We pay our taxes for 2 reasons, 1) War veterans who fought for our freedoms/ against an existential threat did not all come back "able," as they where to make their way in life, if politicians start to say we don't need to pay our taxes, to compensate theses people, it leads down a morally dark paths? 2) We pay taxes because not all people are victims of their own making and we should help them overcome their circumstances (some of whom the state is to blame for those circumstances)
I guess the point is, we don't have a solution for all our problems. better stat-ism than anarchy, When we hear smth logical we will all know? have i missed smth?

Hi guys,

I really dislike MSM. This election cycle has proven to me that all they do is create false equivalences, and create horse races to drive up sales.

But I have this theory that it's the free market dictating what they air. They decide what they report on based on what drives up sales.

I was hoping I could get your thoughts on this. I apologize if this isn't the correct forum for this question, I didn't know where else to ask it.

To be clear, this is a sincere question. I'm not trying to insult anyone I am just extremely curious as to why anyone would vote for someone who has no chance of winning?

As a woman, I felt incredibly uncomfortable when I watched his comments in this video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cziR8WQCXXw

If he hasn't addressed this directly already how would I go about asking him?

I think that this article makes some good points. I see a lot of libertarians who are less effective politically than they could be because they refuse to make any compromises. Is this a fair critique?

https://therabblerouser.org/2016/09/27/how-libertarians-cripple-themselves-by-radicalism/

Trump supporter here. I am getting bit by bit disenfranchised by how he is dealing with the issues he is faces. My support for him is/was basically because he was cutting taxes, securing the borders, increasing our military strength, removing unnecessary red tapes , replacing health care, stop illegal immigration and stop refugees without vetting pouring into our borders.

But now I am having serious doubts about how he will handle difficult situations so want to know what positives are there in the other side

Would it be a good idea to contact people like Ted Cruz, John Kasich, Marco Rubio, and other such people and ask them to endorse Gary Johnson?

I am in none of their districts. I already asked my state senator to do it.

Thanks!

What are Gary's thoughts on the movement? I feel like guarenteed livable income goes hand in hand with libertarianism since it actually stimulates a consumer based economy and will ease transitioning to the new automated economy. In Startrek every one still had capital (starship, pub, restaurant,etc.) but everyone receives $100 000 a year in addition to your salary. This makes food and drinks really cheap while providing the ability to privatize most governemental social services (healthcare, mental care, etc). 19 year olds can start a business right away and provide competition to the industry without the current economic barriers in place.

Not that any of his platform matters if he chooses to sacrifice American sovereignty for the TPP tho. None of it can be accomplished if you give away your ability to legislate.

Personally I support voting for Gary especially if you live in a swing state. Doing this would make the biggest difference because it will let the Democrat and Republican parties see that they need to make compromises if they want your vote in the future. I know everyone here has a different opinion so let's hear them!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tMR2B5GsaNY

During the 60 minutes interview, it was mentioned they want to reform Medicare. What are the pros and cons for us who pay and those that receive it?

I haven't found one aspect of Johnson's fiscal platform remotely close to what Sanders was fighting for. Some of his social issues I get but anything other than that it seems to be the complete opposite of what Sanders was about.

Thanks.

Hey, everyone. Just this morning, Trump mentioned Peter Thiel as a potential nominee for the Supreme Court, which got me thinking about who Gary would nominate. It's a very big issue, as there is currently an opening and it's very possible that during the next four years at least one more seat opens up. I've been pretty underwhelmed by both parties's suggestions, but have felt unable to contribute to a lot of discussion on the subject because it feels like we don't have a ton of substance from the campaign other than the general stance we'd like to see out of our potential Nominees. Have we heard any names, or are there at least any relevant thoughts on who we'd like to see?

Or as a libertarian, that's up to the states to decide?

Gary Johnson may be running under the Libertarian party, but to me, he isn't really a libertarian. A real Libertarian believes in free market, minimal government, and no government intrusion on personal liberties. Gary is just a moderate conservative. He is pro gun control, pro TPP, pro NAFTA, anti RFRA, etc... Closest to a true Libertarian in the race was Rand Paul, but he dropped out early in the Republican primaries.

Would you rather have had Ron/Rand Paul run as the LP candidate instead of Gary Johnson?

This question came up in the AMA with Nicholas Sarwark and didn't get answered, so I was curious if anyone here could shed some light on it for me?

