody is serious about refusing to make more money, since it exactly the opposite that has been occurring. If these folks hold their incomes below the higher mark they will simply have less income, period.

BTW, they can still spend their income, just more down-scale a bit, by flying coach instead of business, or buying a Ford instead of a BMW, or going to the library, or jogging in the street instead of at the gym.

As to whether this drawback will hurt others, maybe it will open up some job opportunities for my kids, who are waiting tables.

user-pic

Tom, you ask elsewhere what it would take to talk to conservatives. Let me make the suggestion of using some objective information, rather than just making unproven assertions.

I don't believe anybody is serious about refusing to make more money, since it exactly the opposite that has been occurring.

I'm not even sure what this refers to much less what you base it on. Plus it ignores the ability to make income in dividends, capital gains via stock bonuses, or tax free munis. Do you think the appeal of working fewer hours isn't real, especially if the total marginal tax rate climbs to 50% or more?
BTW, they can still spend their income, just more down-scale a bit,
Or, just not spend it at all and save it for the uncertainty of current times.
maybe it will open up some job opportunities for my kids, who are waiting tables.

How do you think that's going to happen when the job market is shrinking? That makes no sense at all.

user-pic

What it refers to is the post topic, "Go Galt". Let's try it out, the previous system crashed.

As to non-wage income, you still make money at higher tax rates.

I do not propose any caps, only steeper slopes, like we had in times past, when the middle class was growing, and civil servants like my father, who worked on radar during the war, for the Bureau of Standards, helped out with nuclear testing, and later worked at NASA, could buy a house in Montgomery County, MD.

Enjoy your dividends and your leisure, I have to go to work today. And as to job openings, I'm entitled to make no sense, as you are also, with your slogans and concerned tut-tutting.

user-pic

Personally? I prefer to say they are going to the John. If they lock themselves in there they might stop crapping on the nations economy.

Fortunately for us, when these wingnut free market freaks are out of power they are more of a danger to themselves than to the rest of us.

user-pic

I thought the cafe might enjoy this from Mcsweenys.

http://www.mcsweeneys.net/2008/11/20tucker.html

ATLAS SHRUGGED UPDATED FOR THE CURRENT FINANCIAL CRISIS. BY JEREMIAH TUCKER

- - - -

1.

"Damn it, Dagny! I need the government to get out of the way and let me do my job!"

She sat across the desk from him. She appeared casual but confident, a slim body with rounded shoulders like an exquisitely engineered truss. How he hated his debased need for her, he who loathed self-sacrifice but would give up everything he valued to get in her pants ... Did she know?

"I heard the thugs in Washington were trying to take your Rearden metal at the point of a gun," she said. "Don't let them, Hank. With your advanced alloy and my high-tech railroad, we'll revitalize our country's failing infrastructure and make big, virtuous profits."

"Oh, no, I got out of that suckers' game. I now run my own hedge-fund firm, Rearden Capital Management."

"What?"

He stood and adjusted his suit jacket so that his body didn't betray his shameful weakness. He walked toward her and sat informally on the edge of her desk. "Why make a product when you can make dollars? Right this second, I'm earning millions in interest off money I don't even have."

He gestured to his floor-to-ceiling windows, a symbol of his productive ability and goodness.

"There's a whole world out there of byzantine financial products just waiting to be invented, Dagny. Let the leeches run my factories into the ground! I hope they do! I've taken out more insurance on a single Rearden Steel bond than the entire company is even worth! When my old company finally tanks, I'll make a cool $877 million."

Their eyes locked with an intensity she was only beginning to understand. Yes, Hank ... claim me ... If we're to win the battle against the leeches, we must get it on ... right now ... Don't let them torture us for our happiness ... or our billions.

He tore his eyes away.

"I can't. Sex is base and vile!"

"No, it's an expression of our highest values and our admiration for each other's minds."

"Your mind gives me the biggest boner, Dagny Taggart."

He fell upon her like a savage, wielding his mouth like a machete, and in the pleasure she took from him her body became an extension of her quarterly earnings report—proof of her worthiness as a lover. His hard-on was sanction enough.

"Scream your secret passions, Hank Rearden!"

"Derivatives!"

"Yes!"

"Credit-default swaps!"

"Oh, yes! Yes!"

"Collateralized debt obligation."

"YES! YES! YES!"

2.

Dagny and Hank searched through the ruins of the 21st Century Investment Bank. As they stepped through the crumbling cubicles, a trampled legal pad with a complex column of computations captured Dagny's attention. She fell to her hands and knees and raced through the pages and pages of complex math written in a steady hand. Her fingers bled from the paper cuts, and she did not care.

