Posted on 04/04/2009 7:41:47 AM PDT by Publius
Synopsis
The men of Colorado disappear one by one until only Ted Nielsen is left; he promises Dagny he is not going anywhere. Dagny realizes she is encountering a Destroyer who is performing the reverse of the mystery motor, turning kinetic energy back into static.
Quentin Daniels and Dagny hit it off; neither of them thinks much of “governmental scientific inquiry”. Daniels is the night watchman at Utah Tech but uses the laboratory facilities of the closed school for his own purposes. Dagny and Daniels conclude their own private deal without the involvement of the railroad.
The cigarette stand proprietor catches Dagny as she is leaving the building and tells her that Hugh Akston’s cigarette had attributes he had never seen before and was not made anywhere on this earth.
Ken Danagger and Hank meet discreetly in Hank’s hotel room at the Wayne-Falkland to conclude a deal, now illegal, giving Danagger Coal the Rearden Metal it needs for its mines. Danagger has expanded his operation by acquiring a bankrupt coal company to the conflicting complaints of bureaucrats that he is a monopolist but needs to expand further.
After Danagger leaves, Lillian Rearden surprisingly arrives; she is in town for Jim Taggart’s wedding to Cherryl Brooks, which she sees as perfectly ridiculous. She wants to be the center of her husband’s life, and although Hank would prefer not to go, he does so to please her.
The courtship of Jim and Cherryl has so far not included sex, for which Cherryl is grateful. But she is hurt by those who see Jim’s involvement with her as being “generous”, as if she were an object of pity. She is especially hurt by the reception she gets from Jim’s friends, particularly Betty Pope, whose cryptic comments are disturbing. When she hears comments about Jim’s connections in Washington, she thinks the men hate Jim out of envy, not something else, like disgust.
At the reception Orren Boyle and Bertram Scudder scan the room, classifying each guest as friend or foe. Jim and Boyle get into an argument about who has the greater influence and is more to be feared; each has friends in high places because of personal blackmail. Boyle says that if they don’t trade money, they can trade men. He reminds Jim that Wesley Mouch has been bought twice already and can be bought again.
Cherryl spots Dagny and tells her that she knows about the hell that Dagny has put poor Jim through. “I’m the woman in this family now.” Dagny smiles and says, “That’s quite all right ... I’m the man.”
Lillian approaches Jim and asks if he likes her wedding gift, which is Hank. It gives the impression that even the great Hank Rearden has to toe the line with Jim Taggart and serves as a warning to all in the room. Lillian wants Jim to understand that she has the power to deliver Hank.
Lillian accosts Dagny and asks her opinion of Jim’s marriage; Dagny doesn’t have one. Lillian tells Dagny that Cherryl had resorted to talents that Dagny would despise; Dagny chooses not to be offended. Lillian notices the Rearden Metal bracelet and wants it back, but Dagny refuses. She tells Dagny that her wearing it might hint that something improper was going on; Dagny looks her in the eye and asks if that improper thing might be that she is sleeping with Lillian’s husband. Lillian backs off, and Hank tells her to apologize, which she does.
The intellectuals in the room gather around Jim to praise him for his enlightened behavior. Bertram Scudder gives Jim his highest accolade: he is not a businessman. Jim says, “We will build a society dedicated to higher ideals, and we will replace the aristocracy of money by–“, and Francisco interrupts, “–the aristocracy of pull.” Jim loses his composure, but Francisco rescues him by suggesting that he be presented to the bride.
Francisco tells Jim that he knows Jim is the real stockholder behind all the straw men that Jim and friends have erected to hide their purchases. Francisco understands that Jim doesn’t want people to know how he got rich. The copper company has done well in the past year, and it would take a most unusual kind of man to destroy it. He thanks Jim for the crippling regulations that have made d’Anconia Copper the last man standing in the business. He intends to repay the favor.
Francisco goes to Dagny and asks if she is fishing for a compliment on her achievement, the John Galt Line. Dagny is hurt that Francisco should so despise success. He tells her that John Galt has claimed her line.
