Friends, Objectivist Sympathizers,
Countrymen lend me your Thinking-Reasoning
Self--while noticing that except for
one lousy, measly
little (toy) shovel full--I have come to
praise
Ayn Rand not
bury her.
1. As far as I am concerned Ayn Rand is the
best
philosopher to have ever lived.
2. Ayn Rand is also the best novelist that I have
ever read (not counting those authors whose stories
my 3rd Grade teacher read to us every afternoon while
we traveled through her grade on the way to our 9th
birthday).
3. She, Ayn Rand, is the best thinker to have ever
walked on the face of the earth.
4. The only poem I ever liked in all my school
years I discovered my first year of junior high school,
that poem was/is "If" by Rudyard Kipling. When I
discovered, much later in my life, that this was Ayn
Rand's favorite poem too my growing esteem for her
escalated up the walls of my mind at an exponential
rate.
5. And later still, when I discovered that that
nagging, ominous feeling I had had (at
miscellaneous
points in my kidhood years and more persistently
during
the later part of my teenage years and into my early
twentysomethings) was fear-of-loosing
sovereignty over
the workings of my own mind and that it was
Ayn Rand
standing at the deathbed of that mind when I finally
could put that feeling into words, I did indeed sit bolt
upright in bed and listen to all her wisdom about the
evils of self-sacrifice and its primary carrier,
The
Philosophies of Altruism and Self-Immolation.
6. At some point near the midway mark in my
development as an Objectivist Sympathizer the
following fact "dawned" on me, that is, it "popped" up
into my conscious mind from my subconscious
mind: "Ayn Rand has more compassion in her
little
finger than all the Lutheran ministers on the face of
the
earth--including all the quick and all
the dead ones."
7.When AynRand said "Emotions are not
tools of
cognition" I agreed wholeheartedly.
8.When AynRand said "Emotions are
not tools
of
cognition" I agreed wholeheartedly.
9.When AynRand said "Emotions are
not tools
of
cognition" I agreed wholeheartedly.
10When AynRand said "Emotions are not
tools
of cognition" I agreed wholeheartedly.
11When AynRand said "Emotions are not tools
of cognition" I agreed wholeheartedly.
12When AynRand said "Emotions are not tools
of cognition" I agreed wholeheartedly.
13When AynRand said "Emotions are not tools
of cognition" I agreed wholeheartedly.
14When AynRand said "Emotions are not
tools
of cognition" I agreed wholeheartedly.
15When AynRand said "Emotions are
not tools
of cognition" I agreed wholeheartedly.
16When AynRand said "Emotions are
not tools
of cognition" I agreed wholeheartedly.
17When AynRand said "Emotions are
not tools
of cognition" I agreed wholeheartedly.
18. When Dr. Nathaniel Branden, author and
founder of Biocentric Psychology said, "Emotions
are
the psycho-biological form in which you
experience
your estimate of the beneficial or
harmful relationship
of some aspect of reality to you yourself" I
concluded,
Nathaniel Branden knows more about
emotions than does
Ayn Rand.
19. When Gary Deering, author of Yes,
founder
of STI
and BiO
Spiritualism, said, "Gary's emotions
are the
psycho-biological form in which Gary experiences
his
estimate of the beneficial or harmful relationship of
some aspect of reality to he, himself, I concluded:
Gary
knows ... (or he should know and if he doesn't
he will know) more about HIS
emotions
than does Ayn
Rand OR Nathaniel Branden OR anyone else for that
matter.
20. That is, Gary (finally) became PsycHHological
Man,
that is, he finally took conscious responsibility for
everything he thinks and says and feels and does.
(Or, if not 100% everything right away, then for starters
51% and quickly thereafter for every 3 out of 4 and then
on to 76% and growing (and retrenching) and growing
(and retrenching) and growing with every new day.)
21. It took awhile, but tautologies and clichés
never
end, that is, "nonominiscient man is not omniscient"
and "better late than never" or that is, "nonominiscient
man does not contain an exception called, [insert your
name here]".
22. When Ayn Rand said Hank Rearden,
discoverer of Rearden Metal and still my favorite
fictional character, was not morally responsible for
how people did or did not use his invention I gave all
businessmen a free "benefit-of-the-doubt" pass on
issues of morality.
23. But just recently, it dawned on me that
most big businesses today are the primary carriers of
The Altruistic/Self-Immolation philosophy--or if not
most
then way way too many that are growing in number not
shrinking. What big company (Ecomagination
General Electric?) has
shown any guts
challenging going green--that is, continuuing in
the direction that sacrifices
people to dirt? Not only do
they
not
challenge it but they design logo's they themselves
can use to go greener than their competitors.
