5 ms·

The if Hilary claimed she would pardon Snowden I'd vote for her in a heartbeat. I hate her because to me she seems to want to expand the surveillance state. I h

The if Hilary claimed she would pardon Snowden I'd vote for her in a heartbeat. I hate her because to me she seems to want to expand the surveillance state. I hate Trump because with a surveillance state anyone who makes fun of his hands would/could be arrested... Hence, at the moment I'm voting Gary Johnson, who I actually think is the most qualified, but also made it clear he wants to downsize the NSA

vcarl 10y ago
Gary Johnson wants to get rid of the Department of Education[0] and is against mandatory vaccinations[1]. [0]: https://www.johnsonweld.com/education https://www.johnsonweld.com/education [1]: https://twitter.com/govgaryjohnson/status/113419678730301440 https://twitter.com/govgaryjohnson/status/113419678730301440
- lettergram 10y ago
  I'm not going to get into a flame war, but pretty much everything related to libertarians are freedom of choice. I strongly agree that mandatory vaccinations on a national level should not be required. As long as it does not harm me, I don't think I should disallow someone to do it. That is to say, I don't think I should, or society should pressure our beliefs on others. I would vaccinate my own children because it makes sense to, but I wouldn't force my neighbor to at gun point because that isn't going to help anyone. Which is the whole premise of the libertarian party.
  - JoeAltmaier 10y ago
    But everything affects others, especially in this ever-more-connected-and-congested world. Standards are useful for computer, and for people. Libertarianism has attractions, but idealism only goes so far. I believe the Libertarian world would collapse in flames (or disease, or hunger, or congestion).
    - deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]
    - jshevek 10y ago
      There are multiple approaches to structuring society consistent with the idea that violence shouldn't be used to coerce people into desired behavior. There are multiple libertarian worlds.
  - allendoerfer 10y ago
    I really like the idea of the small state. Things should be as simple as possible, but not simpler. Children have rights and when parents do not protect these rights, the state has to. There is a hierarchy of rights. The right of the child to be healthy is greater than the right of the parent to ignore scientific evidence.
    - JustSomeNobody 10y ago
      Very well said. (I know we're supposed to avoid comments like mine, but this one needed it.)
    - lettergram 10y ago
      I strongly agree with that in general, I just think it might be enforced differently. For example, you lose social security benefits if you do heroine, but heroine isn't illegal. In the case of children I agree for like polio, but perhaps not flu. Either way it's hard to judge and the major point of libertarians is that the state should decide. For example, a west Nile vaccine makes sense for almost everywhere. Besides the bay area which has no mosquitos. I'm sure Gary Johnson would agree to some extent, and he has already changed his mind when presented with evidence.
      - allendoerfer 10y ago
        > I strongly agree with that in general, I just think it might be enforced differently. For example, you lose social security benefits if you do heroine, but heroine isn't illegal. I think it should be illegal, but junkies should not be prosecuted. So I have a similar stance. The US seems to be goldmine for political activists. It is already very rich and successful and many of its social problems can be changed just through policies (e.g. prison population). It is interesting how different (neo-)liberalism is seen in Europe vs. the US. When conservatives in the US speak about liberals they mean ordoliberalism and leftism, meaning increasing rights for people and decreasing rights for corporations, while Europe's left means the exact opposite, when it speaks about neoliberalism. Both are wrong. (Neo-)liberalism includes both social liberalism and market liberalism. Maybe "individualism" is an easier term to describe the general idea. It should be seen as a second dimension on top of the left-right spectrum. You can introduce liberal policies that harm or help the poor or the rich. I do not know the Libertarian party in the US, but what you are describing as libertarian here does not seem libertarian to me at all. Just careful and sensible liberalism. Libertarianism has some anarchist vibes to it. I would say the Tea party has libertarian policies.
