It was actually an analysis completely devoid of emotion and with little opinion: I would see it as prima facie true that the statements made in the article are

It was actually an analysis completely devoid of emotion and with little opinion: I would see it as prima facie true that the statements made in the article are unsubstantiated by anything other than speculation. Moreover, I specifically did not give a critique of Atlas Shrugged because there are a veritable deluge of them in the HN archives. Here's a discussion if you're interested: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1041751 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1041751. I should have thought any discussion about money... is indeed relevant here. No... I would think it would be trivially obvious why this is not the case. Atlas Shrugged is Fisher Price philosophy (I'm a philosophy minor). We don't even see it worth discussing simply because the biggest assumptions in her arguments are placed as axioms.