When Bertram Scudder says that money is the root of all evil, Francisco launches into his famous Root of Money Speech, available here. As he finishes, the crowd at the party reacts in horror, particularly one woman who just feels that Francisco has to be wrong. Francisco tells her that when she sees people dying of starvation around her, her feelings won’t be of any use to them.
Rearden greets Francisco as if they were old friends. Francisco tells Hank he shouldn’t have come to the party because people would assume that he and Jim were friends. Hank now feels differently about Francisco following the speech, but he can’t figure out why Francisco is wasting his talents. Francisco tells Hank to check his premises and warns him to stay away from d’Anconia Copper; when Hank sees what happens in the next fifteen minutes he’ll understand why. The people in the room have secreted their looters’ profits from their Rearden Metal wealth in stock in Francisco’s company. There was a fire tomorrow morning at the company’s docks at Valparaiso, Francisco explains, then there will be a rockslide in a critical mine, and the company’s mines will turn out to be worthless. Hank laughs explosively, then backs away in horror. He thinks that Francisco is guiltiest man in the room. Francisco tells Hank to watch and learn.
Francisco runs into a businessman harried by a bureaucrat who grandly states that he will decide if the businessman is permitted to make a profit or not. Francisco says in a loud voice to Hank that he is sorry that Hank will not grant him the loan because if he can’t raise the money tonight, then when the stock market opens tomorrow... The bureaucrat blanches, Francisco asks him if he owns any d’Anconia Copper stock, and upon receiving affirmation advises the bureaucrat to sell immediately but not to tell anyone in the room so as not to start a panic. Within minutes, everyone rushes to the phones to call their brokers. Jim asks if the rumors are true, and Francisco explains that if money is the root of all evil, then he is just tired of being evil. As Hank, Dagny and Francisco watch, Jim and Orren Boyle join the general chaos.
Cherryl, Sex and the Fifties
As mentioned in a previous chapter, in the Fifties chastity became trendy again and virginity became desirable. But that is not at the heart of Cherryl’s gratitude that Jim has been willing to wait until their wedding night to consummate their relationship.
Cherryl does not want to use underhanded methods to win Jim; she wants to put the lie to the evil assumptions of Jim’s friends. She has her moral code and intends to stick to it come hell or high water. She is completely clueless as to the relationship between Jim and Betty Pope and even more clueless as to the true nature of the man she is marrying. Poor Cherryl.
Francisco’s Root of Money Speech
This speech is an audition for Hank Rearden, and it has the desired effect. There are lines that are seared into the memory long after one has put the book back on the shelf.
Other Discussion Topics
I make no pretense about being a great thinker. I am a practical man who has made his living manufacturing physical products, from screws and fasteners to radio transmitters and at one time even semi-automatic weapons. And I have learned the hard way that every effect has a cause. For every part out of tolerance there is a dull cutting tool. For every machine that wont do what it was designed to do there is a faulty gear or a broken bolt.For every product that wont work there is something inside it that is screwed up. As we used to say,there are no "bad angles" coming down to screw things up....all problems are caused by something real and tangible.
Now, that is not to say that there are not philosophical and spiritual underlying causes to problems. But as someone who has lived a life of finding solutions to manufacturing problems when you cannot go back to the drawing board my whole orientation is to attack the actual situation and jerry rig it to fix it and move on. I am not an engineer. I am a production man who lives in the present and must exist in the real world with real customers and real deadlines. Which brings me to my favorite character in AS, Francisco d'Anconia.
That man took direct action. It wasn't a final solution to the underlining philosophical problems of society...that was left to John Galt....but he hit at every perpetrator he could get at by bankrupting his company and taking them down with him.
So if the Beast is the Federal Reserve Central Bank that creates money out of thin air and forces our people to take fiat "money" and stay slaves in debt to the Central bankers and live or die on the banker's "Credit Scores" to get loans then the solution seems to this practical man rather simple;
1. Don't tear up your credit cards....no, max them out....tear up your credit card BILLS. Just stop paying them. Don't waste your time filing bankrupcy because that just puts you into a system that is rigged against you. Just stop paying and go cash.
2. If they control our behavior by making us slaves to their "Credit Scores" then repudiate your good credit by not paying any debts to the banks and credit card companies.
