Libertarian Discussion Thread

[Colorado-Kansas]

Wish me luck... IC Regional elections are starting in my 80% Conservative region.

[Colorado-Kansas]

[Agritum]

Wow. You would think more libertarians would support Donald Trump, but apparently no.

Why so?

[Anarcho capitalist utopia]

Wow. You would think more libertarians would support Donald Trump, but apparently no.

Why so?

Why do you care? You are a centrist- not a libertarian.

[Zurkerx]

New poll

Of course I don't support him, his policies are in line with nationalists, populists, and protectionists. Libertarians that support him need to re-evaluate themselves.

[Mazujotai]

Why so?

Why do you care? You are a centrist- not a libertarian.

because asking questions is good and constructive to discussion?

I'd assume it has a lot to do with protectionism and similar economic principles trump has exposed which put him at odds which the Laissez-faire crowed isn't to big on considering its goal is to restrict trade with outside entities to a degree or to make importing less profitable.

Laissez-faire free market principles don't at least how I understand it play very well with Economic Nationalism because Laissez-faire economics seek to diminish the role of the government in almost all economic capacity while economic nationalism is using the state to protect the interests of the economy at home and the use of the nations economic clout to influence its geopolitical standing.

[Len Hyet]

Why so?

Why do you care? You are a centrist- not a libertarian.

I'm a Libertarian.

Why on earth would I support Trump?

[The Flutterlands]

Trump just infuriates me. Sometimes makes me wonder if a Mike Pence Theocracy is worth the 25th.

[Agritum]

Why so?

Why do you care? You are a centrist- not a libertarian.

I'm a cousin to libertarian thought as a liberal in the European sense, hence I've settled here as far as possible from Marxists and Tories assorted. I very much care.

[Taihei Tengoku]

A bag of dice renders the whole "support/oppose" question moot--I like the dice when it gives me two sixes and dislike it when it gives snake eyes.

Well given that Clinton was a guaranteed negative, I absolutely support President Bag-O'-Dice.

Clinton was a guaranteed negative with a (generally perceived) tight band of uncertainty. Trump is probably still centered below zero but has a much wider band of possibilities, some of which might be above zero and some of it might be much lower than even Clinton's lower bound. Given that when dealing with people and policies such things are hard to quantify and very fudgy, it's believable that people would fudge against Trump.

[Telconi]

Well given that Clinton was a guaranteed negative, I absolutely support President Bag-O'-Dice.

Clinton was a guaranteed negative with a (generally perceived) tight band of uncertainty. Trump is probably still centered below zero but has a much wider band of possibilities, some of which might be above zero and some of it might be much lower than even Clinton's lower bound. Given that when dealing with people and policies it is hard to quantify and very fudgy, it's believable that people would fudge against Trump.

Basically if you had to imagine it as an equation, Clinton was a -4 With a deviation of +/- 1. Whereas Trump was a -2 With a deviation of +/-4. There's a significant chance that Trump would end up worse than Clinton, but a greater chance he'd end up better. Also, he was the only primary candidate with a chance of creating a net positive outcome.

[Agritum]

I should add that, while finding the Trump presidency loathsome the collateral effects his election win brought to proceedings that directly interest me, such as renewed interest in an autonomous European common defense system and the EU's stand as the new prospective champion of free trade in the world were much needed.The Obama leadership was too reassuring and we lazed off.

[Taihei Tengoku]

Clinton was a guaranteed negative with a (generally perceived) tight band of uncertainty. Trump is probably still centered below zero but has a much wider band of possibilities, some of which might be above zero and some of it might be much lower than even Clinton's lower bound. Given that when dealing with people and policies it is hard to quantify and very fudgy, it's believable that people would fudge against Trump.

Basically if you had to imagine it as an equation, Clinton was a -4 With a deviation of +/- 1. Whereas Trump was a -2 With a deviation of +/-4. There's a significant chance that Trump would end up worse than Clinton, but a greater chance he'd end up better. Also, he was the only primary candidate with a chance of creating a net positive outcome.

Again, there's no way to assign actual numbers to these so the way you fudge is the way you fudge.

Also Trump was a DNC active measure gone wrong so I doubt he was the "only primary candidate"

[Agritum]

Kasich was better than all of the GOP primary candidates and better than Clinton, and I say so as a pretty convinced Clinton supporter.

