11

What would you do? What would John Galt do?

Posted by dbhalling 10 years, 9 months ago to Politics
314 comments | Share | Best of... | Flag

You walk into a small beach bar on the ocean and a guy is sitting there. You have met him at this establishment before so you sit down near him and strike up a conversation. This is the sort of bar where patrons generally talk freely amongst each other. The man was in politics years ago in Kansas and occasionally brings up political topics. You know that his opinions are all over the map and have even moved to the pool table in the sand in order to not listen to him before. You try to steer the conversation away from politics, but he is not deterred. Then he says:
1) He is for raising the minimum wage
What would you do?
2) He states that minimum wage will not affect unemployment and the law of supply and demand has been repealed.
What would you do?
3) Then he says Obamacare is great.
WWYD?
4) After explaining that the only areas were the cost of medical has gone down are those the government stayed out of (e.g., Laser correction surgery), he says we are the only advanced nation without nationalized health care.
WWYD?
5) Then he says kathleen sebelius, who is from Kansas, is a wonderful women.
6) Then he calls you a racist, because you state Obama has the same philosophy Stalin, Moa, Hilter, etc.
7) Then he states we should get rid of the Constitution.
WWYD?


All Comments


Previous comments...   You are currently on page 5.
  • Posted by wiggys 10 years, 9 months ago
    it is quite obvious if you hang around to answer those question you are a gluten for punishment. John Galt would never consider any verbal interaction with this person.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Hiraghm 10 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Y'know, I could have sworn the original quote was "...for men of good will to do nothing".

    which isn't quite the same thing...
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Hiraghm 10 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I like it too. I like movies with characters to whom I can relate... both of them.

    LANGUAGE WARNING!
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=htyDkxfd...

    I disagree with several of the premises; that fake orgasms are acceptable, that guys don't listen to or care about women's problems... okay, guys who get *laid* don't care about or listen to women's problems, that I believe, it's inherent in my philosophy that only egotistical assh****s get the girl...

    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • -4
    Posted by BambiB 10 years, 9 months ago
    You guys already know what I would do.

    khaling would agree with him on #5 because one may not speak ill of a wimmin.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ jlc 10 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Yes.

    Example: I had my hair cut today - by a little blond just-back-from-jogging California hair stylist. She mentioned that she was afraid to express her political opinions to most of her clients because they are flaming liberals (my term, not hers) and she disagrees with them. She particularly mentioned that we should not allow the illegal immigration that is not occurring and that we should practice 'charity begins at home' where our nation's finances are concerned. She is quite relieved to be able to talk about politics with someone with whom she agrees.

    I think that the liberals look more numerous than they are because the have held the podium for so long. So it is good to disagree in public, though I might not have made it past about #4 before I walked away.

    Jan
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ jlc 10 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    HA! I am fond of your responses...especially the last one...a welcome late morning read.

    Thank you.

    Jan
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Bobhummel 10 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    The F-35 is the logical technological follow on to the F-18E/F Super Hornet, but not necessarily the logical tactical follow on to the Super Hornet. The F-35 is a "low observable" (LO) in radar cross section ( as opposed to very low observable (VLO) aircraft like the B-2. It also has a lot of advanced secret squirrel avionics that can deny the adversary/ enemy the use of the electromagnetic spectrum, allow targeting in all weather conditions with weapons that are pin point accurate and also not detectable by the bad guys ( passively or actively). But it is expensive. This is the usual result of anything that has the label "Joint" Strike Fighter. It is attempting to be all things to all the users - Navy, AF, and Marine Corps.
    I have been outside the process for almost 20 years. The last systems I was actively involved in were the. F-14D and F-18E/F. They were very successful programs and needed at the time. They were work horses in Iraq and Afghanistan.
    I will try some contacts and gain some intel to forward to you DB . You can make your own decision.
    Cheers
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Bobhummel 10 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Rule 1. What do I know and how do I know it.
    Rule 2. What do I feel and why do I feel it.
    Rule 2 can only be applied after the successful application of rule 1. Those who are guided by emotions are wandering a very dangerous land with no map, no compass and no ability to find the truth. The looters use the unearned guilt of those who will bear it as the chains of slavery that binds them to their failed ideology. You cannot force freedom on a person. Look at Iraq.
    Cheers
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Thoritsu 10 years, 9 months ago
    I would suggest that rather than changing the greatest nation in the world to be more like the poorer one, if he feels so strongly about these things, he should immigrate to one of the many first world nations that already has them.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by LITTLERED1977 10 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Your reply as to whether they benefit from the programs nailed it. +2 (i am not at the level to "thumbs up yet)
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by iroseland 10 years, 9 months ago
    there are a few things I have learned over the years.. First if someone really, really wants to die there is pretty close to nothing you can do to stop them. Second, I cannot fix stupid. So, I would have to just walk away..
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by LITTLERED1977 10 years, 9 months ago
    I would ask the person what their parents did for a living. My father was a very successful businessman. At an early age, he instilled a strong work ethic. At age 60, I could retire and kick back but I'm having a good time. The person you have described would more than likely fall into the category of my child and my niece and nephew. The eat the fruit but have no interest in the "tending of the orchard". More to your point of how to argue with an idiot. People who don't actually earn their living don't understand why we are upset about all the "giveaways".
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by conscious1978 10 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    It gets worse...and then, they get into positions where they have guns to back up what they think to be true...and discussion is, still, impossible...
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Temlakos 10 years, 9 months ago
    1. Try to explain the flip side that he's missing or ignoring. And if he won't listen:

    2. Leave.

    I've seen a few other recommendations here already. Frankly, they're perfect. I can't improve on any suggested method of argument.

    One thing, though. The question is incomplete. Does this other person hope to benefit directly from a higher minimum wage, socialized medicine, etc.? Or does he think it a painless method of charity?

    Your arguments, if you can reach him at all, are going to be radically different.

    Recall, however, that John Galt "wrote off" only one group of people: the "mystics of science" who did their research work on government grants, and let the government weaponize their science, and either didn't care, or didn't bother to watch out for that or find out about it.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ jbrenner 10 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    This strategy is effective when you have a lot of time, but you don't have a lot of time in db's situation.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by rtpetrick 10 years, 9 months ago
    The person is a true believer. Don't waste you allotted time on the space ship.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by wallace75 10 years, 9 months ago
    I would say ... if I agreed with you we would both be wrong
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by radical 10 years, 9 months ago
    I would answer all 7 statements with this comment,
    I see that you want to give up control over your life."
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Lucky 10 years, 9 months ago
    I just read thru all the replies, (185+) phew!
    dbh- your question has been answered by referring to the oath.
    But the answer to the real question is harder. I meet people like that all the time, I am not John Galt. These views are based on some emotional trigger, such lack of reality that evidence and logic have played no part in creating it. Maybe that is how the human mind works. You cannot influence a mind like that by presenting evidence and reasoning.
    Do not walk away too early. Give it a go. A false smile is more effective than a harangue however sensible. Irrationality cannot be countered with rationality.
    Counter irrationality with irrationality.
    (Similar to Ashby's Law of Requisite Variety in control systems theory)
    Some suggestions on these lines have been given.
    Eg. But what should the minimum wage be? $10ph? $50ph? would that be enough with increasing inflation? Who should decide? Who should pay? Not the same people then! Are you paying enough for your beer or are you exploiting the low paid?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by CTYankee 10 years, 9 months ago
    1) Ask him to defend raising the minimum wage to $100/hr then watch him squirm.
    2) Call over the server or bartender and ask him/her what they would do if they were earning $100/hr? Would they shop differently? Watch guy squirm.
    3) Ask him who will actually pay for O-Care Watch him squirm.
    4) Ask him if he knows anyone who travelled abroad to a nationalized healthcare country, and why not? travel is cheaper than hospital bills. Watch him squirm.
    5) Pfft. No comment.
    6) Look up 'racist' in dictionary; watch him squirm.
    7) Tell him I will respect his right to talk about getting rid of the Constitution bu not calling the cops, because the 1st amendment protects his right to say it in public.
    7b) Then I'll explain to him that I can swim like a Navy Seal, and if he persists I will drag him out into the ocean where he can explain his defective arguments to Davy Jones, and not have to bother the rest of us anymore. As I watch him squirm.
    Reply | Permalink  

  • Comment hidden. Undo