Thomas Paine has argued that wealth is a social construct and that in order for a capitalist society to treat its people in a humane manner it needs to systemically care for its elderly, sick as well as ensure its young people - who come into the world disadvantaged in terms of both wealth and information - are accommodated in a systemic way.

How does a Libertarian ensure populations that cannot compete in labor markets (children, disabled, elderly) have access to food, shelter, and education?

As a moderate who tends to be a bit more left than right, this concerns me. Thanks!

There are thee things I have read about Johnson that bother me, and while I'll probably still vote for him because I don't think Jill Stein has a chance without being on the ballot in all 50, we lost Bernie, and there's no way in hell I'm voting for Hillary or Trump I don't want to feel like I'm just voting for the shiniest of 3 turds.

1. I read that Johnson wants to abolish the IRS and then support our nation with tax dollars derived from sales tax.

• wouldn't this damage the governments budget and drive the price of goods and services through the roof causing greater economic suffering to the lower class?

2. I read that Johnson wants to abolish corporate income tax in hopes that if corporations have more money they will be able to invest that money in their workers and businesses to help alleviate poverty and grow the American job market.

• It's a good idea on paper, but wouldn't this hurt the federal budget and just end up with more of the same problems we are seeing today as a result of Trickle Down Economics a.k.a. Reganomics? Because of that we still have corporations cutting hours and wages for workers and giving their CEOs bonuses and raises instead of investing it in the workforce.

3. I read that Gary Johnson does not support Net Neutrality.

• Without the government stepping in to ensure that ISPs don't start setting up fast lanes for services they like and throttling services they don't how we can we ensure that the internet will remain free and open? We have already had to put net neutrality laws in effect to stop this from happening. If this has been and still is Johnson's stance does he pose a threat to Net Neutrality?

I'm a Johnson supporter, but I wonder about his ability to articulate himself, especially if he gets into the debates. I've been listening to a lot of his interviews and while I almost always agree with the root of what he's trying to say sometimes he stutters a bit and changes course mid-thought. I just wonder if once he gets more under public scrutiny if people will eat him alive with bad soundbites where it sounds like he's stammering because he doesn't know what to say or doesn't have a clear stance.

Emphasizing father's rights, circumcision on male babies and selective service.

My understanding of sales/consumption taxes is that since consumption is much more equally distributed across the income levels^1 than income, wealth, or corporate ownership, they tend to be MUCH more regressive than income, capital gains, corporate, estate, property etc. taxes. Given that our country is ALREADY suffering from dangerous and unsustainable levels of income/wealth inequality, this would seem to be a problem. However, I know that several European countries actually have a MORE regressive tax load than the US, but the net flow of resources between the country and federal government is more progressive because the expenditures are MUCH more progressive. Is this something Johnson, his campaign, or libertarians in general have considered/addressed. Does he/they/you fundamentally disagree with any of my assumptions (such as the regressive nature of sales tax, or the danger of inequality and need for some downward wealth redistribution to combat the natural tendency for wealth to accumulate).

I'd love to hear how this problem (as I see it) would be solved from the Libertarian view point. I know how it is from the Democratic view point, raise taxes on high level income, spend it on education and health care, essentially trying to make broadly accessible the ladder to wealth, and remove one of the greatest financial dangers faced by poor/lower middle class families (medical expenses swamping savings and killing future opportunities, lack of access to good medical care leaving people less capable of competing) and from the Republican point of view, bootstraps I guess, oh and if you give rich folk free rein they'll grow the economy so damn much there won't be poor people anymore, maybe I'm biased, but they honestly don't seem too interested in addressing this problem, or admitting it exists.

1 - (a family making $40,000 might spend $20,000 in a year on "consumption" while a family making $4 Million will spend $200,000 on "consumption" in a year, because you can't buy a Benz EVERY year, so 100x the income, but 10x the spending)

/r/GaryJohnson has like 6-10 new items every hour

I'm torn between Stein and Johnson. But before I choose, could someone explain Johnson's position on Carbon tax? What is that even?

Besides that, why should someone who supports Bernie support Johnson and not Stein?

Hello all. Just a quick question. I've been looking everywhere and I can't seem to find anything about it. I have tried ISideWith and plenty of searches, and nothing has come up. Any ideas?