Post by RS Davis on Jul 20, 2004 2:57:01 GMT -5
I got this question on another forum, and thought you guys might like to see my answer as well...
Do you mean personally, or do you mean his stances on issues and his priorities kind of thing? I really don't know much about him personally, but here is his bio.
As far as the issues go:
Free Trade vs. State Corporatism
The twin tenets of peace and free trade are mutually dependent. As French visionary Frederic Bastiat once said, "If goods don't cross borders, soldiers will." When countries rely upon each other in peaceful commerce, the people of those countries have every incentive to avoid violent conflict.
This is me, Rick, in the italics. I thought you might appreciate if I commented on each of these. This first one I completely agree with, and really have nothing to add. So we'll move on...
How to Stop Crime Before It Starts
"Crime rates go down when offenders must compensate their victims and responsible citizens are permitted to carry concealed weapons. Privatizing police gives them incentive to emphasize prevention and focus on violent, rather than victimless, crimes."
I really agree with this one, as well. This should be used more frequently everywhere. Something he doesn't mention in the blurb is that ending the drug war would drop our crime rates staggering amounts, as most drug related crime comes from turf wars (rather than Miller v. Busch ad wars) and people doing what they can to pay the inflated black market prices.
Military Policy and the War in Iraq
More and more Americans are coming to oppose the war, the war hawks and high government officials are beginning to distance themselves from the president, and the U.S. seems more willing than ever to pull out of Iraq.
This one I would suggest reading the whole thing, because this is a horribly vague blurb. (If you haven't figured it out, the title of each blurb is a link to a longer position paper.)
I agree on Iraq. It was an unconstitutional war, meaning Congress has no right to abrogate their constitutionally-enumerated powers to another branch of government. This blank check they wrote the President was stupid, misguided, and again, unconstitutional. If they were ready to declare war, they damn-well should have done it.
The only reason that was persuasive to me was the WMD angle. I know that if he had them, he would use them against us. But apparently, we were all wrong about the severity of the threat in Iraq, we've wasted many lives and resources, and we'll not likely see much benefit.
How to Make Health Care Affordable
"Health care and insurance costs will plummet if excess regulation is eliminated and malpractice awards are made only on the basis of strict liability. Lower costs, along with the savings from downsizing regulatory bureaucracy, will fund tax credits for those who establish Health Savings Accounts for themselves, their families, Medicare/Medicaid recipients, and the needy."
Well, MSAs were originally a libertarian idea that the Republicans ran with (along with SS privatization), just for those who think voting libertarian can not help make a change in any way. A lot of our good ideas have been stolen by the major parties, and I hope for only more.
As to this issue, the truth is that the cost of medicine is high for three reasons. (1) Greater lifesaving technology. This is important and can't be helped. (2) Unneccessary TORTs. I don't think we should limit damages, personally. I'd rather see a sorta Grand Jury system, whereby a person has to prove they have a case before they get to go to trial. That would cut down on the frivolous one-off lawsuits meant for settlement, which I think causes a lot more financial damage than the random big payouts. (3) Medicare/Medicaid. Even though I believe it to be for the best, there is no way we are going to abolish these programs, so the best thing we can do is cut down on their size and the size of the beuracracy that administers them. We need to back up out of doctor's faces and let them do what they have to do.
Gun Control Means Being Able to Hit your Target
If I have a "hot button" issue, this is definitely it. Don't even THINK about taking my guns! My rights are not negotiable, and I am totally unwilling to compromise when it comes to the Second Amendment.
Well, I'm not really a 2nd Amendment nut, so I don't really share his enthusiasm for this. I view the second amendment as just as important as the other 9 Amendments in the bill of rights - vital and non-negotiable.
How to Empower Minorities Without Reverse Discrimination!
"Prejudice is fading, yet minorities still lag behind economically. A labyrinth of licensing laws and regulations constitute the hidden roots of modern racial and ethnic discrimination."
This is so true. The Institute for Justice stands up for these people all the time who are kept from progress by entrenched licensing cabals. It's horrible, and needs to be stopped.
