first, the individuals were chosen with care to receive information they did not have. Others found the Gulch on their own, but they still had to be invited in. our country is so messed up it's hard to see or remember a time when one could be rewarded well for truly virtuous productivity, but in a free environment there is so much incentive to focus on virtuous pursuits, it would be an anomaly to worry about the one bad apple.
we are so conditioned that the one bad apple will do irreparable harm, we make 100 men instant criminals enacting laws to protect us. The answer is, do not anticipate men will be evil but have in place remedies if someon'es property rights are violated.

I'm not sure about your question, but I was wondering how the Gulch would deal with anyone that arrived as welcomed, and turned out unwelcomed for whatever reason.

Are you referring to a person of mind and ability against other people of mind and ability?

Dime bag?

Or are you going for the whole enchilada...a non-doctored kilo? ;-)

The doctor is on call....

4 decades, and one war ago, I probably should have given this some thought!

Back on point, though: What does the Gulch do with a renegade, like Walter could become?

This is never addressed in AS...since everyone is a kindred spirit, and not out of step with the philosophy.

Real life has some real speed bumps....

Compiled yourself or did it come like that?

@rockymountain:

I understand social production to be all objects available for trade in a collective.

yea, give me my meds now

lol whoa. are you writin the scripts now?

Police state vs. more government social programs?

What is the difference?

Two identical entities answering the same problem.

My guess is that the drug enforcement ends up more beneficial to the populace. Definitely from the crime aspect.

Or maybe not....

The only other solution is to supply the drugs to the addicts. Another governmental agency.

ADDED: And straight out of Brave New World.

Walter White meets your criteria as chemist.

Judging from 6 seasons of watching him, I think that he would adapt just fine.

But...what if he didn't?

foxglove

less funding than the police state? hmmm

If a successful chemist, there would be need. a meth manufacturer is kinda narrow and would not have any custys in the gulch :)

Fine.

Drug users are no longer drug criminals. But they are still committing serious crime to support their addiction.

The article actually says that government rehab programs are now increased, probably to the loss of fear to come forward and ask for help. This is increased government intervention, which has to be funded. Less addicts in jail, but larger government to take care of this new issue.

And those that aren't interested in rehab, are still tramping on the "rights" of others to keep their high going....

I was thinking something that needs massive doses of Penicillin.

That may be where I feel Objectivism is too confined and/or restrictive, if it ignores 'friendly fire' in the quest for total personal freedom.

For example: Do you think that John Galt would embrace a successful meth manufacturer in the gulch?

you took on attorneys. what was that about? seemed pretty much like you lumped them all up

http://www.cato.org/publications/white-p...

"glazed over" argument? hmmm. look at our nation. are we going to outlaw bath salts? You cannot pre-empt how you feel people will behave. it is not Objectivist. Prohibition in the US caused us to have organized crime and the associated police state since created. Want to talk consequences? look at those.
also, check out Portugal stats

I would never be so foolish to think that I could "trap" you.... ;-)

The cancer motive goes away early in the story, when he goes into remission. But, he takes pride in how well he does in the meth trade, and there are several reasons that make it dangerous to try to just 'walk away'. and return to his old life. Bottom line is that he has reached a personal new achievement 'high', that was never realized teaching school. He struggles with the morality of his new job description, but always manages to justify what he is doing, and what he has to do to stay alive (and on 'top').

The question about harming society shouldn't be glazed over by any collectivist argument...drug addicts may have the personal right to be addicted, but they inevitably tramp on others rights in their quest for the funding of their life choice. By promoting this with his product, Walter has a liability.

Excellent show, and has won awards for the first 6 seasons!

You're welcome.

ok, I'm not, but I think that is a trap...lol
first of all, drugs should not be illegal. If you own yourself you have a right to put into your body whatever, you still are responsible for your actions.
The character is capitalizing on a black market, which isn't always bad-plenty have done it-start with sam adams.
"brings harm to his society" first of all, this is inherently collectivist thought process. This character is not working to create a free society, he is opportunistic. The fact that he is battling cancer is irrelevant. If doing something evil for a "good cause" makes it morally ok, then we can justify stealing, welfare, any communist argument. The writers are stringing an audience along and I have no doubt they revel in grey area pig pens. pigs are smart but don't fall in :)

khalling,

You know Rand as well as anyone else in here, and I have what may be a dumb question: What if a "producer" meets all of the definition, but brings harm to his society?

I am thinking of a TV character that I have been following on Breaking Bad, Walter White: a high school teacher that becomes a major drug dealer. He ends up there out of wanting to leave something of worth to his family, when he is told that he will soon die of cancer. He is a natural (chemistry teacher) for making the best meth that his area has ever seen, and he becomes both wealthy, and feared, in the process. He becomes a legend for his success....

@ adam,
what the hell is social production? sounds like a nightmare