rchive

That's kind of like saying Mitt Romney and Liz Cheney are left conservatives by the standards of the Republican Party especially after the takeover of Donald Trump in 2016. It's kind of a ridiculous definition.

I'm super late to this, but I don't think it's correct to call Chase Oliver a left libertarian. Right vs left in the context of libertarianism is capitalist property rights vs socialist or mutualist property rights. Oliver is clearly on the capitalist side. He's a bit culturally lefty as a former Democrat, gay man comfortable with Pride festivals, and an antiwar activist, but culturally lefty isn't exactly the same thing.

The Libertarian Party is about gaining support incrementally. Chase is almost certainly not going to win this year, but if he gets even 3% it will show that Gary Johnson wasn't just a fluke of circumstance. And hopefully he brings a bunch of new people into the movement, not just the paleoconservative types again.

He has already campaigned in all 50 states. He seems extremely committed.

Just want to add, if Chase seems reasonable to you and you don't have another preferred candidate, please actually support him. The Ron Paul paleoconservative wing of the Libertarian Party is criticizing him pretty hard. If he doesn't end up with support and votes, it will be harder to get a nominee that appeals to the left in the future.

I like Chase. I think he's a great speaker, and he's good at making great little one liners. I like most of his policies. I'm not fully on board with the Gaza is a genocide or puberty blockers are reversible stances, but his intentions are good even with those issues.

Some people just lurk without producing content, I guess. Also Lemmy will probably always be more fragmented than Reddit. There might be a lot more libertarian themed communities on other instances.

That is a completely legitimate concern. It's important to note that even if prisons are publicly run, there's still a bunch of private actors in the prison system in the form of the people who work in it. Prison worker unions and police unions lobby for more laws already to protect their jobs. Private prisons might make that aspect worse, but it's not like it's perfect now.

I'm obviously not advocating or defending any particular behavior.

Legally speaking, why is what age they are today relevant rather than the age they are depicted as in the picture? Like, imagine we have a picture 20 years from now of someone at age 37. It's legally fine until it's revealed it was generated in 2023 when the person in question was 17? If the exact same picture was generated a year later it's fine again?

If you make a picture today of someone based on how they looked 10 years ago, we say it's depicting that person as the age they were 10 years ago. How is what age they are today relevant?

If you make a picture today of someone based on how they looked 10 years ago, we say it's depicting that person as the age they were 10 years ago. How is what age they are today relevant?

Neither is obviously more efficient than the other overall, it depends on the structure and the incentives. People worry about private prisons for example. If you make it so the government sends people to prisons and you pay the prison a fixed rate per prisoner, of course you're gonna get skimping on services by the prisons. If you instead give the prisoner a voucher for a prison and make them pick where they go and prisons get money per voucher they get from prisoners, you're gonna get competition on quality so you'll get high quality prisons. Opposite outcomes with just a change to incentives.

In this case it's the definition of efficiency. Efficiency = (resources used up) compared to (resources taken in). How else would you even calculate it?