  - hueving 10y ago
    People skipping vaccines does affect you. http://www.vaccines.gov/basics/protection/ http://www.vaccines.gov/basics/protection/
  - anexprogrammer 10y ago
    Suggest you find out about the herd effect[1] as far as vaccines is concerned. Not having full vaccination does harm you. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herd_immunity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herd_immunity
  - philsnow 10y ago
    Not enforcing vaccinations leads to loss of herd immunity [0] which means that you (and any children you may have) are more likely to catch whooping cough, typhoid, etc etc. Therefore by your logic, you should be for mandatory vaccinations. This is a valid and consistent opinion for a libertarian to hold. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herd_immunity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herd_immunity
    - jessaustin 10y ago
      In the second paragraph of your link, one learns that only certain individuals with particular conditions actually benefit from herd immunity over simple vaccination. We can assume that none of those people are libertarians, so the "valid libertarian opinion" is simply to vaccinate and let others do as they will. The primary victims of the lessened herd immunity that results from less than total vaccination are the people who don't vaccinate. This is a problem that solves itself. Presumably Gary Johnson simply opposes the creation of some sort of Trumpian Vaccination-or-Death Squad.
  - colemickens 10y ago
    >As long as it does not harm me, I don't think I should disallow someone to do it. Oh, so you don't understand the most fundamental bits of science at play in the vaccination debate. Why am I not surprised. I recommend you Google "vaccines herd immunity". Children have already fallen gravely ill in some places in CA because of the stupidity enabled by this "libertarian" mindset.
- empath75 10y ago
  While I'm personally in favor of mandatory vaccination for kids, there's an argument to be made for not requiring them by law. There's all kinds of ways to use the levers of government to induce people into getting their kids vaccinated without making them mandatory.
wes-k 10y ago
And get rid of the EPA and the federal department of education right? Libertarians are interesting. Them wanting a small gov always has something anyone would agree with.
- icelancer 10y ago
  >And get rid of the EPA Yeah, no. Not Gary Johnson. Source: http://www.latimes.com/opinion/editorials/la-ed-gary-johnson-libertarian-transcript-20160729-snap-story.html http://www.latimes.com/opinion/editorials/la-ed-gary-johnson... On the other hand in northern New Mexico, there was a Molycorp mine. There was metals contamination in the Red River. It had gone on for decades. And for decades politically it was being protected because of the jobs that were involved. I took office and I said, you’ve got to clean this up. You have to come to the table and you have to clean this up. They refused to come to the table. So my biggest club in the bag was, I am going to declare you a Superfund site. I’m going to hand you over to federal EPA unless you come to the table in 30 days and come up with a plan for fixing your metals contamination. And they claimed that it was natural! It was ludicrous. It was a slap in the face. And they refused to come to the table. My phone is ringing off the hook, politically. It’s ringing off the hook. There were all these jobs. And my response was: “These people are bad actors and they have to be brought to the table.” Thirty days went by and they became a Superfund site. So there’s an example of the EPA and why the EPA should exist. And why government should exist to protect us against those who would do us harm. And in this case the Libertarian argument would be, as individuals we could have brought suit against polluters. We can bring suit individually. Well, in the case of Molycorp, you know what, they would have been able to withstand any individuals trying to bring that suit against them.

