Read The Chip to Understand Small Tech

As Wall Street investors evaluate their estimate of how tech stocks will perform, one factor that can surprise everyone is new science.  My investment strategy over the last five years has been to put my money into "small tech".  As an Ayn Rand fan, those who wish to emulate my strategy would do well to understand the exact meaning of my "small tech" choices.  Though Hank Rearden was once small when Midas Mulligan chose to lend him the money for massive expansion, not all amateur investors have the stomach for the risks of a small company.

The latest Second Renaissance Book that I have completed is The Chip: How Two Americans Invented the Microchip and Launched a Revolution, by T.R. Reid.  I chose this book to better understand the company that I hold most of my shares in: Intel Corp. (INTC).  I found the book very informative and am confident that my investment strategy is on track in selecting "small tech".

Currently, my other investment is biotech.  I sold my Eli Lilly & Co. (LLY) shares before the election--cashing in on a 60% plus profit.  I also unloaded my shares in AbbVie Inc. (ABBV) for a small gain.  Though I am no longer a shareholder in these innovative giants, I will always be indebted to them and their bioengineers who invented the two medicines which were accepted by psychiatry as alternatives to the chemical tortures of its code.  My primary reason for the two sales was the acceptance that I have made my statement of competence; and with the agreed to legacy of the Big Pharma medicines enhancing my mind, it was time to move on.

However, having invested so much into reading books on medicine and campaigning for Big Pharma and Biotech, I still wanted to be in the sector.  So, I chose to keep the one best company I know of that will probably innovate "small tech" products in the long run.  That company is Vertex Pharmaceuticals Inc. (VRTX).  I can only hope that their research staff will read every "Father of Metachemics" containing post in this blog.

Paul Wharton
Objectivist Capitalist Medicine Promoter

Inertia is LightSpeed

The latest philosophical formula in my science of metachemics is:

Inertia is LightSpeed

Since one Light traveling LightSpeed never changes Velocity, the Inertia is conserved.

These last two metachemical entries in my blog were made while I have been reading Harry Binswanger's book: How We Know: Epistemology on an Objectivist Foundation.  Other than Ayn Rand's masterpiece on the study of knowledge (which Harry Binswanger co-edited), How We Know is the greatest book on epistemology that I am aware of.

Upon completing How We Know in the next couple of days, I will have read 130 books that have been advertised by Second Renaissance Books catalogs (including its various names that it evolved into over the years).

Paul Wharton
Father of Metachemics

Tuxedo Park:  A Great Book about a Great Man

I just finished reading the Ayn Rand Bookstore biography: Tuxedo Park, by Jennet Conant.  The book is about the Wall Street tycoon turned scientist, Alfred Loomis, who created a world class research facility out of his estate in Tuxedo Park, New York.

Loomis hosted talented and famous scientists to come to his place and do research in a philanthropic, high-class environment.  Having distinguished himself in World War I, through his innovative, technological talent, and by observing military events, Loomis understood the dynamics of science and politics involved in conducting a war.

Back on Wall Street, Alfred Loomis predicted the 1929 crash and sold his stock before it happened--thus preserving his wealth with the ability to get back in when the market hit bottom.  However, Loomis's greatest achievements were yet to come.  As an amateur scientist, he poured more and more money into his home run lab experiments--becoming a leading expert in the fields of radio waves and microwaves that were newly detected by physicists.  At the same time, the field of nuclear physics piqued the interest of Loomis; and he personally financed the building of cyclotrons to study small matter.

As the likelihood of America being involved in World War II approached, Loomis was instrumental in bringing together: scientists, funding and political support for preparation of the inevitable.  With Britain nearly on its knees due to the German bombing, Loomis focused on developing better radar technology which eventually got so good that he can personally be credited with having helped win the war in Europe.  On the other front, Loomis's: early cyclotron funding, scientific knowledge, and advocacy and guidance of political connections made him a major contributor to building the atomic bomb that defeated the Japanese.

Read Tuxedo Park to follow the life of a great man who: made money, spent money, and studied science because he enjoyed doing it.

