Taxation is theft. Doubly so when it goes to fund Critical Race Theory, retarded Democrat governors/mayors/DAs and feds that tell us antifa isn't real.
Taxes on income is theft. Taxes on property, goods and services are a part of the mutual agreement of the people of the United States and the government to enable and enforce the constitution.
I like some of what she says but her supporting BLM is a major red flag. She could’ve said of course she is against racism but this is a false narrative
The LP is run by a bunch of retards. A few years back when the left was screeching about "abolish ICE" they were on board with that too, while apparently failing to realize that the left would only support them in the "open borders" portion of their "no taxes + open borders + no welfare state" vision of America and that there is no broad support for the "no welfare state" portion.
Similarly on the right there is much broader support for the "no taxes" portion of their platform than the "no welfare state" portion, which is one reason we have such a massive problem with debt.
If the LP by some miracle ever ascended to power we would have no taxes, open borders, and a massive welfare state; and we would quickly cease to exist as a functional state.
Milton Friedman once said you can’t have open borders and a welfare state. I can see the logic. I used to be very libertarian. I still hold some of the views because small govt is the answer but now I just support whoever is trying to shrink the size of govt.
Of course you can't. What would stop people from just pouring in, taking everything, then going over to the next ripe and retarded field to steal from there as well?
Well, AnCaps have ideas about national defense funded through voluntary means. They are entirely theoretical, because we don't have ancaptopia anywhere, just saying that we see the value of a national defense.
What guarantees people will actually voluntarily do it though? Logically you can convince people, but at the same time people aren't logical.
I'm not trying to be an ass here, but I genuinely don't get it. How do you make something necessary for basic safety and survival of everyone collectively based on voluntary actions without it failing?
National defense is provided by private security companies. If it is worth it, people will pay for it voluntarily. You and I might not have enough cash, but Amazon and Walmart are very concerned about shipping lanes.
Well, the model I'm most familiar with is an insurance model. Your home insurance company has an interest in your property not being destroyed in an invasion, as well as your continued ability to pay your subscription fees. So, when most of the people in an area are insured, it's less expensive for the insurance companies to hire mercenaries to defend the area than it is for them to lose all their customers or pay to rebuild a whole city.
They don't do this right now because taxpayers are required to fund things, so they can profit from living under the national defense.
The threat of it actually being permitted to fail should be fairly strong as a persuader.
Like..well, this is a small scale example, but consider a town's police department. Only the citizens of that town should be funding it. If there's suddenly no funding for it, that can only really mean a few things. If everyone chose to not fund it, let them reap the consequences of no police. That town might burn down, or it could thrive, it depends on the citizens and how well they adjust to having to uphold the law on their own.
If the town burns down (literally or figuratively), it will affect import/export at the least. This causes trouble for outside groups who may have enough incentive to step in and put out the fire. Or, who knows, maybe the town gets quarantined so no one has to deal with them anymore.
It's kind of like legalizing suicide. You couldn't charge anyone in the first place, but there's a fear that everyone might commit suicide if you say it's okay. To me, ancap is like that, where you just bite the bullet and let populations destroy themselves if they choose to, while hoping that instead you end up with a more happy and productive set of remaining populations.
This needs to be highlighted. The LP party is run by a bunch of weirdo retards.
I can see voting for them in the less important elections as a protest vote, knowing full well they won't win squat. But with the global establishment throwing everything at Trump this election, it is absolutely essential Trump gets every vote he can get. If Trump can pull off this second victory it could absolutely break hollywood and other parts of the globalist narrative. It doesn't matter if Trump actually does anything in his second term, just him winning will make the SJWs self destruct. Now is not the time for protest votes.
The government can't steal from you, so you have to let the black people around you personally steal from you, yay. Soooo much better.
As long as people are harming each other on a personal level this JoJo's Bizarre Ideas clown and her friends can play their stupid games in peace.
Her campaign is using the strategy of mild BLM pandering in order to get conversations with influential lefty activists. I'm not sure why they think that's a good Ide, because those people are communists, but that's the idea. JoJo and Cohen don't support the reparations BS.
