Toni, Calem Malum, has mentioned it in response to his comment on page 17.
He refers to the author Ayn Rand.
I looked it up.
The responses were much more telling than the article.
The comments were from bent and twisted angry minds.
The article seems to promote the kind of people the entitled ones don't like.
The wealthy person.
So according to the deplorables, if you have succeeded in life, it must have been at the expense of the poor.
Or a theme along those lines.
My comments are based on, after having read her resume, the comment section that followed, and was taken over by the morons and is a list of idiots who, it appears, expects a successful person to give them his wealth because the people made the money for him to become rich.
How many holes can YOU find in that argument?
Take a moment to read it, its worth a quick read.

//Toni, Calem Malum, has mentioned it in response to his comment on page 17.
He refers to the author Ayn Rand.//

OK, but his comment on page 17 is just:

//To Altrav- Perhaps Foxy should read Ayn Rand.//

Which isn't very specific. Ayn Rand wrote a lot of stuff.

//I looked it up.//

Yes, so did I. If you Google 'Ayn Rand' you get a lot of articles about Ayn Rand. Which specific one are you referring to?

//The responses were much more telling than the article.
The comments were from bent and twisted angry minds.//

None of the sites I looked at had comment sections. I'm still in the dark here.

//Take a moment to read it, its worth a quick read.//

OK, I'll do that, if I ever find out what it is.

Toni, I suppose one of the ones I refer to is; after Googling in her name you go down to the one titled; The new age of Ayn Rand:how she won over Trump and Silicon..........
There are many more but the comments at the end of this particular article are an indictment on the loony left, and demonstrate a certain kind of social toxicity that is very disturbing.
She's just another person with an opinion.
I don't see her being that important that she commands such a large amount of negative sentiment, if any at all.
But For some reason the loony left decided that what she believes IS relevant and/or so important/relevant that it deserved to be attacked for some unknown reason.
Hmm, go figure.

//There are many more but the comments at the end of this particular article are an indictment on the loony left, and demonstrate a certain kind of social toxicity that is very disturbing.//

I dunno, most of them seem fairly mild compared to some of the rants you go on.

//She's just another person with an opinion.
I don't see her being that important that she commands such a large amount of negative sentiment, if any at all.
But For some reason the loony left decided that what she believes IS relevant and/or so important/relevant that it deserved to be attacked for some unknown reason.//

So, like most of the people you rant about then?

//Hmm, go figure.//

Oh believe me, I've tried.

OK Toni, if I put down someone or some groups, it is with reason.
If I do it is because their beliefs are questionable, yet they believe everyone who does not agree with them are wrong.
If I go on the attack it is because I don't believe they are right.
So where's the problem?
Same goes for these morons and their negative comments about Ayn Rand.
Just because she is writing about a right wing view she must be wrong, according to these halfwits.
Did you read the comments or are you going to join the loony left line to offer another superfluous lefty negative comment.
I am not caring what she says, she is allowed to say what she believes, through research and studies.
The responses are based on emotion with little or no research into her reasoning.
They just don't like what she has written.
Big deal.
They are irrelevant.
Her comments give some insights as to how one can become wealthy.
The scum have no clue about anything other than to disagree with anyone who is not left.

Hi ALTRAV...

I don't believe there's anyone on this Forum, more astute, wise, or shrewd than Ayn RAND, whether they're Left, Right or Centre. You can't achieve the world wide acclaim or intellectual accolades of Ms RAND, without recognising some notable substance about her or her views. You don't have to agree with her, just admit she's a formidable adversary if you don't?