Lanchester presents excellent observations of what happens when risk is removed from finance. He tries to validate his personal beliefs that Socialism is necessary to keep capitalism honest. Removing risk from finance is actually a manipulation of capitalism and is the direct cause of financial collapse. Lanchester thinks capitalists no longer have to be nice to others because there is no socialism to compare their actions to - a Karl Marx as yardstick, if you will. He suffers the same inattentional blindness many liberals suffer. (Watching the basketball - missing the gorilla) Watching the harmful escalation of bad behavior of "bankers" while missing the increasingly complex but well intended regulations which pushed those bankers by moving the cheese. There are no perfect regulations. It is always best to connect self interest to behavior as directly as possible. Allow banks to fail - caveat emptor doesn't work is everyone is protected from negative consequences.
Still, Langton is an excellent narrator. The book is a pleasant listen.
This is a well put together chain of reason and logic. I believe that Socrates would have been won over by Ayn Rand with this one work. Ayn is very patient and very systematic in this presentation. I have spent time studying several popular philosophies, and traditional beliefs. There is so much built-in contradiction in so many philosophies that are explained with impenetrable mysteries that end in unreasonable statements. The clarity of Ayn Rand presents a startling contrast to all those philosophies. She asks only for clear reasoning, not for a leap of faith.
It is a frustrating experience to speak with someone who chooses not to think beyond a point. Art Markman points out in "Smart Thinking" that thinking uses a lot of energy and that the human brain is designed to conserve energy. This may explain the abdication of thinking and reasoning that so many choose when faced with the challenge of thinking all the way through a philosophical presentation.
Please listen to this several times before you decide Ayn Rand, Objectivist philosophy is just wrong. If you are a libertarian, but you have no philosophical underpinning for your beliefs, listen closely to Ayn Rand's challenging essays on Objectivism. If you get tired of thinking, take a break and come back to it, don't give up. Don't decide that your brain is not qualified to reason it out. To allow others to think for you to stop thinking things through and understand clearly what you believe is to throw yourself on the pyre of another's unreasoning sacrifice. It is blanking out. Make yourself valuable to yourself. Work for yourself. You get what you want by providing what others seek or need.
Whether you call it enlightened self interest or selfishness, you are attaining what you seek in a society of peers who reward others who produce what they want. Ayn Rand uses the term selfish to get your attention. To act selfishly, she indicates, it to make your own decisions based on your own resources, perspectives, goals. Helping others is an act of goodwill, not of duty. A charity is only a charity if contribution is voluntary. To give with another's money is taking, not giving.
Is it abusing others to give them a task or job and pay them what at the level they request? As soon as one is rewarded based on need versus based on what they earn, that entire society will parish. Reward for accomplishment is reasonable. One way to look at it is to say that the only thing worth more than gold is trust. I offer my pay (gold) to someone I trust to deliver something I want (plumbing or food, etc.). This is exactly what I offer to those who pay me, trust that I will deliver what I promise. My reputation and demonstrated skills result in the value of what I offer. The value is different to others based on their need or desire.
Ayn Rand lays these simple, reasonable principles end to end in a very logical presentation.
You may ask who will protect me or others from people or organizations who do not deliver what they promise. The role of a government is simple. It is to review the promise as presented (contract) and help enforce this promise for the weaker participant in the contract. Simpler contracts and straight forward trades make it easier for contract participants to understand what to deliver and when. Complex agreements will require help to define the agreement. As it stands now, all the rules, laws, subtleties to commitments makes it impossible for anyone to know where a commitment begins and ends without professional assistance. By complicating the contract with interfering laws and inferences, all parties enter into unknown risks, The one with more influence and professional assistance gains advantages in this system. Reducing government interference benefits the ones with limited means and influence.
This author needs better editors. There seems to be a story here worth reading. Unfortunately, the reader has to adapt and repair the content to find it. This is the failure of the editor.
Read Angela's Ashes and The Man Who Listens to Horses. These are examples of techniques for developing similar biographical material that work. This book stalls and drags. This story remains too tedious and pointless for too long. Consider the timing and plot development when intermingling past present and retrospective reveal. We need a sense of perspective. Where are we when you are telling the story? Are we moving through time on one line while considering another? Is there a third line that we see the first two from? I still cannot answer this. Please find a good editor.
Very good narrator. The one thing that kept me listening as long as I did was the very good performance of the narrator.
Bewilderment is not what the author was trying to create in her readers, I'm sure. Due to using a difficult technique - personal childhood history, recent events, retroactive revision to reveal misperceptions or lies - all told concurrently. I spent too long wondering why lies and second thoughts were revealed as the narrative of the simultaneous stories develop, or failed to develop. I sense that you have a good story, it is just not well told.