Should Gay Couples Be Allowed to Marry?
"Marriage partners, not government, should define the terms and spiritual orientation of their union in accordance with our nation's guarantee of religious freedom."
This is my hot button issue. This is the last great Civil Rights battle we have left, and it is extremely important to me that we take care of this. Get government out of the marriage business. I mean, gosh, state licensing of married couples was brough about as a way to prevent interracial marriage, and it is still being used today to prevent people from marrying the person they love. Make it all civil union for legal purposes, and leave the sanctity of marriage to God, churches, and individuals. Hell, heteros are doing enough on their own to destroy the sanctity of marriage...
How to Keep the Economy Up and Unemployment Down!
"Excess regulation and government spending destroy jobs and increase unemployment. Every regulator we fire results in the creation of over 150 new jobs, enough to hire the ex-regulator, the unemployed, and the able-bodied poor."
This is a good start, but sooner or later, we are going to have to face up to the fact that the Federal Reserve system is a failure.
Medical Marijuana and the Federal War on Drugs
In the 2000 campaign for president, George W. Bush said that the federal government should not interfere with the medical marijuana policies of the several states. Like so many other promises, he went back on his word and has closed down medical marijuana facilities permitted by state governments.
Agreed. I went into this already above, so I'll just leave it at that.
How to Slash Pharmaceutical Prices Virtually Overnight
"Excess regulation has increased new drug development time by a decade since the 1960s and multiplied development costs 5-fold. Consequently, our seriously ill die waiting for life-saving medicines and pay exorbitant prices when they finally can purchase them. Since these excess regulations kill many more people than they save, they can be safely eliminated, slashing pharmaceutical prices virtually overnight!"
I agree. I would even go so far as to, if not abolish, neuter the FDA, making it an information administration, rather than an approval system. They can vouch for the drugs they've tested, but let's leave people to decide for themselves their own treatment. Some would, I assume, stick with only things that the FDA had approved. Others would not. But no one would die because they didn't have the choice.
On another note, this prescription drug benefit is only going to make this worse for everybody.
Anyway, I don't agree with him 100%, but I do agree with him more than any of the other candidates. So, I'm voting for him. Hope this is what you were looking for!
- Rick
PeoplesFrontofJudea said:
I'm looking at him. What, besides his being a Libertarian, do you like about him?Do you mean personally, or do you mean his stances on issues and his priorities kind of thing? I really don't know much about him personally, but here is his bio.
As far as the issues go:
Free Trade vs. State Corporatism
The twin tenets of peace and free trade are mutually dependent. As French visionary Frederic Bastiat once said, "If goods don't cross borders, soldiers will." When countries rely upon each other in peaceful commerce, the people of those countries have every incentive to avoid violent conflict.
This is me, Rick, in the italics. I thought you might appreciate if I commented on each of these. This first one I completely agree with, and really have nothing to add. So we'll move on...
How to Stop Crime Before It Starts
"Crime rates go down when offenders must compensate their victims and responsible citizens are permitted to carry concealed weapons. Privatizing police gives them incentive to emphasize prevention and focus on violent, rather than victimless, crimes."
I really agree with this one, as well. This should be used more frequently everywhere. Something he doesn't mention in the blurb is that ending the drug war would drop our crime rates staggering amounts, as most drug related crime comes from turf wars (rather than Miller v. Busch ad wars) and people doing what they can to pay the inflated black market prices.
Military Policy and the War in Iraq
More and more Americans are coming to oppose the war, the war hawks and high government officials are beginning to distance themselves from the president, and the U.S. seems more willing than ever to pull out of Iraq.
This one I would suggest reading the whole thing, because this is a horribly vague blurb. (If you haven't figured it out, the title of each blurb is a link to a longer position paper.)
I agree on Iraq. It was an unconstitutional war, meaning Congress has no right to abrogate their constitutionally-enumerated powers to another branch of government. This blank check they wrote the President was stupid, misguided, and again, unconstitutional. If they were ready to declare war, they damn-well should have done it.
