Skip to comments.Five Reasons Ayn Rand Is Bad for Business
Posted on 08/24/2012 7:24:47 PM PDT by dynachrome
1. Rand focuses employees on money.
Rand practically worshipped the almighty dollar, seeing the acquisition of wealth as a goal worthy in and of itself.
Unfortunately, when that attitude spreads throughout an organization, a higher salary becomes the only motivation that really works. That means top workers will, of course, leave the moment they get a better offer elsewhere.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnbc.com ...
ping. So much wrong here, hard to know where to start.
Remember, these folks believe in “climate change” too.
That says it all.
Absolutely nothing wrong with that either. Talent moves, influences other organizations to become better, then moves on again and the cycle repeats itself.
I for one willingly whore myself out to the Company that pays me the highest dollar. It's in MY and MY FAMILY's best interest, and those are the only two interests I serve.
Company "loyalty" hasn't been rewarded for a long, long, time. I learned that lesson the hard way when I literally gave my life for a Company that I loved, only to be released after nearly 10 years of service because I had a severe back injury which required surgery and 4 months to recover from.
Learned my lesson after that. Highest bidder for my services wins.
Offer me $10 dollars more an hour, but I have to move to Deeeeetroit, I say FU.
>>Company “loyalty” hasn’t been rewarded for a long, long, time.
Exactly. Employers try to convince you that your loyalty is important to them, right up until they decide they don’t need you anymore or they can find your labor cheaper. It only makes sense to return that level of loyalty to them. As long as they offer the most bucks, I’ll give them the best work I can.
Cause after all, why should you have to pay top dollar just to get top talent? (And they think conservatives are the robber barons!) [facepalm]
Wow, is the author brain damaged, totally ignorant of economics, or being an obastard whoreshipper?
I’d bet on all three...
I think someone pointing out why it is good, if the business wants the person they will be willing to pay for them.
If they want a cheap employee, then they can get a cheap employee.
Sure, I am just saying that salary is not everything.
Is that you, Jim Taggart? This is some of the funniest stuff I've read in ages, and thanks for posting it. Good heavens, workers considering themselves individuals and working for money? How dare they?
The author is either the most clueless individual on teh Interwebz at the moment or the most excellent parodist. Yes, Rand is bad for business because she encourages individual achievement and an insistence that reward be commensurate with it. Lord knows you can't run a business on the basis of individual achievement and reward. That would be (shudder) capitalism.
“One major misconception is that Rand worshipped the rich and saw moneymaking as lifes highest goal. In fact, most wealthy characters in her novels are pathetic, repulsive, or both: businessmen fattened on shady deals or government perks, society people who fill their empty lives with luxury. (There are also sympathetic poor and working-class characters.) . . . .To Rand, being selfish meant being true to oneself, neither sacrificing ones own desires nor trampling on others. Likewise, Rands stance against altruism was not an assault on compassion so much as a critique of doctrines that subordinate the individual to a collectivestate, church, community, or family.
—Cathy Young, “What Liberals Don’t Understand About Ayn Rand”
+1 times infinity.
While we all know that the proper perspective is that one should sacrifice all for the good of the
collective group. This concept is so key to economic success that the government should play the role of umpire to decide who sacrifices and who benefits.
I wonder if the writer realizes just how ridiculous he appears to those who recognize and revile those whom Rand identified as the "moochers" and the "takers".
I'm an employer and loyalty is *EXTREMELY* important to me. In fact, I consider it to be a big revenue generator.
I expect that this author's next article will be an enumeration of all those companies that embraced Rand's teachings and have ended up in bankruptcy court. Is it possible that Solyndra was such a company? How about General Motors? Or the United States Postal Service?
Why, the bankruptcy courts must be crowded with the many companies that insisted on giving value-for-value to their customers and who refused to even consider government bailouts or other interference.
Sure, I am just saying that salary is not everything.”
I have been working for at least 55 years and IMO it sure beats everything else on the list. I believe the saying goes something like, “Money may not buy happiness, but it allows you to be unhappy in some very wonderful places.”
This guy has never read Rand.
Two words: Galt’s engine.
I agree if you are a small-business owner. I would say that the larger the business, especially corporations, loyalty is not a prerogative. I worked for a fortune 500 corp, and was booted out after 19 years. I was loyal, but my talents were deemed not needed. That's life. But my loyalty to the corp. played no part in their decision.In fact, I had a friend who was a manager. She used to chide me about my less than super love for my job and the corp we worked for. I told her that we'd both be gone in five years (the handwriting was on the wall), and she was gone before I was. We were both terminated. Again, that's business, but loyalty had no determination on who stayed and who got booted out.