3.Use their funny money against them by cashing out all your bank accounts, CD's, T-Bills, Stocks and Bonds and use their fiat money for your living expenses.
4. And tell the Federal Reserve that you would appreciate it if they would pay off all your "Bank to You" loans with their fiat currency the same way they paid off all the "Bank to Bank" loans.
Going Galt today may just mean to repudiate their system of slavery by taking them down with us. Just like d'Ancionia. And then the real producers in society can pick up the pieces after the collapse.
We are only victims of the system because we have given them our sanction by playing their game of good little debtor's always trying to pay them back. Sorry boys, you're on your on and you wont have our productivity to feed on anymore!
Anyway, thats how it looks this sunday morning.
The employer agreed to pay his people in gold and silver eagles. For example, let's say an employee earned $1100 in a pay period. He paid the employee 1 gold eagle, worth around $950 at the time, and the remainder of $150 was paid in silver eagles, which were worth around $22 at the time. So far, so good.
But when it came to reporting to the IRS, the employer reported the face value of the coins. The face value of a gold eagle is $50, and the face value of a silver eagle is $1. So for $1100 in gold and silver, the employee's taxable wages were $56. This had the effect of permitting the employee to opt out of the income tax system.
The IRS took the employer to court. The employer's lawyer brought up two Supreme Court decisions from the post-Civil War era that said the face value of the coin of the realm was sacred. Under those opinions, what the employer did was legal, and how his employees reported their tax liability was legal. The jury hung on all counts.
Granted, the IRS could refile, or seek a case in a jurisdiction more sympathetic to the government, or ask Congress to exempt gold and silver eagles from the face value condition. But in the absence of that, the IRS doesn't have a case.
Shortly after, a gold clause in a 1912 contract related to a real estate situation in New York City was reactivated, after having been dormant since FDR in 1933.
As a joke, shortly thereafter, a multimillion dollar apartment in Manhattan was priced in both dollars and ounces of gold.
Soon, it won't be a joke.
Check Post #42. Maybe I can focus you in a slightly different direction.
As far as “going Galt,” There are many was to do this. I have been exposed for many years to the concept of how our “money” isn’t real anymore, but on a practical basis, when you have to live in this world, I’ve always been a bit chicken.
What I have been doing is conducting my transactions, to the extent possible, away from the taxation system. Private, cash transactions between private parties utilizing Craigslist, yard sales, word of mouth and such. Analyzing “do I really need that now?” Reusing all of the junk around here for my little projects. What I cannot do now is earn my main income source outside of the taxation system. However I am relocating to a state with a far less confiscatory taxation rate.
Liberal hypocracy....”It’s for the children” and then they support abortion on demand.
It’s all about using categories of victims to advance their agenda.
As far as their being no absolutes...They should try stepping off a cliff.
Fascinating twist.
So, the employee in turn could save them or “cash them in.”
Wow. Could just imagine demanding my employer pay me in gold and silver coinage. He balks when he has to actually write a check and not DD. LOL.
On a tangent, I've always wondered about the attitude some people have toward money and physical possessions. People will say "It's only money," or, "it's just an object and easily replaced."
Orren Boyle would have loved people who thought this way. As a corollary, I'm always appalled by those who don't understand why thieves should be harshly punished.
People never want to think through the underlying effort put forth in order to own the things they have, whether it's essential or non-essential.
No matter what, it requires effort and time out of your life that can never be replaced. Man is born on this earth with a finite time to live. So, when one says "it's only money" or "only an object" what they are really saying is "I don't value my life very much."
Think about it, everything that is taken by force from you is robbing you of life, because of the hours, or days, needed from your life in order to reacquire that which had already been obtained.
However, I also recognize this thought pattern as being the end result of valuing life so little.
In this particular chapter, I think you see Ayn pointing in that direction. Ayn Rand fully understood the value of individual effort.
Wow thanks EBH for the posts, this is really intricate and will take me a while to absorb all this. I have some questions but let me present my premises first.