Jo is no Ron Paul. She lost my support when she started simping for commies & BLM. Proper libertarianism is against large state power & both of those groups are in direct contrast of what the LO stands for. Combine this with her saying she’s pro 2A and yet can’t answer basic questions about current laws and restrictions shows me she’s a lame duck you just as bad as the other two.. There’s a lot of division in the LP but I’m not gonna lie there’s some nuts in the fruit salad...
Charitable tax write-offs only mean you don't pay income tax on money you don't keep for your own use. It's the same principle that says you don't have to pay income tax on the wages you're paying out to your employees.
Jo Jorgensen is only useful as an instrument to argue that people who would otherwise vote Democrat but who do not like the present incarnation of the party should vote for her.
I was toying with the idea of suggesting some of my...'friends' vote Libertarian since they refuse to ever vote for Trump despite the hive of scum and villainy that is the left atm but...yeah, no, Trump is the only way foward atm.
Well, if they refuse to vote for Cheeto Hitler, convincing them to at least vote Libertarian or Green or writing in Deez Nuts is still better than if they voted Democrat.
I'm against most taxes, but the reality is that we do need some. We had property taxes to create and fix roads, but then we got income tax and it stayed. For the rich, a percentage doesn't necessarily affect them as much as the middle and lower income classes. Corporations do grow bigger faster than small businesses, and the regulations they lobby for help them even more. We should be cutting taxes for a lot of stuff, but we should keep corporate taxes and manage them more carefully so they don't screw us over every time.
The Trump tax cuts are moving toward getting us relief from being burdened by taxes, but doing it while acquiring debt may not work out well. There are tens of thousands of government jobs that must be eliminated, billions of dollars in government wages that must be cut, and benefits that should be greatly reduced.
I want to see more plans to let us keep our money while keeping government small and accountable. It can be done. It should be done.
Taxation is theft. Doubly so when it goes to fund Critical Race Theory, retarded Democrat governors/mayors/DAs and feds that tell us antifa isn't real.
Taxes on income is theft. Taxes on property, goods and services are a part of the mutual agreement of the people of the United States and the government to enable and enforce the constitution.
I like some of what she says but her supporting BLM is a major red flag. She could’ve said of course she is against racism but this is a false narrative
The LP is run by a bunch of retards. A few years back when the left was screeching about "abolish ICE" they were on board with that too, while apparently failing to realize that the left would only support them in the "open borders" portion of their "no taxes + open borders + no welfare state" vision of America and that there is no broad support for the "no welfare state" portion.
Similarly on the right there is much broader support for the "no taxes" portion of their platform than the "no welfare state" portion, which is one reason we have such a massive problem with debt.
If the LP by some miracle ever ascended to power we would have no taxes, open borders, and a massive welfare state; and we would quickly cease to exist as a functional state.
Milton Friedman once said you can’t have open borders and a welfare state. I can see the logic. I used to be very libertarian. I still hold some of the views because small govt is the answer but now I just support whoever is trying to shrink the size of govt.
Of course you can't. What would stop people from just pouring in, taking everything, then going over to the next ripe and retarded field to steal from there as well?
Well, AnCaps have ideas about national defense funded through voluntary means. They are entirely theoretical, because we don't have ancaptopia anywhere, just saying that we see the value of a national defense.
What guarantees people will actually voluntarily do it though? Logically you can convince people, but at the same time people aren't logical.
I'm not trying to be an ass here, but I genuinely don't get it. How do you make something necessary for basic safety and survival of everyone collectively based on voluntary actions without it failing?
National defense is provided by private security companies. If it is worth it, people will pay for it voluntarily. You and I might not have enough cash, but Amazon and Walmart are very concerned about shipping lanes.
Well, the model I'm most familiar with is an insurance model. Your home insurance company has an interest in your property not being destroyed in an invasion, as well as your continued ability to pay your subscription fees. So, when most of the people in an area are insured, it's less expensive for the insurance companies to hire mercenaries to defend the area than it is for them to lose all their customers or pay to rebuild a whole city.
They don't do this right now because taxpayers are required to fund things, so they can profit from living under the national defense.
The threat of it actually being permitted to fail should be fairly strong as a persuader.
Like..well, this is a small scale example, but consider a town's police department. Only the citizens of that town should be funding it. If there's suddenly no funding for it, that can only really mean a few things. If everyone chose to not fund it, let them reap the consequences of no police. That town might burn down, or it could thrive, it depends on the citizens and how well they adjust to having to uphold the law on their own.
