100
Libertarian Party nominates gay candidate for 2024 presidential election
(www.washingtonblade.com)
this post was submitted on 03 Jun 2024
100 points (89.7% liked)
politics
19090 readers
5769 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
"Trust corporations to save us without any incentive to do so."
Fuck that, fuck Chase, fuck corporations.
Libertarian "thinking" in a nutshell, really
And yet, there are so many counter examples to pull from. Like, the basis of most regulations start with companies, who had been left to their own devices, completely screwing their customers, workers, and the environment.
But sure. It would work this time if we take off the guardrails.
Yep.
Clearly the problem is too much regulation! If we stop regulating companies completely, they'll ✨magically✨ just start doing the right thing.
Shhhh don't talk about historical precedent for that not working, libertarian brains can't handle that sort of stuff. Just repeat after me: TAXATION IS THEFT, FREEDOM IS SLAVERY, WAR IS PEACE
I love my increased chocolate ration
Different guardrails. Remove liability protections and strengthen having to actually repay damages.
Obviously the wizards will do it.
But only if you don't regulate them
Wizards don't have a regulatory board. It was liquidated.
glances at Communist Chinese EVs
So... Um...
One additional note, wrt his wiki page. I gotta say, quitting the Dem Party because Barack Obama didn't get us out of Iraq as promised is a more respectable position than I'd expect out of an LP candidate. After growing up with the likes of Ron Paul and Gary Johnson dominating the party, this feels like a ray of sunshine peaking out behind a very dark cloud.
Setting aside his naive take on climate change and education, I don't see much in immigration or criminal justice reform or foreign policy to explicitly hate. But I also know he's showing up as the more liberal wing of a party that's got a rather nasty John Bircher streak. Feels like he's showing up in the negative relative to a Trump campaign that's sucking up all the libertarian racists and cop lovers.
The past 40 years of complete inaction on the part of businesses determined that was a lie.
I mean, I recall seeing a ton of press a while back that the percentage of the Texas power grid that was renewable keeps growing because it's more economically viable than traditional power plants.
So, like, he may not be wrong. Solar and wind just keep getting cheaper. It's not like businesses will spend extra money to burn coal, just to spite the environment.
Let's hear how he deals with bears.
For anyone interested: The Town That Went Feral
They'll just add solar and gas to the pile and keep the coal.
I mean, I think that's what the majority of people are advocating for in green circles too, no? "No New Coal" and all that?
I don't hear much advocacy for tearing down working power plants.
Power plants don't exactly have an infinite shelf life. They get run down and need to be replaced. Eventually only building green leads to only having green.
Combine that with the ever increasing cost of actually running a coal fire plant. Shipping in hundreds of tons of coal is eventually gonna get way more expensive than operating a solar or wind farm. At that point the business owners will likely tear the plant down of their own volition to replace it with the cheaper option. (Though that will be admittedly a little slower, as you have to amortize in the construction and downtime costs.)
I hope you're right. My worry is we keep the fossil fuels as-is and just use newer technologies to facilitate even more extraction.
Did you mean to reply to me? I don't see how that is relevant.
Like, sure, oil and gas companies are corrupt and doing immoral things to prop up their industry.
But if a coal plant can sell me electricity for 5¢/kwh and the windmill company can sell it to me for 2¢/kwh, I don't care what immoral stuff they try, the consumer is gonna buy the cheaper option.
Historically fossil fuels have been the cheaper option, and most of the immoral stuff was to avoid bad press. That strategy doesn't work if you're the more expensive option. The market will in fact work for the best in that scenario.
Which isn't to say the free market always makes the "correct" decision. Fossil fuels are a great example, as they have continued to be the primary form of energy for the past 100+yrs, since it was cheap. But it looks like natural market forces are bringing us around to green slowly but surely, and Chase Oliver might be right that this is a problem that will, at this point, largely solve itself.
😁
Your cynicism is both understandable and warranted.
That said, a few Libertarians speak of pollution being a violation of the NAP.