I am hoping that a revised edition of this book is released eventually. I might take another shot at it. I am sure a good editor cout manage this.
Perhaps a good reference book but a useless learning tool.
Pimsleur does a good job. I think Fluenz is top of the line in language learning. Rosetta Stone is far better at marketing than at developing good content. All in all, these three are better than Chinese for Dummies.
This is my first Menguin Liu listen. His voice is the best thing about this book. The pace is a bit fast for learning, at least for Dummies. :)
Good pronounciation by the narrator is the redeeming quality of this book.
Perhaps it is worth having a paper copy of this one, but audio is impossible in this organization of material.
Be prepared to lean more about FICO scores and how businesses use them as The Deciding Factor than you ever wanted to know. The first seven sentences of each chapter are worth writing down. Beyond that the words Fair Isaac and FICO are repeated endlessly. Yes, many big and successful companies have used FICO scores to change the way they do business. Rosenberger and Nash seem to believe that those example companies uses the Fair Isaac consulting and FICO scores to, in some way - never really made clear - improve their business. For example, apparently, Paris Hiltons father made a mess of the Carte Blanche credit card they created. With Fair Isaac's help, it became less of a mess before the media revealed that it was a mess. I'm not familiar with the details, but the implication is that it was eventually a failure in the end. Good thing Paris' dad hired Fair Isaac. I believe that FI balance sheet has fared much better than Carte Blanche. I guess Hilton corp. survived without too much impact.
The bottom line is that the book is one of the bigger wates of time I've experienced in the past couple hundred books I've listened to. If you need to know how better to use credit scores 10 to 20 years ago, this is the book for you. If you are a business owner, entrepreneur trying to grow your business, this is a WASTE OF TIME.
Narrator is very good.
More accurate title, PLEASE! I had no opinion of FICO or Fair Isaac prior to listening to this. Now, I think you protest too much.
Very clear and understandable presentation. I like the cadence. THe narrator sold me on this book during the sample.
This is a disappointment!
Please make it clear in the summary that this is a commercial for Fair Isaac.
This book is great for anyone interested in psychology or just wanting to better understand others. Narrator Sean Pratt is great - very listenable. The content is serious science and based on mostly recent research.
More practical than The Psychopath Next Door.
David Lieberman gives several conversational evaluation methods that are very usable.
Nicely organized and nicely presented.
If you've listened to as many business audio books as I have, you know the stories of Ben & Jerry, Honest Tea, Stoneyfield Farms, et. al. That's all you get with this book is the stories. Where is the insight? Where is the application and common truths for the rest of us. With a title like Inspire, I shouldn't expect more than a few mildly inspiring stories. I've been spoiled by the likes of Seth Godin and Tom Peters with inspiration followed by action items and lessons learned. Jim Champy writes in a simple style, lacking depth and insight. It leaves you wanting more. A "How To" book it is not.
Stow Lovejoy does a very nice job narrating this (un)inspiring business book. If you are going into the yogurt business: read/listen to this book. For the rest of us, time is much better spent elsewhere.
My expectations were high. This is a topic that I could sink my teeth (or ears) into. Why is everyone so committed to being wrong? People seem to become so happy with a position, an idea, an answer, that it no longer matters to them that the answer is wrong. Ayn Rand used the term "blank out" to describe the way people stop responding when they would have to concede a point or when they break a chain of reasoning to get to the answer they prefer.
Ms. Schultz certainly appreciates the many ways we humans arrive at the incorrect. She is well researched and of broad perspective. Her book includes psychological, biological, and neurological aspects of self deception. From a philosophical perspective, she points out that it is impossible to say truthfully that "I am wrong", because we can only realize that we were wrong by adopting a new idea different from the old, wrong idea. She quotes many great and some terrible thinkers on the subject of being wrong. The quotes are the best part of this book.
The frustrating aspect of this book is Ms. Schultz' organization of ideas. Just as a concept is being developed just to insert a distracting non sequitur. It gives the effect that she wants to make a point that has nothing to do with the concept that was being developed. I wait and listen patiently for the digression to end and the thoughts to be completed. Unfortunately, she doesn't return to the original thought - ever. Apparently, she feels obligated to begin her chapters on the topic, but feels no such obligation to conclude the chapter on the same topic.
In a paper book, we might be able to deal with the author's meandering by turning pages until we find the topic or a new topic to bridge the continuity on our own. In an audio book, we lack the resources to compensate for her inconsistencies. It becomes maddening to encounter the unclosed loops, unjustified digressions, repeatedly.
I listen to approximately ten audio books per month.
Report Inappropriate Content