Re: Galt's Gulch
Atlas Shrugged
Galt's Gulch
Tampico
04-11-2009, 11:50 AM
29.34, -91.067
Re: Galt's Gulch
galtsgulcher
04-11-2009, 12:26 PM
Hi Tampico,
That's a real pithy comment... ; )
Since there's nothing going on in this ghost town and you titled it Galt's Gulch, I'll go with it.
While Rand expressed it as a moral ideal in a work of fiction, Galt's Gulch does have some basis in reality. Its attributes are a place where ethical businessmen deal directly with each other, and where they are free to explore their innovative ideas and to physically implement them to better the lives of those around them who share their moral values.
This ideal of Galt's Gulch exists here in America, but it's not necessarily in a particular location, but is wherever people are doing what is right.
Another attribute of Galt's Gulch is that it is hidden. Its protection is that is not seen by those who do not uphold its values by their behavior.
So if you want enjoy living in Galt's Gulch...
...you first need to WORK to EARN the RIGHT to BE there.
Greg
Re: Galt's Gulch
Tampico
04-11-2009, 1:01 PM
In order to survive at 29.34, -91.067, it would be necessary to have substantial means. Looters, moochers and slackers could never afford a sufficiently supplied liveaboard sailboat or cruising houseboat. I have already earned the right to be there because I have the means to get there and survive in the environment. Lost Lake is a good place to go if you plan to sell off properties in the US because it will serve as a pivot point once the Collapse is underway. If it becomes apparent that the US has gone hopelessly collectivist then simply trade the cruising houseboats for good offshore sailboats and set the course for Belize or the Faulklands. If, on the other hand, there comes about a viable movement for Texas secession, with the new Republic being a libertarian one, then 29.34, -91.067 is only a short distance from the Texas coast. Greg - I like you man, but you are not the judge of who has a "right" to be anywhere or who has earned what. The point is to choose a location that, by its very nature, prohibits those who cannot afford floating housing from being present and thereby eliminate moochers and looters.
Galt's Gulch cannot be in America "wherever people are doing what is right" so long as property owners in the US can be looted. Once income tax fails to support the collectivist social welfare state then the looters will look at the property tax lists and eye small business registrations. We looked at the Paulville movements, but came to realize that these places, if successful, would become non-moving targets for the collectivists.
Re: Galt's Gulch
galtsgulcher
04-11-2009, 11:32 PM
(Tampico wrote...)
"In order to survive at 29.34, -91.067, it would be necessary to have substantial means."
Hi Tampico.
Oh, it's GPS coordinates!
I don't have a GPS and so the numbers didn't ring a bell until you supplied the context.
(T)
"Looters, moochers and slackers could never afford a sufficiently supplied liveaboard sailboat or cruising houseboat. I have already earned the right to be there because I have the means to get there and survive in the environment."
I'm assuming that you did honest work to earn the money to buy those "substantial means". That's what I mean by working to earn the right to live in Galt's Gulch...
...~whatever~ that may be to you.
(T)
"I like you man, but you are not the judge of who has a "right" to be anywhere or who has earned what."
You're right, I'm not...
You are the only one who can work to earn the right to be where you see fit to be...
...just as I do.
(T)
"The point is to choose a location that, by its very nature, prohibits those who cannot afford floating housing from being present and thereby eliminate moochers and looters."
That's a good approach... except in the light of the latest pirate news events, the seas may not be quite as safe as you think they are.
And since I'm a landlubber who gets sick even looking at a boat, I chose another method. And that is to live in a place that moochers and looters can't afford.
(T)
"Galt's Gulch cannot be in America "wherever people are doing what is right" so long as property owners in the US can be looted. Once income tax fails to support the collectivist social welfare state then the looters will look at the property tax lists and eye small business registrations."
There is a moral law that applies to the decent:
There is ~always~ a way
around ~any~ obstacle.
But that way ~isn't~ seen until time comes that the obstacle is ~actually~ in front of the person.
This has been proven to my satisfaction time and again by my own experience alone, so there's no way of saying whether it would work for anyone else not knowing if they're decent.
(T)
"We looked at the Paulville movements, but came to realize that these places, if successful, would become non-moving targets for the collectivists."
What's a "Paulville"?
I actually ~prefer~ moving targets... ; )
Hope you don't mind the lighthearted banter... I do this just for my own entertainment instead of watching TV.
Take Care,
Greg
Re: Galt's Gulch
salmongirl73
04-19-2009, 5:23 AM
I don't see how living in a really expensive place is going to protect you. Certainly, looters and moochers would shrivel and die in an environment populated overwhelmingly by rationalists; however, there are an awful lot of them who have accumulated rather sizable amounts of money and thus would be able to insinuate themselves into any such arrangements. My goal since this whole mess started was not only to free the productive, but to make sure they
stay
free -- and this means eradicating the altruist/collectivist mindset. And this means, plainly, the John Galt method: lay their scheme out naked, for everyone to see, then withdraw and let it collapse. This will necessarily require a "gulch" or "gulches" -- I prefer the term Atlantis -- in which the producers can continue to produce, to support their lives until the way is clear. Then, everything can be rebuilt on rational values.
Re: Galt's Gulch
galtsgulcher
04-19-2009, 3:02 PM
(salmongirl wrote...)
"I don't see how living in a really expensive place is going to protect you."
Hi salmon,
Yes, you're right. Location ~alone~ is no protection. The real protection is moral responsibility and personal integrity.
My wife and I just picked what we deemed to be the best place from the available real world options open to us, and so chose the unlikely combination of ~both~ rural ~and~ exclusive.
It seems that the scheme as you've described has pretty much already been layed out...
...as everyone has already chosen how they will view the world and will take what they chose and its consequences with them to their grave.
As far as the producers are concerned... there are decent ones scattered all over and they find their own kind with whom to do business.
I totally agree with you about an impending collapse... The unsustainablillty of the present corrupted third party payer leftist socialist system is getting more obvious by the day, and this is making the government looters increasingly desperate for tax revenue to service the now critical mass of moochers. It has to collpase so that the decent people can pick up the pieces and put them together in a different way.
Take Care,
Greg
Copyright, The Objectivist Center, 2005. All rights reserved.