What
big company (300,000 + employees Home Depot,
Inc?)
doesn't deal
in BS
as the
preferred
means of "controlling"/manipulating/ "motivating" their
employees so as to grind out one more 50¢ piece per
hour out of them so that when "they" multiply it times
100's of thousands of employees they can turn it into
100's of million dollar bonuses for the BS slingers at
the top? What big company (Target Corp?) doesn't
puff up
their chest to
the world-at-large pointing out how much they
give
back and/or will give back to the
community-at-large
as proof that "they" are the best
altruists-at-large?
And more.
If you couple the foregoing facts with the fact of
a
Public
School System in this country that is run by the
Political Class--that is, a Political Class--
that is hell
bent on turning out people who are taught not
how to
think but rather, what to think then ... what future
does
our beloved country have?
....................................
{!!!INTERRUPTER !!!
INTERRUPTER!!!INTERRUPTER!!!}
See Chart 5 at left from last newsletter (December
2008).
The pattern has not been broken,
WE ARE STILL IN CRASH MODE.
(If it turns out that the real djia interim bottom is the
6440 set on
3/9/9 then my
estimate error relative to my "pure" low estimate of
7,140 is only
off by 9.8%, which isn't good but which, qua estimate,
isn't too
bad either.)
However, if this "offness" grows before the
upside peak (11,088) or (a 9.8% down adjusted peak
value of
10,001) is gotten closer to, then this is a bad deal as
the pattern will be broken ON THE DOWNSIDE
meaning the end result
could be we are in a Great(er) Depression ... not
something I even thought to consider.
But, if this, then the only thing that would make
this
make sense (to me) is the peak value at the
beginning of the
pattern (djia of 400 in the 1929 Stock Market Crash
and the 14,280 in the 2007 ToBeDetermined "crash")
when
divided by the markets dominant leverage
amount of the time--in '29 it was 10-to-1 as in
everybody and his brother could buy stock on 10%
down and eventually they did--
so that 400/10 = 40 = the ultimate bottom in the
Great
Depression and as such this was the
number "we"
used to predict the "Current Depression's" djia
heading towards 1,428.
But.
IF and I must emphasize the "if", IF
irrational leverage is the culprit ( I read
somewhere once that 6-to-1 or 8-to-1
maximum was a
Banking "best practice" / "rational" leverage
amount ... )
then the question to be answered is, "what was the
dominant leverage amount for our current pattern"?
And the answer is ... I don't know.
But.
Based on speculation based on the numbers thrown
around on TV's Financial Networks this number is
either
10'ish (regular old-fashion Banks) or 30'ish (newer
Investment "Banks") or if we are to believe John
Allison
of
BB&T Corp who said, Freddie
and Fannie leveraged to
the
tune of 1000-to-1 (yes, that's correct, ONE
THOUSAND-to-ONE!) then ...
We are in so f.....g much trouble I think i'm going to go
hibernate somewhere ... because ... Dr. Peikoff is right
(again) and I wrong.
(Somewhere I said
something to the effect that I thought Dr. Peikoff--in
his Ominous Parallels Book--was
overstating
the case that America was heading for the same kind
of thing that characterized Germany's Weimar
Republic after World War I. That is, that we'd be
hauling wheelborrow loads of dollar bills to the bakery
just to buy a single loaf of bread. It still "feels" like this
isn't
possible, but a 1000-to-1
leverage!?!?!?!?!?! That is, a leverage that "they" are
trying to make good on by just printing more
money to cover it thinking that is all they have to
do ... ) ... or ... that is ... I hate to repeat myself but ...
halt.halt.
{That is, a double halt.
Back up a step.
I don't always have such an opportunity
to point out a psycHHological tool
for
the introspective you to use. But.
By example, my case ... above I wrote
"wheelborrow" and now I ask myself, "is
this sOs? (slip OR slop?). If slop then
it simply means I misspelled the word, it
should be, "wheelbarrow". But if it a (Brandian)
slip then subconsciously it could mean
something to me, about me. That is, in my current
tight
money life I'm thinking maybe refinancing
our house is a way out ... I don't want to do
it
but .... in order for us to make it .... "we'll borrow" ...
... sounds a little bit funny I know, but ... I've had a
gazillion
(or perhaps I should say, a TARP's quanity of)
such "slips" that are very self enlightening and I
will
think
twice
about this one before I do it ...
maybe I/we should just sell everything we've
got and hit the open road in a 5th wheeler ....
... or not ...
to be determined, but in the meantime, back
to repeating
myself:}
We (who? us[me and my wife] or the country? ...
both somewhat, but the country moreso) is in so f.....g
much trouble I think i'm going to go hibernate
somewhere ... or rather that is ...