Furthermore, I believe he could have actually won the popular vote by a fair margin.

[Telconi]

Basically if you had to imagine it as an equation, Clinton was a -4 With a deviation of +/- 1. Whereas Trump was a -2 With a deviation of +/-4. There's a significant chance that Trump would end up worse than Clinton, but a greater chance he'd end up better. Also, he was the only primary candidate with a chance of creating a net positive outcome.

Again, there's no way to assign actual numbers to these so the way you fudge is the way you fudge.

Also Trump was a DNC active measure gone wrong so I doubt he was the "only primary candidate"

There absolutely is a way to actually assign numbers. I just did it in a crude form.

[The Liberated Territories]

Kasich was better than all of the GOP primary candidates and better than Clinton, and I say so as a pretty convinced Clinton supporter.

Furthermore, I believe he could have actually won the popular vote by a fair margin.

Kaisch is absolutely corrupt.

http://www.cleveland.com/opinion/index. ... ments.html

https://voicesofliberty.com/2015/07/29/ ... hn-kasich/

http://plunderbund.com/2015/10/15/kasic ... ly-deadly/

Using the law as a political weapon is something I find irredeemable. Its like the middle class folks who evict/arrest black tenants through sound ordinances and curfew.

[Brasillie]

Can i join the club, statists? (ancap here)

[The Liberated Territories]

Also RIP obamacare

Perhaps now we can finally have a healthcare system that isn't a flawed crapitalist mess.

[Brasillie]

Also RIP obamacare

Perhaps now we can finally have a healthcare system that isn't a flawed crapitalist mess.

I've never understood this obamacare, is it just a failed state health project, or is there anything else?

[The Liberated Territories]

Also RIP obamacare

Perhaps now we can finally have a healthcare system that isn't a flawed crapitalist mess.

I've never understood this obamacare, is it just a failed state health project, or is there anything else?

Obamacare td;lr version: healthcare insurance is mandated by the government. Essentially all candidates of healthcare are forced to be treated equally, which anyone with a passing knowledge of how insurance works would realize that is a very bad idea. Imagine a car insurance company that charges the same rates for a reckless driver as much as a safe driver. Yeah

It also had a myriad of other restrictions that were anti market, like insurance companies being limited based on area, and subsidizing basically everything.

[Brasillie]

I've never understood this obamacare, is it just a failed state health project, or is there anything else?

Obamacare td;lr version: healthcare insurance is mandated by the government. Essentially all candidates of healthcare are forced to be treated equally, which anyone with a passing knowledge of how insurance works would realize that is a very bad idea. Imagine a car insurance company that charges the same rates for a reckless driver as much as a safe driver. Yeah

It also had a myriad of other restrictions that were anti market, like insurance companies being limited based on area, and subsidizing basically everything.

Oh, I never thought Obama was as socialist as he is :/

[Agritum]

https://fee.org/articles/how-much-homog ... iety-need/

This apparently triggered entryists pretty well.

[Omakhandia]

Why would any true libertarian support Donald Trump? Aside from Rick Santorum and maybe Ted Cruz, he's one of the most authoritarian US politicians out there. His years in business have conditioned him to expect others to follow his orders and carry out his demands without question. Why do you think he demands loyalty from people? He's become accustomed to being served and flattered by his underlings. He doesn't see senators (or the head of the FBI) as fellow statesmen. He sees them as employees.

Authoritarianism isn't a fatal flaw if you're running a real estate business or an oil company. Bring that kind of personality into politics, though, and you've lost my vote.

[New Visayan Islands]

I've never understood this obamacare, is it just a failed state health project, or is there anything else?

Obamacare td;lr version: healthcare insurance is mandated by the government. Essentially all candidates of healthcare are forced to be treated equally, which anyone with a passing knowledge of how insurance works would realize that is a very bad idea. Imagine a car insurance company that charges the same rates for a reckless driver as much as a safe driver. Yeah

It also had a myriad of other restrictions that were anti market, like insurance companies being limited based on area, and subsidizing basically everything.

Or smoker vs. non-smoker--and that's a smoker speaking!

[Taihei Tengoku]

https://fee.org/articles/how-much-homogeneity-does-society-need/

This apparently triggered entryists pretty well.

Jeff Tucker is one that Gets It