Paul Wharton
Objectivist Capitalist Medicine Promoter

New Metachemics Definitions:  Heat and Chill

The following are two new definitions in metachemics:

(1) Heat - a light moving lightspeed with more direction changes

(2) Chill - a light moving lightspeed with fewer direction changes

Paul Wharton
Father of Metachemics

Repeal and then Laissez-Faire

Obamacare has been a disaster.  So many politicians have spoken out against it that it will easily be repealed.  But, what about those who have run on the platform: Repeal and Replace?  The "Replace" part is what I want to address in this blog.  Replace could mean many things.  Will it be: a laissez-faire free market, Medicaid and Medicare as it was prior to Obamacare, or, a half-hearted, attempt at Capitalism--but then a drift back towards Obamacare again?

Medicine is a market that tries to save human life.  The more medicine one buys, the longer one can usually live.  However, the reality is that eventually each individual will die.  Another truth of reality is that one day one's own money will not be able to keep one alive.  So, when that day of reckoning comes, when an individual cannot preserve one's own life, what will happen?  Will government take from producers to give the accepting parasite a way?

Besides the fundamental, human reality, there is also a consequential, systemic one.  If a political system does go the Medicaid and Medicare route, the more money it takes from producers, the worse the problem gets.  Since, generally, the longer a parasite lives, the more the producer drain, there is no resolution in sight, other than to remove the government socialism and let the dependent die.

Due to the two truths of reality: human mortality and private economic limits, I believe that socialized medicine is bad business.

Along with my conviction that Capitalism is the moral system--where the Producers get to keep their Property and Constitutionally law-abiding Individuals have their Liberty respected by government--I support a system of Capitalist Medicine that operates according to the principles of Laissez-Faire.

Paul Wharton
Objectivist Capitalist Medicine Promoter

Matter Causes Gravity

The following are three inductively achieved observations about matter and gravity:

(1) Matter causes gravity.

(2) Gravity is an attractive acceleration.

(3) Gravity is each matter's attractive acceleration towards each other.

Paul Wharton
Father of Metachemics

An Election is a Popularity Contest

An election is basically a popularity contest.  In the coming Presidential election, one of the best ways to predict who is ahead is to gauge the size of the crowds at the contenders' events.  Donald Trump's crowds are usually more than ten times bigger than the scattered events thrown by Shrillary Clinton.

So how are we hearing these reports that the election is neck and neck with maybe only a slight Trump lead?

Americans have to understand the nature of the mainstream media.  When one hears the results of a poll it should be asked if it is a mainstream media conducted poll.  There are so many ways to skew a poll that if the source is corrupt, (such as CNN), the poll should be summarily dismissed.

I think that the democrat spinsters' motive to misportray Trump's popularity is to set up voter fraud.  If it is expected that it is a close race, then the illegal and repeat votes won't be questioned.

Paul Wharton
Objectivist Capitalist Medicine Promoter

Let's Win the War, Then Consider Electing Mommy

America is on the brink of military annihilation.  We confront enemies who dwell both within and without.  In the preceding 8 years, Obama has done his best to undermine the U.S. military--making it as weak as possible.  A Shrillary Clinton command would continue the effort.  America cannot afford 4 more years of it.

While Shrillary refuses to embrace a philosophy of victory, she emerges a couple times a week to parade the uniqueness of a first ever woman presidency.  But, what value is there in roving ISIS gangs domestically torturing and slaughtering American women?

I say, "Let's win the war, then consider electing mommy."

Paul Wharton
Objectivist Capitalist Medicine Promoter

The Shrillary Pneumonia Disease

The democratic party has pushed for it; they have fought for it; and now, under Obama's leadership America is living their dream--illegal immigrant diseases.

I'm not saying I know for sure whether Shrillary Clinton got her illness(es) from hugging an illegal child.  Perhaps as Secretary of State it was an act of espionage.  All I know is that considering how wide open the border is, it is very likely that Shrillary has at least one previously non-problematic foreign illness.  Something is definitely going around; and, I think Americans need to factor this in as they ask themselves who they will vote for when they try to wake up and drag themselves over to the voting booth on November 8th.