vcarl 10y ago

Gary Johnson wants to get rid of the Department of Education[0] and is against mandatory vaccinations[1]. [0]: https://www.johnsonweld.com/education https://www.johnsonweld.com/education [1]: https://twitter.com/govgaryjohnson/status/113419678730301440 https://twitter.com/govgaryjohnson/status/113419678730301440

lettergram 10y ago
I'm not going to get into a flame war, but pretty much everything related to libertarians are freedom of choice. I strongly agree that mandatory vaccinations on a national level should not be required. As long as it does not harm me, I don't think I should disallow someone to do it. That is to say, I don't think I should, or society should pressure our beliefs on others. I would vaccinate my own children because it makes sense to, but I wouldn't force my neighbor to at gun point because that isn't going to help anyone. Which is the whole premise of the libertarian party.
- JoeAltmaier 10y ago
  But everything affects others, especially in this ever-more-connected-and-congested world. Standards are useful for computer, and for people. Libertarianism has attractions, but idealism only goes so far. I believe the Libertarian world would collapse in flames (or disease, or hunger, or congestion).
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - jshevek 10y ago
    There are multiple approaches to structuring society consistent with the idea that violence shouldn't be used to coerce people into desired behavior. There are multiple libertarian worlds.
- allendoerfer 10y ago
  I really like the idea of the small state. Things should be as simple as possible, but not simpler. Children have rights and when parents do not protect these rights, the state has to. There is a hierarchy of rights. The right of the child to be healthy is greater than the right of the parent to ignore scientific evidence.
  - JustSomeNobody 10y ago
    Very well said. (I know we're supposed to avoid comments like mine, but this one needed it.)
  - lettergram 10y ago
    I strongly agree with that in general, I just think it might be enforced differently. For example, you lose social security benefits if you do heroine, but heroine isn't illegal. In the case of children I agree for like polio, but perhaps not flu. Either way it's hard to judge and the major point of libertarians is that the state should decide. For example, a west Nile vaccine makes sense for almost everywhere. Besides the bay area which has no mosquitos. I'm sure Gary Johnson would agree to some extent, and he has already changed his mind when presented with evidence.
    - allendoerfer 10y ago
      > I strongly agree with that in general, I just think it might be enforced differently. For example, you lose social security benefits if you do heroine, but heroine isn't illegal. I think it should be illegal, but junkies should not be prosecuted. So I have a similar stance. The US seems to be goldmine for political activists. It is already very rich and successful and many of its social problems can be changed just through policies (e.g. prison population). It is interesting how different (neo-)liberalism is seen in Europe vs. the US. When conservatives in the US speak about liberals they mean ordoliberalism and leftism, meaning increasing rights for people and decreasing rights for corporations, while Europe's left means the exact opposite, when it speaks about neoliberalism. Both are wrong. (Neo-)liberalism includes both social liberalism and market liberalism. Maybe "individualism" is an easier term to describe the general idea. It should be seen as a second dimension on top of the left-right spectrum. You can introduce liberal policies that harm or help the poor or the rich. I do not know the Libertarian party in the US, but what you are describing as libertarian here does not seem libertarian to me at all. Just careful and sensible liberalism. Libertarianism has some anarchist vibes to it. I would say the Tea party has libertarian policies.
- hueving 10y ago
  People skipping vaccines does affect you. http://www.vaccines.gov/basics/protection/ http://www.vaccines.gov/basics/protection/
- anexprogrammer 10y ago
  Suggest you find out about the herd effect[1] as far as vaccines is concerned. Not having full vaccination does harm you. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herd_immunity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herd_immunity
- philsnow 10y ago
  Not enforcing vaccinations leads to loss of herd immunity [0] which means that you (and any children you may have) are more likely to catch whooping cough, typhoid, etc etc. Therefore by your logic, you should be for mandatory vaccinations. This is a valid and consistent opinion for a libertarian to hold. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herd_immunity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herd_immunity
  - jessaustin 10y ago
    In the second paragraph of your link, one learns that only certain individuals with particular conditions actually benefit from herd immunity over simple vaccination. We can assume that none of those people are libertarians, so the "valid libertarian opinion" is simply to vaccinate and let others do as they will. The primary victims of the lessened herd immunity that results from less than total vaccination are the people who don't vaccinate. This is a problem that solves itself. Presumably Gary Johnson simply opposes the creation of some sort of Trumpian Vaccination-or-Death Squad.
- colemickens 10y ago
  >As long as it does not harm me, I don't think I should disallow someone to do it. Oh, so you don't understand the most fundamental bits of science at play in the vaccination debate. Why am I not surprised. I recommend you Google "vaccines herd immunity". Children have already fallen gravely ill in some places in CA because of the stupidity enabled by this "libertarian" mindset.
empath75 10y ago
While I'm personally in favor of mandatory vaccination for kids, there's an argument to be made for not requiring them by law. There's all kinds of ways to use the levers of government to induce people into getting their kids vaccinated without making them mandatory.

wes-k 10y ago

And get rid of the EPA and the federal department of education right? Libertarians are interesting. Them wanting a small gov always has something anyone would agree with.

icelancer 10y ago
>And get rid of the EPA Yeah, no. Not Gary Johnson. Source: http://www.latimes.com/opinion/editorials/la-ed-gary-johnson-libertarian-transcript-20160729-snap-story.html http://www.latimes.com/opinion/editorials/la-ed-gary-johnson... On the other hand in northern New Mexico, there was a Molycorp mine. There was metals contamination in the Red River. It had gone on for decades. And for decades politically it was being protected because of the jobs that were involved. I took office and I said, you’ve got to clean this up. You have to come to the table and you have to clean this up. They refused to come to the table. So my biggest club in the bag was, I am going to declare you a Superfund site. I’m going to hand you over to federal EPA unless you come to the table in 30 days and come up with a plan for fixing your metals contamination. And they claimed that it was natural! It was ludicrous. It was a slap in the face. And they refused to come to the table. My phone is ringing off the hook, politically. It’s ringing off the hook. There were all these jobs. And my response was: “These people are bad actors and they have to be brought to the table.” Thirty days went by and they became a Superfund site. So there’s an example of the EPA and why the EPA should exist. And why government should exist to protect us against those who would do us harm. And in this case the Libertarian argument would be, as individuals we could have brought suit against polluters. We can bring suit individually. Well, in the case of Molycorp, you know what, they would have been able to withstand any individuals trying to bring that suit against them.