Ayn Rand, socialized medicine moocher

[Longermonger]

"Between December 1974 and her death in March 1982, Rand collected a total of $11,002 in monthly Social Security payments. O’Connor received $2,943 between December 1974 and his death in November 1979."


Your hero was a hypocrite!

"Rand often spoke of moral absolutism, saying “There can be no compromise on basic principles,” but the realities of aging and illness seem to have softened her stance. Social Security, and perhaps Medicare, allowed Rand and her husband to maintain their quality of life, remain in their apartment and live out their final years with dignity."

[john_galt]

Troll watch!

[Longermonger]

That's recent info relating to that lame movie that just came out on April 15th.

[CuteOldGuy]

I thought social security was a trust fund, not an entitlement. If she paid in, why shouldn't she get some back? So collecting $149 a month for the last few years of her life, which she paid in makes her a hypocrite? Collecting on an investment managed by the government makes her a hypocrite? She wasn't taking free money from the government. She was collecting on an investment she was forced to make. She was just lucky she died before it ran out of money.

[Longermonger]

If she stuck to her theory like the other female founders of American libertarianism, she would have rejected Social Security money. Instead of using just her own savings to pay for her medical care, she accepted Social Security and MEDICARE money!

Medicare was created in 1965. It's hard to tell if she took out more than she paid in. My guess is yes, considering the short time between when it was created and when she would have started drawing.

"Do as I say, not as I do." ---Ayn Rand?

[Longermonger]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

I thought social security was a trust fund, not an entitlement. If she paid in, why shouldn't she get some back? So collecting $149 a month for the last few years of her life, which she paid in makes her a hypocrite? Yes! Because she preached that..."There can be no compromise on basic principles. There can be no compromise on moral issues. There can be no compromise on matters of knowledge, of truth, of rational conviction." Participating in those social programs when she had the ability to 'opt out' at any point makes her a hypocrite...especially since she was so hard-line in her own beliefs. Collecting on an investment managed by the government makes her a hypocrite? She wasn't taking free money from the government. She was collecting on an investment she was forced to make. She was just lucky she died before it ran out of money.

Yes, she is a super duper hypocrite.

[john_galt]

Ayn Rand was not a libertarian, nor a conservative. She was an individualist.
To see how idiotic this thread is Longer would only be content if every self-identified conservative turned down everything government sponsored whether you paid into or not (against your will as well). He thinks that all conservatives should resist welfare, unemployment, social security, medicare, medicaid, etc. That "logic" would also mean that conservative should turn down any law enforcement or military aid in the event of a disaster. So by now you should see just how skewed Longer is.

[CuteOldGuy]

She paid in, she took some out. Another straw argument goes down in flames. Keep trying, Longer.

[Longermonger]

Originally Posted by john_galt

Ayn Rand was not a libertarian, nor a conservative. She was an individualist.
To see how idiotic this thread is Longer would only be content if every self-identified conservative turned down everything government sponsored whether you paid into or not (against your will as well). He thinks that all conservatives should resist welfare, unemployment, social security, medicare, medicaid, etc. That "logic" would also mean that conservative should turn down any law enforcement or military aid in the event of a disaster. So by now you should see just how skewed Longer is.

And you! You name yourself after one of her characters. Are you an individualist? No. You can't be an individualist and swear this:


I, (NAME), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.

...to protect this:

“ We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America. ”
—United States Constitution, Preamble

There is no 'I' in Navy.

[Longermonger]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

She paid in, she took some out. Another straw argument goes down in flames. Keep trying, Longer.

It wasn't a straw argument, it was a way of tricking you into arguing that Social Security and Medicare WORKED for Ayn Rand. I knew you were going to say "paid in, paid out...so what?", which is why I added the last paragraph about staying true to her principles in my first post. You ignored that, so I repeated it.

Not only was she a hypocrite, but she was DEAD WRONG. Both of those social programs outlived her by several decades and counting.

[lacrew_2000]

Originally Posted by Longermonger

It wasn't a straw argument

Hmmm, maybe Brome or Alfalfa then...

"Between December 1974 and her death in March 1982, Rand collected a total of $11,002 in monthly Social Security payments"

"Medicare was created in 1965. It's hard to tell if she took out more than she paid in. My guess is yes, considering the short time between when it was created and when she would have started drawing."

Nice switcharoo....but lets keep the apples and oranges in different bowls.

Assuming the $11,002 (which is unsourced) is true, lets look at this using Social Security. Is it possible that between 1937 and 1974 (37 years) she contributed more than $11k?

1937-1950 tax was 2%
1950-1956 tax was 3%
1956-1961 tax was 4%
1961-1972 tax was 9.2%
1972-1974 tax was 9.9%

A weighted average for her SS tax over her working life would be 5%. So, over a 37 year period, is it reasonable to assume she made $220,040...or less than 6k per year. I dunno. She was involved in books and movies, which tend to make one a little bit of money.

Of course its not quite that simple. If the government hadn't been confiscating her income, she could have invested it herself. How much would she have had to invest (at 3%) each month to accrue $11,002?

$13.55....per month....a total of $6,016 could have been invested, to get her back the $11k when she retired. $13.55 a month would be 5% of $120,320 over 37 years, or $3,251 a year. I think its likely she made that.

I don't see her as a hypocrite (and for the record, I haven't read her books).

But so what....is this bit of trivia supposed to make us forget that SS is now in the RED. Even if Rand had not contributed one red cent to SS, it would not change this. It needs fixing; and, it is tiring to see those with ideas on how to do that get branded as 'radical'....as Paul Ryan was just branded by our President.

[Longermonger]

http://www.alternet.org/teaparty/149...e_needed_them/

No switcheroo. She cashed checks from both programs. Redo your maths.

The source is the former director of communications of the Ayn Rand Institute's interview of Ayn Rand's social worker. :P

[CuteOldGuy]

Longer, I never said those programs work, I just said she put money in, she is entitled, according to the program to money out. Oh, I guess you tricked me!

[lacrew_2000]

My math is based on the claim made in the original post - she collect 11k in SS. If that statement is false, I will do math on the corrected statement, but not in thin air.

[john_galt]

Longer, if you had read any of Ayn Rand you would know that serving in the military does not preclude individualism. Rand was against people acting noble with self sacrifice unless that person made themselves happy by submitting themselves to an authority. You see that was the core of what Rand was about despite how badly Longer misunderstands it. She used an example of a couple. One person would put their own concerns aside in order to support the other and this she felt was wrong. However, if that person sacrificing themselves in order to make themselves happy then it was within the understanding of individualism as she saw it. Same point was made for parents with their children. She thought an intelligent person should not sacrifice their time or money for even their children but if the possibility that the child would be successful was what stirred the parent to the sacrifice and did it willingly then that was okay. I was all about the initial reasons for an action. To help Longer understand; if he pays a woman a handsome sum to tie him up and abuse him then that is his choice. His free choice. He may allow himself to be hurt and humiliated but that is his choice and the choice of the lady he pays.
I was not drafted, I volunteered. In fact, I was asking my parents from the time I turned 17 years old to sign my papers. They did three months after I turned 17. It was my choice and I lived with that choice. I submitted myself to the authority of the military voluntarily because serving that institution made me happy. You are a little piece of scum for questioning that commitment. No wonder they kicked you out or am I assuming too much?