Paul Wharton
Objectivist Capitalist Medicine Promoter

An Army of Counter Punchers

Months ago, investors in biotech companies suffered heavy sustained losses after Shrillary Clinton's famous anti-Big Pharma tweet.  I struck back in the style of Donald J. Trump--as a "counter puncher".  Now she has done it again, initiating an attack on a Wednesday--which gives enough time for her evil media intellectual allies and short-selling government cronies to cash in on lower stock prices coming up at the end of the trading day on Friday.  So, here's my rebound:

Shrillary's body does not serve the needs of the poor.  She selfishly hoards the value of her different parts in such a way that one could tweet the accusation of "price gouging".  For example, her body generates blood similar to how a pharmaceutical plant manufactures pills.  But, she does not sell her blood at low prices, nor does she give away a lot of it like Big Pharma is coerced into doing with their product.  The blood in Shrillary is there.  The poor need it.  Who is she to profit from robust health and vitality?  Therefore, the government should require that she give half her blood away every week.

Another body part Shrillary is rich in is kidneys.  She has two kidneys for goodness sake!  Shrillary doesn't need both kidneys.  Who is she to walk around kidney-rich while others with an unmet medical need are suffering?  Does "two kidney" Shrillary Clinton really expect to win running as a Democrat when this makes her a hypocrite?  The Democrat Party should demand that she remove one kidney for the race to go on.

(This blog was the response by one man in what I envision as "an army of counter punchers")

Paul Wharton
Objectivist Capitalist Medicine Promoter

Television Propaganda Controls

Back in the winter of 2009, before Obama was sworn in, socialist television started to get really bad.  I responded by selling my TV--and have not replaced it with a new one to this day.

The mainstream media is so dishonest, biased, and borders on communist.  I had been following the Trump campaign on-line through what I thought was one of the better media sources, but then found non-traditional footage of the candidate's speaking events in the search engines.  And I'll tell you, it is like night and day!

Something has got to be done to undermine the mainstream media.  While I believe in Freedom of Speech and of the Press, I have a couple of ideas of how to do this without treading on The Constitution.

Most Americans know that the media is skewed; but it seems like we don't know that the majority knows this, too.  So, since for the most part, we don't fund their efforts with advertising views, how are these stations staying in business?  My hypothesis is that they aren't.  I believe that their continued existence is reflective proof of government funding behind the scenes.

One thing that could be done is for a business to invent what could be called: "television propaganda controls".  This could work like the already marketed "parental controls".  An individual who has had enough with certain channels, such as: CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, and/or NBC could program one's electronic devices to skip over the individually selected stations.

Paul Wharton
Objectivist Capitalist Medicine Promoter

What's Better than Crooked Hillary?

Trump's name for Clinton says a lot; and I hope he keeps using it.  But, I have thought of an alternative name that I think is even better: Shrillary.

If you listen to her speeches and especially her exclamatory, raised voice at the staged events, Clinton sounds shrill.  Shrillary needs to calm down a bit.  By calling her Shrillary, Trump supporters in effect are helping the situation:

Shhh...Shrillary.  Chill.

Paul Wharton
Objectivist Capitalist Medicine Promoter

Literary Thriller: No Time to Die

Kira Peikoff does it again with her outstanding medical thriller: No Time to Die. The book weaves much Objectivism with medicine in an entertaining plot that is perfect for my focus.  The story centers on an elusive and mysterious character who calls himself "Galileo".  As my blog page identity is "American Galileo", it is interesting that both Kira and I conceived such similar names completely independently.

While I don't know if No Time to Die would be considered an official Objectivist novel, the story contains many parallels to Atlas Shrugged.  I especially enjoyed the description of New Mexico--as I spent five summers there where my father did research at Los Alamos.

I'm taking a break before moving on to Kira's third book in order to read Atlas Shrugged for the 10th time.  I just wonder when she will write a thriller with the theme of freedom vs. state mental health.