The “Root of Money” speech defines money as a measure of a man’s ability to produce wealth. The U.S. dollar is the world’s strongest currency, even throughout this economic morass, because we are by far still one of the most productive peoples on this earth. (This is due to a couple of factors, including having enough law and order to support a capitalistic machine, along with good old American work ethics and ingenuity.)
For whatever reason (jealousy, evil, greed, etc.) there are always attacks on the producers by the non-producers. This happens both internally within the nation as well as globally, with other nations like China trying to pick on us. FDR tries to control the producers by taking us off the gold standard. There is some conspiracy theory Saddam Hussein tried to take oil off the dollar standard to weaken the U.S. Now they are trying TARP like you say to inflate the currency. I would argue that in all cases they have failed or will fail, because you can’t stop a producer from producing; it is against his very nature. As long as you have enough producers, our economy (and country, and way of life) will remain strong.
I am wondering if the real reason we feel more and more bankrupt is not so much inflation but because people have less faith in each other. When more and more producers go Galt, or turn into looters and moochers, by Anconia’s definition, the currency will be worth less and less.
To me this reasoning seems independent of the other cause which is the inflation caused by TARP. Or are they related in some way that I am missing?
Ironically if my premise is right, then all you have to do to kill an economy is demoralize the producers or make them disappear. (Just look at what happened to Zimbabwe the former “breadbasket of Africa”.) So I think it is the social and cultural wars which will destroy this country more than any of the financial manipulations you mention. Falsely credentialing workers (affirmative action), adding more and more regulation (SOX), taxing the productive and rewarding the incompetent, increasing socialization, all will be much more successful at demoralizing producers.
What do yall think? Sorry this argument is not more succinct but I am still trying to put it all together. And it’s late. :)
Now as to your premise that the reason we feel more & more bankrupt is not related to money, but to the morality of the dealings between individuals. I would direct you back to the The Money Speech where Francisco says, “Money is the material shape of the principle that men who wish to deal with one another must deal by trade and give value for value...It is not the moochers or the looters who give value to money.” In the first two paragraphs to the speech, Francisco delivers the idea of Value to money. So we must understand what value and values are, in order to properly appreciate money.
What is value? We learn through the money speech it is your work, your efforts, your life energy and that is what gives value to your money. Since we are no longer on the gold standard, all the government can do is inflate the currency...which decreases the value of the dollar. Decreases the value of your efforts. They have now stolen your value from you without ever taking a physical dollar from you by making your dollar worth less. TARP is a redistribution of unearned wealth. You said, “I am wondering if the real reason we feel more and more bankrupt is not so much inflation but because people have less faith in each other.” Francisco actually agrees with you when he talks about, “Your wallet is your statement of hope that somewhere in the world around you there are men who will not default on that moral principle which is the root of money...” I would say people have less faith in each other because they are breaking the moral code of money. Being in debt, devaluing the dollar, failing to pay your mortgage, mismanaging your company and then expecting the society to bail you out.
I agree we feel more and more bankrupt both financially, but also morally. Why, because others are breaking the moral principle of money. Wealth redistribution breaks the moral code of money. Inflation is the physical result of the disrespect of money and thereby the disrespect and devaluation of your production. The code that holds each of us with respect to our efforts to produce. So, like Hank Reardon and Dagney you will work harder, smarter, put in more time, create more but...how much faith/hope will they put in? Even producers have a breaking point.
Let's look at some of the words used in the Speech: hope, honor, honest, good will, mind, effort, productivity, recognition, and respect. I like the paragraph that talks about inheriting money.
So I would say your premise is correct and Francisco is trying to teach us that money is nothing but a tool of men's moral code.
Going Galt does not devalue currency. The only way to devalue currency is through inflation. Going Galt and removing your own wealth from the market should technically fight against inflation. You are taking money out of the system, not pumping it in. Of course, unless the whole country goes Galt, the individual efforts of this tactic do little to stem inflation or as many here like to say, Starve the Beast.
I think the money speech should be required reading in school. I wonder what Francisco would have to say concerning what is the “root of evil”?
I believe there are two reasons some jurors voted to convict.
The first was a belief that no one should be allowed to dodge paying taxes.
