Tbh, libertarian economics =/= GOP economics... libertarians want to fix the disaster that is our monetary policy by restoring sound money... a big part of the reason why the economic climate is so ty for young people is because of decades of Fed-engineered boom and bust cycles along with the constant debasement of our fiat currency... just getting back to sound money alone will do a world of good for the economy, imho...
Actually, no... Gary Johnson was just flat-out wrong on a number of libertarian issues, including drones, "humanitarian" wars, and the Federal Reserve (which he naively thinks is a public construct that we can regulate instead of a private cartel that needs to be abolished)...
Does sound money = gold standard?
It would take at least two years for them to get their together and decide to jettison the cons, and actually jettison them. Then they start talking up their libertarian POVs. Do you think that all of these young people will build up trust for the party in two short years?
I think that they have to change their stripes and take their lumps for a few years before this big of a transformation is to work.
The underlying problem is that pro-lifers have a logically flawed argument if they allow for exceptions in the event of rape or incest. It's a damned of you do, damned if you don't scenario.
A) If you say abortion shouldn't be allowed for rape or incest, then you're an insensitive asshole and you'll get clobbered by the woman vote.
B) If you say it should be allowed, you come off as reasonable to most, but you also undercut your stance that abortion truly is murder and bring it into question. If you truly believe abortion is murder then you would think there's no scenario where abortion is acceptable.
The reason Mourdock and Akin give these quotes is because they're trying to wiggle out of A) or B). Of course what they say ends up sounding dumber than A) or B) and it backfires, but their quotes speak to the larger quandry for Republicans that it's impossible to have a logically sound pro-life stance while not coming off as an asshole to women.
AFAIK, libertarians believe in the SMALL GOVERNMENT = BEST GOVERNMENT! stuff. Lets just say I have a family member who's a major player in the Libertarian party (you can PM me if you're curious who) who's is a really close friend of Ron Paul's and her economic views are bat . She preaches the same, "REGULATION HURTS JOB CREATORS!" crap the GOP preaches. For example she has the same views of the EPA that a typical GOP politician who gets Koch money has.
Yes, the kill the fed movement and restore the currency movement is something young people could get behind, but they see through the bull trickle down, deregulate everything stuff.
As a disappointed member, the Libertarian Party is not a real representation of libertarianism anymore.... the Koch Bros. came in, took over, and turned it into a brazen money grab for tax dollars...
Regulation such as the EPA does suck, but not because it TAKES OUR JARBS... it's because regulatory bodies become corrupted the minute industry experts and special interest groups inevitably make the regulators their .... if you get rid of the regulatory bodies and the lobbyist shills that come with them, actual progress could be made on punishing polluters in court without lobbyist interference.... the fines that the EPA levies are a total joke anyway that don't stop polluters....
Ultimately, even though these regulatory bodies are set up with good intentions, they always become a way for the 1% to rig the game in their favor...
Also, being against the EPA doesn't mean libertarians are against any environmental regulation at all, we just think it should be handled at the state level instead of through a bloated, one-size-fits-none federal bureaucracy...
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