Paul Wharton
Objectivist Capitalist Medicine Promoter

If We Don't Win the War, Nothing Else is Going to Matter

The presidential race has come down to two contenders: Donald Trump vs. Hillary Clinton.  Though in her nomination acceptance speech, Clinton gave about 100 standard socialist reasons why those types of democrats should support her, the dominant issue in this campaign really only comes down to one thing: The War.

For example, suppose ObamaCare was eradicated and private individuals and businesses replaced it with Capitalist Medicine.  And, suppose, for instance, that a wealthy businessman builds a private specialty hospital in New York City--but then isis nukes it the next year.  What good did the medical legislation reversal do?

As a real estate developer, Trump is a builder.  However, the point I'm trying to make in this blog is that in order to be cleared for building, America is going to have to destroy what stands in its path to Capitalism.

Of course, Clinton is neither a builder, nor a competent Commander-in-Chief.  But, whatever political side-issues emerge between now and the election, I encourage every voter to cast your ballot for Donald J. Trump so America can achieve victory in what recent events have brought to the front as a necessary war.

Paul Wharton
Objectivist Capitalist Medicine Promoter

Good Book: Equal is UNfair

Equal is UNfair by Don Watkins and Yaron Brook discusses  the recent surge in attacks on "inequality".  Considering that I haven't had a TV since 2009, the American culture explained in the book seemed foreign to me.  Apparently, I missed out on Obama's fundamental transformation of America's "inequality attitudes".  I have noticed some differences--such as the low quality of new, young employees at work.  However, in reading Equal is UNfair, frankly, I didn't realize that it was this bad.

The book is written more for the layman than many Objectivist endorsed books.  Though I still enjoyed reading it, I find that I like more scholarly non-fiction better.

Paul Wharton

Objectivist Capitalist Medicine Promoter

Wharton's First Epistemological Law

(Deduction)(Induction) = 1

Deduction and Induction are inversely related.

Paul Wharton
Objectivist Capitalist Medicine Promoter

Read Living Proof

The fiction novel Living Proof, by Kira Peikoff, takes place in the not too distant future in an America that has undergone a theocratic transformation.  I was attracted to this book because it is a medical thriller written by the daughter of a prominent Objectivist.  In the process of reading the novel, every time I would come across elements of the Objectivist philosophy, it brought a smile to my face.  From the main character's name, Arianna, to the story's setting, New York City, to the philosophical morality of stem cell research, (which is being suppressed by the Christian government), Kira Peikoff really knows how to exploit her market.

Currently, I am in the process of reading her second book, (another medical thriller), and, recently bought her third novel which is sitting on one of my bookshelves right now.

Paul Wharton
Objectivist Capitalist Medicine Promoter

Book: Moral Rights and Political Freedom

In Moral Rights and Political Freedom, Objectivist author Tara Smith explores the ethical and political philosophy concerning "rights" and their manifestation in regard to political liberty.

Reading Smith's book was enlightening for me in that it explained an entire school of ethical philosophy concerning "rights" that I didn't understand before.  Years ago, when I was forced into and held in hospitals, it was common practice for the place to inform me of my "rights".  One major source of conflict was a "right to refuse medication".  Often, I would inquire whether or not I could refuse only to be met with a bold and confident assurance that I have the right to refuse.  Unfortunately, eventually every time, if I refused, I would later find myself approached by a squad of security goons and a nurse with a needle to inject me.  I now know what was going through the minds of the hospital staff who always seemed to me to be liars who didn't care.  The key to their ethics is a different concept of "rights".  In their philosophy, "rights" are not freedom that has immunity from government.  "Rights" are only tangible if the person exercising one's "rights" is operating how the authorities would have wanted one to do so.  Thus, this school makes a mockery of rights and, in the name of medicine, treats people with fraud and force.

The solution to the problem, in such a medical situation, and, especially one that deals with mind-altering drugs, is to recognize the inalienable individual Right to One's Own Mind.  I believe that this natural right is one that was overlooked by the Founding Fathers--perhaps because, back then, there were few mind-altering substances that government could force into the minds of Man.  I will consider it a battle won when the Right to One's Own Mind is written as an Amendment into the Constitution of the United States of America.  If you don't think we need it, just look what happened to me.