"What is it, Dagny?"

"Read this."

"Good God!"

"Yes, it's an experimental formula for a financial strategy that could convert static securities into kinetic profits that would increase at an almost exponential rate."

Hank studied the numbers. "The amount of debt you would need to make this work would be at least 30-to-1, but a daring, rational man who lives by his mind would be willing to take that risk!"

"Yes, and it's so complex the government could never regulate it."

"It's perfect. There's only one problem—half the pages are missing. Could you reconstruct it, Dagny?"

Her answer escaped her lips like air from a punctured galvanized-steel duct:

"No."

"I didn't think so, but why leave such an achievement to rot here? It's the greatest thing I've ever laid eyes on, made by a monumental genius, the sort of mind that's only born once in a century ... Dagny, why are you fondling your breasts?"

3.

There was still the breathless tone in her voice when she asked, "The financial strategy ... the financial strategy I found ... it was you who made it?"

"Yes," he said.

John Galt's face betrayed no signs of pain or fear or guilt, and his body had the clean tensile strength of a foundry casting with skin the color of a polished full-port brass valve. In the center of this secret mountain valley where the titans of Wall Street had retreated for an extended junket was a 3-foot-tall dollar sign of pure gold atop a granite column. It was tacky, yes, but it was also their emblem, a symbol of their triumph.

"But why did you leave it behind?"

"Because once I committed the plan to memory I no longer needed it."

"I don't understand."

"The capital-gains tax, Dagny," Galt said. "We loathe it."

He pointed to the houses of men she knew, and the names sounded like the richest stock market in the world—a roll call of honor.

"Our money represents our spirit's values," Galt said. "When the government takes our profits, it is literally robbing us of our souls. I will not apologize for my wealth to a nation of looters. We who live by the mind could've been engineers, scientists, doctors, extreme-sports enthusiasts, but there is no purer pursuit than the pursuit of money. A is A. Money begets more money, and ..."

Galt went on like this for what seemed to Dagny like hours, until, finally, something he said piqued her interest.

"And that's why I created the financial plan you found. It's true, it works. But it is not sustainable. It will ruin this country's financial system, and then we'll see how those who despise us prosper when their lenders and investors refuse to invest or lend." He laughed joylessly. "Funny, isn't it? I must destroy the very thing I love in order to save it."

"Just to avoid paying taxes?"

"I do not compromise my beliefs, and I will kill anyone who asks me to!"

A silence fell between them, and it was awkward.

Finally, Dagny asked, "So, just out of curiosity, how much are you worth?"

He shrugged. "What is infinity?"

She let out a rich, powerful moan, like the sound of a passing diesel train in the night.

user-pic

This is different from the original, how?

=D

Oh, maybe they took some of the bodice-ripping romance out.

user-pic

The only problem I see is with standard conservatives evoking the name Ayn Rand.

They have been betraying laissez-faire capitalism for years, and actively promote Christianity in the laws of our nation, both of which Rand would despise. I and other Objectivists have voted against many Rebpulicans lately, precisely because of the type of unholy church-state relationship Malkin and other conservatives advocate. She is not being honest with herself in advocating freedom, while also advocating a dark-ages mysticism that undermines it.

That said, I am glad Galt is getting publicity. There's a reason for that: in spite of the uninformed mockery she endures, Rand got it right. Her growing audience, Objectivism's inroads into academia, and the success of the Ayn Rand Institute and Ayn Rand Center are evidence that many others agree (the Center is the Institute's advocacy organization in DC: http://www.aynrand.org).

As for one's assessment of Rand and her philosophy, readers should go to the source and see for themselves, rather than taking the word of her critics.

Leave a comment

Aatos

user-pic

Following:
Followers: 2

Posts
Comments & Recommends


  • Location Arizona
  • Party Democrat
  • Politics When Republicans lose by 5 percent, I'm annoyed they didn't lose by 10.

Favorites

  • Favorite Blogs Matt Yglesias, Ezra Klein, Dean Baker, Kevin Drum, Washington Monthly, Ta'Nahisi Coates
  • Favorite Books The Affluent Society and The New Industrial State by John Kenneth Galbraith
  • Favorite Quotes My avatar is the air scoop off a Yamaha V-Max, in case you were wondering.

Bio

Husband, Father, Democrat, Motorcyclist, Gamer, Woodworker, Hunter, Fisherman, Pharmacist. Pretty much in that order.

All Reader Posts
How to use myTPM

Advertise Liberally
Share
Close Social Web Email

"To" Email Address

Your Name

Your Email Address