Perhaps we should take this to P&R so as to not clutter this forum.
This is where we disagree my friend. The problem with most overachievers is that they tend to be shortsighted. They are the rabbit that sprints but falls asleep before the finish line. If you dont agree then explain why recession always follows a period of economic boom, and why at the end, what is lost is greater than what was gained originally.
I don't have a clue what you are talking about. The entire paragraph lacks any cohesive theme. Over achievers are short sighted and some how that causes recession to follow periods of economic boom?
I think this short hand description from Rand expresses the point I am try to get across better than I can. Manevery manis an end in himself, not the means to the ends of others. He must exist for his own sake, neither sacrificing himself to others nor sacrificing others to himself. The pursuit of his own rational self-interest and of his own happiness is the highest moral purpose of his life. The ideal political-economic system is laissez-faire capitalism. It is a system where men deal with one another, not as victims and executioners, nor as masters and slaves, but as traders, by free, voluntary exchange to mutual benefit. It is a system where no man may obtain any values from others by resorting to physical force, and no man may initiate the use of physical force against others. The government acts only as a policeman that protects man's rights; it uses physical force only in retaliation and only against those who initiate its use, such as criminals or foreign invaders. In a system of full capitalism, there should be (but, historically, has not yet been) a complete separation of state and economics, in the same way and for the same reasons as the separation of state and church.
And then baby bear said "Somebody's been hijacking MY Ferrari GTE thread with political mumbo jumbo."
Read "The Fountainhead" again maybe... To shackle creators, to count on them to innovate, design, produce, but then to expropriate their creations for others who did nothing to earn it, is a great injustice. The independent minds, the Galileos, the Edisons, the Aristotles, carry the rest of mankind forward on their backs. This is the message of Roark's speech and the significance of the title, The Fountainhead. The meaning is: the ego is the fountainhead of human achievement and progress. The ego is the individual man's reasoning mind.
fish78, The only are where I disagree with you regarding this: Is that you are missing out of what really makes a person, that is helping somebody else achieve. If you truly believe in what you stated you would not have children and you would be a uncaring person. And John Vardanian's statement was made very clearly. Economic boons do not help everybody (especially with your attitude) but the recession that follows brings everybody down. In the end mate there is far more to life that money, wealth, and yes I am aware that your statement does directly relate to wealth, but unfortunately modern man measure themselves by wealth instead of achievements ... that is the sad part. Achievements can involving helping others ... but ofcourse that would not make a profit Pete
I don't believe I ever mentioned money or wealth. I simply was referring to what one creates is his own and belongs to no other man...read that as Ferrari, Scagletti, Pinin Farina etc...that to appropriate their work is wrong. If a man uses his ego to his self interest society as a whole benefits...this is not an economic discussion, it is about the philosophy of using what belongs to another as if was yours...replicas...I firmly believe that the owner who cuts up a car he owns is within his rights, but when he makes that cut up car into a replica he misappropriates the property of another. Each of us can have no higher moral purpose than tp pursue his own rational self interest and his own happiness.
You are right on here. But weve learned that these noble innovators and creators quickly become instruments of the capitalist who care only about their wealth and supremacy. Albert Einstein did not intend for his science to nearly demolish a whole nation. john
While I can see your point I do not agree that looking after 'Number One' means that society in general benefits. This is not true ... we have all witnessed others walking all over people to get where they want to be. How can that benefit society?. Look how we do nothing to solve poverty ... too busy 'self interesting' to care. Also because we are so money dominated ... self interest equates to personal wealth, unfortunately. Nobody invents anything to help others anymore ... just to make money I also do not believe many cut up old Ferraris just because they wanted a replica to own ... I believe they do it because they think they can make the 'car' more sellable. It's second hand car dealership mentality ... lets paint her red so we can add a few $'s. Hence why most were sacrificed in the gready 80's ... Pete
Which is worse, chopping up a GTE to make a replica Testarossa or parting out a 308 with a crushed fender simply because it is not economically feasible to "come out ahead" after an expensive repair? Seems to me that 30 years ago, many of those GTEs were not economically feasible to "come out ahead" after an expensive repair. That's how they ended up as replicas of more attractive Ferraris. Be honest, despite all the vintage hoop-la today, a GTE is still a 4 seater that is quite down the line on the desirability food chain. Any 308 looks 5 times better in my opinion. Much more "Ferrari-esque". A GTE looks like something an old banker in Europe would drive to the yacht club with his aunt and uncle in the back seat.
Does this make it 'not-a-Ferrari? James [And then baby bear said "Somebody's been hijacking MY Ferrari GTE thread with political mumbo jumbo."] Horsefly xlnt!
Arlie, I was about to complement post 109 but the I read post 119. Anyway, I agree with 109, and disagree with 119. Have you ever ridden in a vintage V-12 Ferrari of any sort? In my opinion there is no substitute. And that's comming from a guy who has Tom S. hovering over his car like a vulture(he even gave ma a T-shirt saying: "I drive a Ferrari parts car" ). Regards, Art S.
A 308 is a pseudo sports car, MASS produced for American poseurs fed on an excessive diet of Miami Vice. It has pathetic performance, wears a Ferrari badge but in reality is produced and designed by the Italian conglomerate FIAT, should be called a Dino, and has EIGHT cylinders in the BACK. No racing heritage, no racing future, and a car that in Europe looks like something that is driven by hairdressers going to a night club with a "loose" lady in the passenger seat. Can you say FLASH? A 308 does not look Ferrari-esque. Indeed, it is not a Ferrari. A GTE, on the other hand, shares an engine (detuned of course) with a Ferrari 250 GTO, was Enzo´s personal car during a time, and was produced by an independant company fully controlled by a gentleman called Enzo Ferrari. It also has a V12 engine, in the front, designed by Colombo. Your comparison is absurd. The only thing they have in common , in my opinion, is that they are cars.
Art S. Harsh perhaps, but unnecessary? I am not sure. My post was written in response to a post that affirmed that 308´s were more Ferrari-esque than GTE's, were five times more beautiful, and that GTE's were tipically driven by bankers to their yacht club with their aunt and uncle in the back. Now THAT is unnecessary. Particularly on the vintage section of this wonderful board. Cheers, Julio P.S. I live in Europe and I own a GTE, but I am not a banker, and I have no yacht club membership.
While I don´t agree with your take on the 308, I do agree with your point regarding the GTE as being less Ferrari than a 308. In my view, frontengined, 12 cylinder 2+2 Ferrari´s, are about as Ferrari as you can get. Enzo would agree, wouldn´t he? (PS, my choosen screenname is of course no coincidence).