Paul Wharton

Objectivist Capitalist Medicine Promoter

The Universal Law

     In my philosophic, metachemical pursuits, I have been operating with a premise that I call: "The Universal Law".  I see it as self-evident, i.e., a common sense approach to science.  The following is its definition:

The Universal Law is that physics laws are the same everywhere in The Universe

Paul Wharton

Father of Metachemics

Vertex (VRTX): A New Addition to My Portfolio

     I managed to save about $9,000 from my main jobs over the last two years; so I thought I would put that money to work by making a new investment.  I first learned about Vertex Pharmaceuticals Inc. (VRTX) from a book sold by Second Renaissance Books--a precursor to the Ayn Rand Estore.  Of the 12 books about medicine that the catalogs endorsed, which I have read, The Billion-Dollar Molecule: One Company's Quest for the Perfect Drug, by Barry Werth, is my absolute favorite.  The author returned 20 years later to write a follow-up about Vertex (VRTX), The Antidote: Inside the World of New Pharma.  This second book tops the list of the 10 non-Ayn Rand catalog books about medicine that I have read.

Vertex (VRTX) is one of the major players in the world in cystic fibrosis medicine.  My brother was tested genetically; and it turned out that he is a carrier of that gene.  Thankfully, no one in my family has CF.  However, if the biology follows a simple genetic pattern, I have a 50% chance of also being a carrier.  This gives me a personal interest in promoting Vertex (VRTX), on top of the financial gain I stand to make.

As I know from the books I read, Vertex (VRTX) is a company run by geniuses in business.  However, they are just as much so in the realm of science.  Being based in Boston, Massachusetts has enabled the company to attract top talent in the high-tech hub site there.  Anyone who has been following my blogging over the last 10 years can see that I switch focus, back and forth, from medicine to science, periodically.  Eventually, I plan to make the switch, again; and owning Vertex (VRTX) is ideal for me, as the geniuses there will outdistance every other biotech company, I know of, as my new science comes in.

In the meantime, though, I'm sticking with medicine--with my three pharmaceutical picks: (LLY), (ABBV), & (VRTX).  Economists (the good ones) know that when a business sector is suppressed with heavy regulations, the companies in it will not perform well.  Pharmaceuticals are one of the most controlled and oppressed areas of the economy.  I, too, know this.  However, what I am betting on is that I can be invested before those regulations go away, and then see my profit skyrocket.

Paul Wharton
Objectivist Capitalist Medicine Promoter

An Incomocracy: a Constitutionally Limited Republic from the Productive

     For centuries, America has operated with a system from democracy in electing the President and Representatives in the form of government called a Constitutionally Limited Republic.  It has worked well--the best that any devised, and known, system could have, in the history of civilization going back to when it was invented in Ancient Greece.  That is...until Obama.

The current, and questionable, "president" refuses to enforce America's immigration laws--even going so far as to manipulate cargo ships and planes to go out from our borders and flood this country with what will be argued as "new votes".  Not only will the mass homelessness result in crime, espionage, and disease, many politicians will grudgingly use tax dollars to dole out forms of "welfare".  If only there was not this "more voters" incentive that is driving the democrats.  After wrestling with the issue for years, last night I thought of a solution: an Incomocracy.

In an Incomocracy, one dollar produced in the previous calendar year equals a weight of one vote.  Its strict definition is:

Incomocracy is a Constitutionally Limited Republic from the Productive.

This means that a six year old girl, if she made $20 last year at her lemonade stand, gets a weight of 20 votes in each election that has her in its jurisdiction.  And, Bill Gates, if he made $20 billion last year, gets a weight of 20 billion votes in each election that has him in its jurisdiction.

As an Objectivist, I should note that this new form of electing government officials is not from my readings of Ayn Rand.  It is entirely created by my own design.

Paul Wharton
Objectivist Capitalist Medicine Promoter

Investing to Save One's Own Life

     As an investor in Big Pharma, I focus on the companies that invented and/or sell the products that have had the biggest positive impact upon my life.  However, when looking for businesses to promote, it is not only the current conditions that I deal with that I should consider.  It is important to anticipate possible, future illnesses, as well.