The second was a belief that those two SCOTUS decisions from the 1870's were old and thus had no meaning in today's modern world. Gold is a barbarous relic of the past, removed from backing the dollar by Nixon in 1971, and thus those decisions no longer mattered. It's the Living Constitution, interpreted by judges in the interest of fairness.
Fortunately, the Constitution in Exile won out to some extent.
You wrote...
...stay slaves in debt to the Central bankers and live or die on the banker's "Credit Scores" to get loans...
and
2. If they control our behavior by making us slaves to their "Credit Scores" then repudiate your good credit by not paying any debts to the banks and credit card companies.
Lets give this action a catchy name, one that can force people to think (if that's still possible).
I humbly suggest that we do the 'FICO LIMBO'...
...just how low can you go ???
I don't suggest taking on debt, knowing that it won't be repaid, that _is_ illegal. I would point out that if, say, a credit card company raises your interest rates above what you can afford to repay, don't fret, do the FICO LIMBO!
Watch this video and try to keep from screaming...and I have no dog of my own in this fight.
http://www.fox6now.com/news/witi-090305-atv-ban,0,4227218.story K
What we have decided to do is to go to a cash basis to the fullest extent possible. The only reason we borrow money to buy things is that we don’t have enough to buy things with the cash we have. It didn’t used to be that way back in the day, and we were better for it. I guess before I was born about the only thing anyone actually borrowed for was their house. Then cars, then appliances, then credit cards for everyday life.
One part of our “shrugging” is to pay off all of the debt we can and getting out of the credit game as much as possible. We have a mortgage on our house, and can’t pay it off right away, so we have to keep that. But we are only using Debit cards and cash now, have cut out most of our non-essential purchases, and only have a credit card because I travel on business and it’s tough to do without an actual credit card. For instance, I CAN rent a car with a debit card, but they run a credit check on you if you don’t use an actual credit card.
We are also doing an addition on the house, but will save our cash and will pay for it as we go once we get enough to get started. Paying cash for everything will probably get it done for less as well.
Bottom line is that we hope to get to a point where we really don’t care what our FICO score is, and we’re well on our way to that.
I’ve learned my lesson too, whodathunkit, but just a warning from my own experience. Debit cards are NOT safe; if they are compromised, the money comes right out of your checking account, and your bank has no responsibility toward you. My credit union suggested I report my loss of $2000 to someone who got my debit card number from ebay to the local police department. Yeah, right! Fortunately, ebay made it good (and turned the perp over to the authorities in UK). But it was back to the credit card for me, which I treat as a checking account and keep paid up, so no interest or outstanding balances.
K
I have found it odd over the years that people can be as presumptuous about other people’s money as they are. My parents grew up in the Depression, worked very hard all their lives, did without to save money, and retired with 2 pensions. My dad with a military pension and mother with her work’s pension. They’re collecting social security as well. We have family members who actually tell them that it’s OK for the government to take their social security since “they don’t need it”. To give to people who grew up next to them, spent like drunken sailors (no offense, sailors in the crowd), and who ended up trying to retire with no savings.
That it was “right” for them to have it taxed away to support those in need. Straight out of AS.
To my dad’s credit, he tells them to keep their d*mn hands off his money and donate THEIR money if they’re so inclined.
[i]With every law that does not serve the proper role of government, our ability to defend ourselves diminishes.[/i]
I think the proper role of government is key. One thing I’ve been thinking on while reading the book again, is the line between producers and looters. I understand it’s very clear in the book on which side of the line everyone is on, but in real life it can be more difficult.
For instance, my wife is a government contractor, for the Defense Department (constitutionally defined role for government). I have other relatives who are government contractors for other agencies that are not in the constitution and they tend to have a different mindset, and that is that higher taxes are OK for everyone else. So I have a hard time not thinking of them as looters whether or not they work hard, since their work is directed at government operations which are not the proper role of government.
Just still pondering on the gray areas around producer/looter...
One of the biggest libs actually came up with a good allegory for proper role, though. Football. The rules committee equates to legislative, referees equate to executive and replay officials equate to judicial.
The rules of the game are set and enforced, but the rules don't try to pick a winner and the referees don't play.
On another note, use <i> and </i> to italicize instead of [i] and [/i].
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.