Companies must look out for their best interest, just as you yourself do. It's a two way street.
I’m pretty sure that the author of this little “ditty” uses the same journalistic techniques as most of Rush Limbaugh’s critics... Don’t actually read Rand, just read the criticism of Rand, and go from there.
There are so many false assumptions that the author makes, it’s difficult to list them all, but 1 really stands out to me... “#3 Rand Creates Fanatics.” Someone may want to break it to the author, that Ayn Rand is no longer creating anything, as she’s gone to the “Great Galt’s Gulch in the Sky,” or more realistically for her, she simply no longer exists. The point is that if you have employees who read something and they become “fanatics,” maybe you’re hiring employees who have “issues” far before ever reading Rand.
Frankly, the posts on this thread, as well as the many pages of comments on the original article at the CNBC website pretty much says it all. That the author really has no understanding of what Rand wrote.
Every time I’ve changed jobs voluntarily, it has been for one reason.
If you’re like me, your real life is what happens away from the job. The job is the way that you gain what it takes to afford your life. “Career advancement” is defined by the number next to the “$” on the paycheck.
As Bernadette Peters said in “The Jerk”, “It’s not the money....it’s the stuff.”
Don’t bother. Just shrug.
John Galt, go home. Take your homies with you.
Tell us about your resurrection.
I’ve been collecting reader’s opinions of Ayn Rand off the internet for a couple of months. There are hundreds like these:
Ayn Rand wrote Fiction and then as all mentally ill people do she started to believed her own fiction and fools believed right along with her adding fuel to her delusions. Odd how the right puts a closeted man hateing lesbian, athiest, anti semantic, anti social indiviualist on a pedistal???? Strange.
As Bernadette Peters said in The Jerk, Its not the money....its the stuff.
You got it. I have a friend who worked very, very hard for many years. He has a plane, a boat and a restored Rolls that drives from the right side. He also has a pair of work boots in his closet that has duct tape covering holes in the top and soles of both of them. Said he keeps them to remind him of how he got to the place where he doesn’t ever have to walk very far any more if he doesn’t want to.
Gotta wonder if the folks writing this tripe are really as ignorant as they sound, just Wasserman-like liars, or (my bet) both.
Such workers respect leaders who know that others contributed to their success.....”You didn’t build that.”
What does CNBC stand for:
Communist Nonsense Bull Crap!
OH MAN! I have got to tell this story.
The company I worked for got a new general manager, after a month or so of him being in charge we, (The Employees), received a multi-page questionnaire about our jobs and what could the company do to improve work condition, morale, etc.
Well in my department we got together and talked it over. We ALL put down on our questionnaires that the number one thing the company could do to improve morale was to pay us more. The very last thing on mine anyway was “Improve communications from upper management to the lower level employees.”
Surprise, surprise! when the company posted the results of the questionaire “Improve Communications was #1. Pay increase were somewhere along the lines of #9 or #10. Needless to say morale did not improve and general disdain for the upper management did increase.
>>I’m an employer and loyalty is *EXTREMELY* important to me. In fact, I consider it to be a big revenue generator.
Thanks for making my point. Loyalty is about people, not revenue.
Wow, these jackals are terrified of Ayn Rand’s ideas. Good.
In my current job, it would take a very substantial increase in money to lure me away. For the first time in my life, I have a boss that not only has my full faith in his ability to run the business, treats us with a fairness I haven’t seen before in my 30 years in my career.
My happiness is not worth a few more dollars.
Why did he stop at only five ???
From his perspective he could have written
A Bazillion Reasons Ayn Rand Is Bad for Business
and I wouldn't have thought any less of him.
I cannot be bought.
However, I can be rented, for the right price.
When the author derides “fanatics” he is really deriding passion. Passion is one of the top 5 indicators of success. Any manager or employer SHOULD be celebrating Rand “fanatics,” as these are the truely innovative and passionate. If these “fanatics” are not allowed to flourish, they will find a more satisfactory situation. If employers/mgrs are happy to see them go, then they should realize that they are stagnating and will soon see failure.
Of course the collecrivists, such as this author continually deride success, so they consider passion to be a negative. They celebrate drones!
I don’t like Rand, but this guy has it wrong.
Rand’s ideas are “to your own self be true”...and anyone who read the Fountainhead knows that for her, chasing the almighty dollar isn’t the main aim of life.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.