My grandmother died from Parkinson's disease.  Due to the somewhat hereditary nature of that fatal condition, I should be concerned about trying to work for a cure before I risk getting it in old age.  Fortunately, two of the companies that I hold stock in have joined forces with five other big names to advance towards developing better treatments and eventually a cure.  Those pharmaceutical corporations are AbbVie Inc. (ABBV) and Eli Lilly & Co. (LLY).

If I can champion these Big Pharma businesses, perhaps a medicine will exist so that it is there for when I have use for it and can buy it.  And, as a reward for my business alliances, I may find that I have made a small fortune for myself through my investments, too.

Paul Wharton
Objectivist Capitalist Medicine Promoter

The FDA Attacked in an Ayn Rand Estore Book

      I have finished reading, In Defense of Selfishness: Why the Code of Self-Sacrifice is Unjust and Destructive, by Peter Schwartz of the Ayn Rand Institute.  The book is an excellent exploration of the evil of altruism and the virtue of its opposite--selfishness.  However, I want to focus this blog on an agency that Schwartz comments on extensively: the FDA.  The following are some selected quotes:

"The FDA exists, not to keep us from being deceived by drug manufacturers, but to keep us from judging for ourselves what is good for us." (p.140)  "The FDA, like any regulatory body, has only one basic function: to say no--or rather, to say no and to force us to abide by that pronouncement." (p.140)

"...even if you are among those who are helped by a drug--even if you are dying and the drug is your only hope--you will not be permitted to take any medicine deemed detrimental to the "population as a whole."." (p.160-161)  "Since only individuals concretely exist, the FDA's policy of deciding "on the basis of the whole" can mean only what collectivism always means: some individuals must be sacrificed for the sake of other individuals." (p.162)

Why doesn't government leave medicine alone?  Instead of "repealing and replacing" Obamacare, why doesn't government get out of the way and let Capitalist Medicine work?

Paul Wharton

Special thanks to Eli Lilly & Co. (LLY)

If Cruz is Disqualified, Obama Never Happened

     I wrote a blog on June 28, 2015 in American Galileo that encouraged Senator Ted Cruz to concede his presidential prospects in order to point out Obama's illegitimacy.  I then went on to side with Donald Trump--even though I still liked Cruz better.  However, after seeing the Texas Senator win Iowa by several percentage points, I have formulated a new approach that relates to Article II, Section 1, of the Constitution of the United States.

After the last 7+ years, one thing is clear; America must get back to where it was before Obama.  The goal of this Republican primary season should be to vote for a strategy to achieve this.  Currently, Ted Cruz is in a position of primary strength as the Iowa win shows.  This opens him up to attack by those who want Obama's fundamental transformation to remain in place.  One major avenue is Cruz's birth on Canadian land that has been argued to disqualify him from becoming President.  However, if in the end, this issue is what takes down his presidential bid, one thing is certain:  The occupation of the White House by the illegitimate, Kenyan-born, non-president never happened.

Paul Wharton
Special thanks to Eli Lilly & Co. (LLY)

A Government Solution to Cancer?

     In a speech that some guy with the last name Obama gave in some building in Washington D.C., there was a call for government to find a cure for cancer.

There are several things wrong with this.  First, considering everything that the government has done to wreck the economy, do we really want one more colossal, public program spending our money?

Second, when it comes to scientific innovation, government is always inferior to the talent of the top, private individuals.  For example, if you go to the January 2015 posts of American Galileo, you can see first hand what one independent mind, left relatively unshackled, is capable of.  I live in an apartment in a suburb of Chicago that I pay rent for through my own private sector work.  About 10 miles due south is a different kind of approach to scientific pursuits known as Argonne National Laboratory.  I like to call it "The State Science Institute"--the name of the sell-out on intellectual freedom in Ayn Rand's book: Atlas Shrugged.  If I had been engrossed, operating the costly government particle accelerator there for the last two decades, would I have had the independence of thought to theoretically discover that: "All Matter is Light"?