If the town burns down (literally or figuratively), it will affect import/export at the least. This causes trouble for outside groups who may have enough incentive to step in and put out the fire. Or, who knows, maybe the town gets quarantined so no one has to deal with them anymore.
It's kind of like legalizing suicide. You couldn't charge anyone in the first place, but there's a fear that everyone might commit suicide if you say it's okay. To me, ancap is like that, where you just bite the bullet and let populations destroy themselves if they choose to, while hoping that instead you end up with a more happy and productive set of remaining populations.
This needs to be highlighted. The LP party is run by a bunch of weirdo retards.
I can see voting for them in the less important elections as a protest vote, knowing full well they won't win squat. But with the global establishment throwing everything at Trump this election, it is absolutely essential Trump gets every vote he can get. If Trump can pull off this second victory it could absolutely break hollywood and other parts of the globalist narrative. It doesn't matter if Trump actually does anything in his second term, just him winning will make the SJWs self destruct. Now is not the time for protest votes.
True.
JoJo's the reason I'm voting for Trump.
I voted Johnson in 2016. Trump proved me wrong in the last 4 years so I'm voting for him this year.
But if she supports zero taxes, how does she intend to fund reparations?
Is she advocating for more "community reparations" as we've seen in: Seattle, Portland and Chicago?
Not sure that squares with the Libertarian position.
The government can't steal from you, so you have to let the black people around you personally steal from you, yay. Soooo much better.
As long as people are harming each other on a personal level this JoJo's Bizarre Ideas clown and her friends can play their stupid games in peace.
Don't think Jo's a real Libertarian, sounds more like a commie subversive.
Her campaign is using the strategy of mild BLM pandering in order to get conversations with influential lefty activists. I'm not sure why they think that's a good Ide, because those people are communists, but that's the idea. JoJo and Cohen don't support the reparations BS.
Joseph Joestar is best JoJo.
Jo Jorgensen is worst JoJo.
Jo is no Ron Paul. She lost my support when she started simping for commies & BLM. Proper libertarianism is against large state power & both of those groups are in direct contrast of what the LO stands for. Combine this with her saying she’s pro 2A and yet can’t answer basic questions about current laws and restrictions shows me she’s a lame duck you just as bad as the other two.. There’s a lot of division in the LP but I’m not gonna lie there’s some nuts in the fruit salad...
I will say that while “charitable tax write offs” are still a thing, she’s not wrong in that statement.
Don’t know enough about her to judge her on other shit.
The Libertarian Party is more left than the Dems. They let ancoms into the party in the 90s, and that was it.
Charitable tax write-offs only mean you don't pay income tax on money you don't keep for your own use. It's the same principle that says you don't have to pay income tax on the wages you're paying out to your employees.
Jo Jorgensen is only useful as an instrument to argue that people who would otherwise vote Democrat but who do not like the present incarnation of the party should vote for her.
So, a tax cut then?
I was toying with the idea of suggesting some of my...'friends' vote Libertarian since they refuse to ever vote for Trump despite the hive of scum and villainy that is the left atm but...yeah, no, Trump is the only way foward atm.
Well, if they refuse to vote for Cheeto Hitler, convincing them to at least vote Libertarian or Green or writing in Deez Nuts is still better than if they voted Democrat.
Well isn’t it nice she supports rebates
I'm against most taxes, but the reality is that we do need some. We had property taxes to create and fix roads, but then we got income tax and it stayed. For the rich, a percentage doesn't necessarily affect them as much as the middle and lower income classes. Corporations do grow bigger faster than small businesses, and the regulations they lobby for help them even more. We should be cutting taxes for a lot of stuff, but we should keep corporate taxes and manage them more carefully so they don't screw us over every time.
The Trump tax cuts are moving toward getting us relief from being burdened by taxes, but doing it while acquiring debt may not work out well. There are tens of thousands of government jobs that must be eliminated, billions of dollars in government wages that must be cut, and benefits that should be greatly reduced.
I want to see more plans to let us keep our money while keeping government small and accountable. It can be done. It should be done.
so zero taxes
taxes are come from white supremacy, we should abolish all taxes or cheat the tamen (like many a black hollywood movie star)
No no. Let her try this. Can't wait for her to see her next paycheck.