There's objectively plenty of openly confessing Randroids in business and politics, so it's not mere speculation.

"Gore Vidal, the American writer, once described the American economic system as 'free enterprise for the poor and socialism for the rich'. Macroeconomic policy on the global scale is a bit like that. It is Keynesianism for the rich countries and monetarism for the poor." - Ha-Joon Chang

Well, while apologists for the corporate sector justify policies based on conservative principles (what's called conservatism at least), the opposite is often really the case in practice. I mean the idea that there's this clash between the market and the state is really the sickest joke in social theory. The rich wants a very powerful state that intervenes in the economy, just for their interests and not for others. It's the hypocritical nature of neoliberalism.

'free enterprise for the poor and socialism for the rich' — Saphsin

True when Vidal (or whoever coined the phrase) said it; still true today.

the idea that there's this clash between the market and the state is really the sickest joke in social theory — Saphsin

Indeed. As Marx said, the state is a committee for organizing the affairs of the bourgeoisie (meaning, the rich). The last thing a good capitalist wants is unfettered competition. Horrors!

The libertarian, Randian, objectivist approach is a call to live in the worst of the wild west.

Some of the Randian principles that Mayor cites are ridiculous: (Rand, not Mayor, is ridiculous)

"Any and all natural resources are limitless" is true only in the most abstracted theoretical way. True, the resources of earth, the moon, asteroids, and other planets (from their atmospheres to their cores) might be "limitless" but our capacity to exploit, and survive the exploitation, are most certainly very limited. We have neither tapped out all of the oil nor dug up all of the coal and already the liberated CO2, stored up in the Carboniferous Period (359 to 299 million years ago) is sending the earth into a warming feedback loop that won't be easily reversed.

Trillions of tons of iron--to pick just one element--remain in the earth. That doesn't mean it is accessible. The easily reached valuable minerals haven't all been dug up, but what remains accessible is by no stretch of the term "unlimited", and the consequences of getting it might be intolerable. And so what if the earth has a solid core of iron? Ayn Rand herself isn't cold enough to dig her way to the core and come back without being incinerated several times over.

"The government has never invented anything or done any good for anyone."

More stupid ideas from Ayn Swine Rand.

Aside from maintaining the legal infrastructure upon which wealth is gained and reliably secured, the United States Government did the following good things for Americans (but not at the same time for the recipients of government attention, in some cases):

The US Government bought, conquered, seized, liberated "cleared" and organized 3,119,884.69 square miles (8,080,464.3 km2) of land upon which fortunes could be built.

The US Government defended American Interests in several wars, most notably WWII. Whether Randians consider protecting the USA from Fascist forces was a good thing or a nuisance, don't know.

The US Government invented the Atomic Bomb, the Hydrogen Bomb, and with some help from Nazi engineers like Werner von Braun, the ICBMs to deliver them COD.

The US Government developed the technology of digital photography (used in satellites long before it showed up at Walmart);

The US Government's space program (NASA) developed the ultimate blessing to Humanity, Teflon, which allows us to fry eggs without the eggs sticking to the pans. Never before or since have so many owed so much to so few.

Not to mention the Interstate Highway System; Rural Electrification; the Internet; and so on. Governments also run schools; hospitals; snow plowing operations; ports, rivers, and canals maintenance; operates the Centers for Disease Control; the National Cancer (and other) Institutes; the Library of Congress; and the National Park System (just to scratch the surface).

Can you verify these para-quotes, or are you just making this stuff up? I agree that Rand was basically evil, and her book was dreadful and has had a damning legacy on the security, rights and safety of working people, whilst increasing poverty and inequality, but I find it hard to accept that the book is so blatantly wicked to have convinced so many people, so easily.

What neoliberalism has engineered for the rich is based on a false myth that the market solves all problems of inefficiency and competition guarantees the best price. They have engineered a change from state run business, denigrated as wasteful, whilst handing out contract to their friends who are offered an effectively blank cheque to provide services whilst being offered the latitude to pay their workers less, with less safety and fewer benefits. This was promised to have led to better services but has simply enriched the rich and squashed low end demand through low wages depressing the economy.
So whilst the captains of industry wag their fingers on the steps of parliament about too much government they are their to pick up their blank cheque so they can laugh all the way to the bank.

Can you verify these para-quotes, or are you just making this stuff up? — Hogrider

Me? Make stuff up?

It is tempting to make stuff up, and if done with sufficient boldness, confidence, and brio there is a good chance one's lies will be accepted as gospel truth.

In this case, I didn't make it up. You'll have to ask Mayor of Simpleton whether he made it up, since I was quoting him. It's been a long time since I read anything by Rand. I'm pretty sure MOS's points are partly a projection of what he thinks Rand represents, and partly a report of what Rand does represent.

“I hope you don’t have friends who recommend Ayn Rand to you. The fiction of Ayn Rand is as low as you can get re fiction. I hope you picked it up off the floor of the subway and threw it in the nearest garbage pail. She makes Mickey Spillane look like Dostoevsky.” Flannery O'Connor

Well...

... Alan Greenspan?

“Before I met Ayn Rand, I was a logical positivist, and accordingly, I didn’t believe in absolutes, moral or otherwise. If I couldn’t prove a proposition with facts and figures, it was without merit.”

All that I feel I really need to say.

Meow!

GREG