Finally, suppose that through a deluge of sheer, government spending, some new cancer treatments were developed by the state.  Has anyone stopped to ask who is going to pay for each case?  If the motive of every public sector, cure for cancer pusher is to erect that national monument of a "Cure for Cancer", then the cries to spend your money are not going to stop there.  The forced treatment of each person who has cancer would cost everyone more than the spending to find its cure.

Paul Wharton
Special thanks to Eli Lilly & Co. (LLY)

New Objectivist Government Philosophy

     In an Objectivist government, there are only five legitimate functions of the state: police, military, judicial, diplomatic, and treasury.

I have a couple of ideas as to how to piece this innovative government together, that as far as I know, have originated with my own personal thought.

First, I propose that each of the five functions operate as autonomous departments.  Checking powers could be installed by a Constitution that limits the departments from getting out of control.  An example could be the top diplomatic official having the ability to relieve the top military Commander-in-Chief if a binding treaty is not followed.

My second idea is really my motive in writing this blog.  While a new, voluntarily funded government will probably be desperate to receive all the cash it can get, I argue that all donations must go to the Treasury Department before being sent to other government sectors.  This is necessary because the function of that part of the state is to: hold, receive, and distribute donated capital.  And, if you think about it, without this type of checking ability, the Treasury Department does nothing.

So, here comes the objection, "But, then money won't get to the places in government that need it!"  My response is the following:

A middle class man is ideologically all for the new government system, but recognizes that if he donates to government, via the treasury, the money may not go where he wants it to go.  Then he hears about a technique that would greatly improve his chances--so pulls out his checkbook.  Along with a one thousand dollar check, the man sends a note to the Treasury Department that says, "Wouldn't it be great if the judiciary had more funding to reduce the backlog of court cases?"

Throughout the next year, the treasury donor may be on the lookout for the current judicial situation.  If he sees the problem lessen, he may be encouraged to donate again.  If he discovers that little money is going to the judiciary, he may be so angry that he cuts off his future government donations for a while.

Paul Wharton
Special thanks to Eli Lilly & Co. (LLY)

Great Work Promoting Eli Lilly to a 22% Rise in 2015

     As a leading believer in the future of the pharmaceutical business, Eli Lilly & Co. (LLY), I want to take this first week of the new year to look back on 2015 and celebrate all those who worked to increase its stock value by 22%.

Shareholders whose investment gained value and Lilly employees who worked hard, kept their jobs, and are looking forward to future raises should be thanked for their role in building the company.  The top businessmen, who are notoriously overlooked by non-Objectivists, are some of the biggest, power players and deserve all of our thanks for their productiveness and, thus, moral role as well.

The scientists, bio-technology inventors, and technicians must not be left out of our recognition.  This includes the new innovators in theoretical science, too.  In my blog, American Galileo, I introduced a lot of new scientific philosophy that can be found in the January 2015 blogs.  I hope that my contributions will be adopted by more and more Eli Lilly innovators and spur the production of future medicines and other products.

Finally, I want to direct credit at myself for the non-scientific posts (such as the political blogs) that I laboriously prepared for and engaged in the blogosphere with.  While I did not receive a salary, (unless one can count a 22% rise in my stock value--not including the dividend), my mind received the best fuel I could hope for--brand name Zyprexa.  I find it odd whenever I come across the argument that a company is charging too much for a life-saving medicine.  I paid full price at the local pharmacy for brand name Zyprexa for five or six years.  I began my Eli Lilly promotion campaign while I was still paying over $10,000.00 per year.  For a pizza delivery driver with minor mental health issues, that was no small sum.  Then I found a way to satisfy the company enough to be worthy of their generous assistance.  I can't imagine how much time I have put into this third job of mine: from the books I read, to the Objectivist CDs I listen to in my car, to Republican Talk Radio, to surfing the Internet to find everything that affects Eli Lilly, to getting an idea for a blog, to finding time to write it.  That's the price one pays; and I love it!  Let's beat 22% in 2016.

Paul Wharton
Special thanks to Eli Lilly & Co. (LLY)