Reaganomics i.e conservative/libertarian economics succeeds at last.

These two sentences are inconsistent. There are situations in which force is necessary to prevent person #1 from trampling the rights of person #2 (thus restricting person #1's private activity) because person #1's greed and power allows him to do so.

 

Then that scenario isn't capitalism.

All exchange in capitalism is voluntary, by definition.

 

So when there was no minimum wage, no maximum length work week, and no child labor laws, was that capitalism? The workers who were "voluntarily" providing their labor were doing so because the only alternative was to starve to death. That's not really voluntary.

 

Voluntary to what extent though? What if what I want to do is make and sell meth. Shouldn't I be allowed to do so and if people want to buy it that is there own business and not the state's.

As you note Rand's ideal is a romantic ideal but like most such romantic ideals it is one that can only really exist in a utopia.

 

Child labor is a different scenario, we don't give children the same rights or responsibilities as adults.

Yes, laws like minimum wage and maximum work week are not capitalism. Minimum wage laws discriminate against individuals whose labor is worth less than the minimum wage. If two parties contractually agree to a particular wage or work week, it's none of your or the state's business, and it's immoral to use force to interfere.

Again, it's wrong to use physical force against another party to provide you with more appealing choices.

Absolutely.

It is the system that can and should it exist, it is the philosophy individuals can and should live by. Just because it is a utopia doesn't make it irrational to strive for that ideal.

If anything Atlas Shrugged is a dystopia, mirrored by reality more and more every day. In the book the producers went on strike. You see something similar today with companies hoarding assets and refusing to hire, due to extreme uncertainty about upcoming regulation/taxation (cap and trade, Obamacare, VAT, rates increasing next year, etc.).

 

Wow someone has been drinking the koolaid. I'm just waiting for you to pull out the "at the point of the gun" quote from Galt.

The purpose of the government is to regulate and monitor to PROTECT the general publc. I would find that pretty immoral if the government was not "influencing/restricting the private individual activity" of dumping chemicals that contaminated the drinking water. Let's see how much dumping toxic waste would be a "negative externality" if your wife and child developed cancer.

Could have sworn the Consitution mentions something about the right to Life but you Cons tend to only focus on that right as national defense against foreign enemies rather than the domestic enemies of greed that take those same lifes. But as you mentioned it's "boring" that people die from tainted food or drinking water, much more exciting when they die from a terrorist attack.

You're quite right be sure and tell that to your local GOP candidate when part of their platform is against gay marriage, stem cell research, and abortion.

 

But here is where the ideals cannot exist practically and have a functioning society. While in principle perhaps I should be allowed to produce and sell meth to willing buyers under Objectivist principles selling a substance like meth though after a point it is questionable whether that is a voluntary transaction made freely.

Strive maybe but again it is one that not only is impossible to enact but one that would also cause much much more misery than anything we currently have.

Atlas Shrugged paints a very limited and shallow scenario populated by very limited and shallow characters. John Galt, Ragnar Danneskold, and Wesley Mouch are really no more than cardboard cutouts set against a painted backdrop. As opposed to a reality where there actually are people who want to sell meth.

Except that companies were laying people off even before the current Admin. and the job losses were the heaviest prior to Obama taking office.