Can't Kill This, Chump!

[Tahlvin]

Can't we just all get along?

[Cazmonster]

[TheMaster]

[Mike]

Then vote for Gary Johnson, man. Why in holy hell would you vote for a psychopath like Trump when you have a politician out there and in the running who actually agrees with you on everything? As opposed to a vote for Trump to "shake things up". You think Libertarians gaining more power wouldn't shake things up?

Also note that the stuff I'm putting out there about what Libertarians believe in is what they actually believe in. You say that "immigration is clearly the government's job", and that's true, but according to the Libertarian party platform, they would only keep out people who were obviously dangerous. If you have no criminal record, and you want to come to this country to work... go for it, pretty much no questions asked.

You say, "Government can still hire private contractors." No... not under Libertarians. When they say they won't be involved, they mean they won't be spending ANY money on it. No government employees to handle it... no hired contractors... no one. If the people want stuff done, they'll find a way, and it's none of the government's business.

If you believe in most or all of the things on the Libertarian platform, then good for you. Go support them. However, if you also don't see the importance of free, universal public education in this country, then I don't see where you and I can even open up a basic political discussion. The end of free, public education in this nation would be the end of the United States as a competitive economic power. If that's not obvious to you, then I suppose we could start the discussion there.

[Cazmonster]

[TheMaster]

The reasons you listed are the reason I'm not 100% for the Libertarian party. And i will be voting for Gary Johnson (assuming he is on my ballot). Not because i think he can win, but i know that no matter how i vote trump will win my state. and if Gary Johnson can get 15% of the vote in November that party will have a real chance at winning in years to come.

As for Free Public Schools. I Agree they are needed and welcome. I just believe that the Federal Government needs to stay out of it. Leave those kind of decisions to the local schools and city governments. We need a whole rework of the Education system in America. The fact that I have to study Literature to get an Engineering degree is dumb. If I can read and write, I should be done with that portion of education (as an engineer). Same for someone that wants to teach Literature. They don't need Algebra in order to teach about Hamlet, so why do they need to bust their tails to barely sneak by with a passing grade. and i know there are people that can easily do math and literature, but what im trying to say is that, if you dont need a subject past a certain point, why must you continue to learn it? If I can go the rest of my life (and have a good life) without knowing that 3*6=18, why do i have to learn that?

We should start encouraging specialized learning at a far younger age. I know that if I would have been given the opportunity to explore things i was into at a younger age i would have a completely different life.

[Mike]

Ah, then you and I do have some common ground.

Side note: the Libertarians don't say "No federal funding/involvement in education." They say government has no role in education... at any level. So when I wrote "no government funding for education" and you replied "good", I assumed you meant you agreed with the Libertarian platform, but you just meant federal. I get it.

Next one: So... you're okay with "No banking regulations"?

[Cazmonster]

[TheMaster]

I think we need to get rid of the Federal Reserve. The arbitrarily change the value of money with nothing to back it up. We need to get back to the Gold Standard.

As far as banks being regulated by the government, I don't know enough about what they actually regulate (other than what The Fed does). So, I can't give too much of an educated discussion on that.

Edited to delete repetitiveness.

[Mike]

Oh, how I wish Salvation would read this thread.

I know the gold standard is a horrible idea, but I don't remember the details well enough to explain why without sounding half-assed, and I don't have time for research.

As for banking regulations and the Fed, this country had a steady cycle of severe economic depression every 30 or 40 years, until the Great Depression, which was the worst. That prompted federal regulation of financial markets and institutions and we haven't had a depression for 100 years. Every once in a while, advancing culture and technology create new area that are unregulated. Every once in a while, there's a push for deregulation to "spur growth". And in those times, we see things like the savings and loan crisis of the 80's, or the housing market crash and subsequent recession that started at the end of the Bush era. THAT is what happens when there is insufficient oversight. It's not a matter of the general public choosing good institutions over bad, because they're ALL crooked when the law allows, and because the average person usually has no clue what's good and what's bad even with decent research. How does the average working person sort good from bad when the banks have billions to spend convincing you that everything they're doing is good for you?

[Elle]

My question for Mike is whether your libertarian dystopia differs from a 21st century Republican dystopia. I don't see much difference besides less fair taxes, more waging of foreign wars, and more government handouts to industries that aren't always very good citizens who deserve it, to put it mildly. So all of that strongly favors libertarians over the GOP, with the bonus that they can get stoned legally and stop trying so hard.

[Mike]

[Eliahad]

I think some of these things only work if you believe beyond all belief that people don't cheat. And I would say that MOST people don't cheat, but some do, and in order to have free AND fair go together, no one can cheat. But people DO! So...well...how do we reconcile that?

[Elle]

As a practical reality, if you're really pro-life and anti-drug, pro-banks and pro-intervention in foreign conflicts, then vote GOP and not Libertarian. Otherwise I see no meaningful practical difference. The GOP would be delighted to wipe out spending on almost any social service; they might pay lip service to preserving social security because most people don't compute that this IS welfare, but they want to privatize and minimize it. They have resisted almost any form of spending besides massive corporate welfare. So I really do see libertarians today as a step up from rock bottom.

[Elle]

I forgot education policy: private school vouchers plus cutting spending as much as possible, while demanding crazy false shit be put in the curriculum and basic true facts be left out, is what the GOP does. Libertarianism cannot be worse than that, because again as a practical reality, nobody is going to fully eliminate public education.

[Mike]

[Elle]

But the difference is that Republicans really DO the things I'm talking about. They really have effed with curricula and they really do make it impossible to have factual sex ed and history books! They really have slashed school funding to the point that education is suffering! They really have made it damn near impossible to get abortions in various places!

Likewise, Trump really would be able to implement much of the crazy stuff he's talking about doing - he may fail, but I have no doubt he would cause real damage along the way and he would have the power to do a lot. Gary Johnson would try, except he ain't going to win at all, and I really don't see the majority public giving up the entitlements to which they've grown accustomed without some sort of fight he would lose. So I see little downside to voting for Gary and a lot to any vote for Trump.

[TheMaster]

[Mike]

The difference is only that the Libertarians have no power. You are judging them by two different standards. You're painting the Libertarians as less dangerous than Republicans because they have less power and thus ARE less dangerous. I'm comparing only their stated philosophies based on their party platforms. If Libertarians gained the sort of influence that Republicans have, the awesome benefits of their liberal social agenda would be far outweighed by their... everything else.

You are are arguing that Republicans are more of a threat than Libertarians to the things that are important to you. I can't argue with you. You are absolutely right. I was talking about something completely different.

[Elle]

I would have to read the platforms to be sure, but I'm not sure I wouldn't prefer the Libertarian platform to the Republican one. But I will concede the theoretical argument because I don't really know. My vote would be purely practical. None of these jokers are my preference. But I would love to see a legit Libertarian alternative on the local and state ballots where I live, rather than knowing the latest effective water carrier for the rich and already-powerful is automatically going to prevail. I could be a one-issue climate/environmental protection voter, but the Greens are nutjobs and Jill Stein is a nutjob class 1. They'll never be a viable third party the way the Libertarians might be.

And the GOP deserves to be collapsed for giving us Trump as their nominee. If the Libertarian Phoenix rises from those ashes, so be it.