Modern American Libertarianism and the Just-World Fallacy

Agree completely. The American system has been so succesful because it is not pure capitalism but is in fact a mixed economy. From Wiki:

Someone brought up Rand and I agree she pushes the idea of freedom eloquently but her characters of Rearden, Galt, Taggert are all just oppressed job creators at the mercy of the looters and moochers and government black helicopters. In other words as the OP stated we see them for what we want we want them to be; in a constant struggle against what we already have set in our minds as the bad guys. Where is the other side? Where is the Dick Fulds and the Bernie Madoffs? I see Rearden Steel and Taggert Railroad but where is Enron? or Worldcom, or Tyco, or Bear Stearns, or well you get the picture. Where is Atlas Shrugged Part Two where John Galt truely rejects altruism and acts on self interest by running his electric motor company into the ground and demanding the government bail him out or the engine of the world really will stop? Oh right acting on self interest only leads to rainbows, unicorns, and low unemployment.

Like you mentioned capitalism like communism works in theory. When you apply the ideas to real life they fail miserably because of self interest. You either become lazy or greedy or corrupt. You have to have balance which IMO the left understands but the right does not.

 

They do exist in Atlas Shrugged. James Taggart and that other steel dude for example. I don't like Rand, but it's a little too simplistic to say that she argues businessmen = good and government = bad. She does show what she considers to be bad businessmen.

 

Simplistic is what Rand is all about.

The bad businessman and inventors in the novel go bad by going to work for the government. Floyd Ferris, Wesley Mouch, and Robert Stadler.

Again and again and again Rand simplistically illustrates anyone associated with the government is bad.

I will concede Orren Boyle the other steel dude, however his laziness and ineptitude are glossed over in the novel while the valiant plights of Galt and the rest are romanticized to the point of rediculousness.

James Taggert was portrayed as the nepotistic lazy looter similar to Hank Reardens family. It was Dagney who had all of the control of the railroad.

 

Actually James had the control. Dagny fought him over it to the point of spinning off the least profitable route and creating the John Galt line. James Taggert's failing was that he was unwilling to innovate. He only wanted to have Taggert Transcontinental doing what all the other railroads were doing, including a refusal to use Reardon metal.

Reardon's family was all about the denigration of business in general (they could be writing the recent Democratic narrative about the evil corporations and greedy millionaires). They were more than willing to benefit from Hank's money, but they tried to cut him down at the same time.