The only reason that was persuasive to me was the WMD angle. I know that if he had them, he would use them against us. But apparently, we were all wrong about the severity of the threat in Iraq, we've wasted many lives and resources, and we'll not likely see much benefit.
How to Make Health Care Affordable
"Health care and insurance costs will plummet if excess regulation is eliminated and malpractice awards are made only on the basis of strict liability. Lower costs, along with the savings from downsizing regulatory bureaucracy, will fund tax credits for those who establish Health Savings Accounts for themselves, their families, Medicare/Medicaid recipients, and the needy."
Well, MSAs were originally a libertarian idea that the Republicans ran with (along with SS privatization), just for those who think voting libertarian can not help make a change in any way. A lot of our good ideas have been stolen by the major parties, and I hope for only more.
As to this issue, the truth is that the cost of medicine is high for three reasons. (1) Greater lifesaving technology. This is important and can't be helped. (2) Unneccessary TORTs. I don't think we should limit damages, personally. I'd rather see a sorta Grand Jury system, whereby a person has to prove they have a case before they get to go to trial. That would cut down on the frivolous one-off lawsuits meant for settlement, which I think causes a lot more financial damage than the random big payouts. (3) Medicare/Medicaid. Even though I believe it to be for the best, there is no way we are going to abolish these programs, so the best thing we can do is cut down on their size and the size of the beuracracy that administers them. We need to back up out of doctor's faces and let them do what they have to do.
Gun Control Means Being Able to Hit your Target
If I have a "hot button" issue, this is definitely it. Don't even THINK about taking my guns! My rights are not negotiable, and I am totally unwilling to compromise when it comes to the Second Amendment.
Well, I'm not really a 2nd Amendment nut, so I don't really share his enthusiasm for this. I view the second amendment as just as important as the other 9 Amendments in the bill of rights - vital and non-negotiable.
How to Empower Minorities Without Reverse Discrimination!
"Prejudice is fading, yet minorities still lag behind economically. A labyrinth of licensing laws and regulations constitute the hidden roots of modern racial and ethnic discrimination."
This is so true. The Institute for Justice stands up for these people all the time who are kept from progress by entrenched licensing cabals. It's horrible, and needs to be stopped.
Should Gay Couples Be Allowed to Marry?
"Marriage partners, not government, should define the terms and spiritual orientation of their union in accordance with our nation's guarantee of religious freedom."
This is my hot button issue. This is the last great Civil Rights battle we have left, and it is extremely important to me that we take care of this. Get government out of the marriage business. I mean, gosh, state licensing of married couples was brough about as a way to prevent interracial marriage, and it is still being used today to prevent people from marrying the person they love. Make it all civil union for legal purposes, and leave the sanctity of marriage to God, churches, and individuals. Hell, heteros are doing enough on their own to destroy the sanctity of marriage...
How to Keep the Economy Up and Unemployment Down!
"Excess regulation and government spending destroy jobs and increase unemployment. Every regulator we fire results in the creation of over 150 new jobs, enough to hire the ex-regulator, the unemployed, and the able-bodied poor."
This is a good start, but sooner or later, we are going to have to face up to the fact that the Federal Reserve system is a failure.
Medical Marijuana and the Federal War on Drugs
In the 2000 campaign for president, George W. Bush said that the federal government should not interfere with the medical marijuana policies of the several states. Like so many other promises, he went back on his word and has closed down medical marijuana facilities permitted by state governments.
Agreed. I went into this already above, so I'll just leave it at that.
How to Slash Pharmaceutical Prices Virtually Overnight
"Excess regulation has increased new drug development time by a decade since the 1960s and multiplied development costs 5-fold. Consequently, our seriously ill die waiting for life-saving medicines and pay exorbitant prices when they finally can purchase them. Since these excess regulations kill many more people than they save, they can be safely eliminated, slashing pharmaceutical prices virtually overnight!"
I agree. I would even go so far as to, if not abolish, neuter the FDA, making it an information administration, rather than an approval system. They can vouch for the drugs they've tested, but let's leave people to decide for themselves their own treatment. Some would, I assume, stick with only things that the FDA had approved. Others would not. But no one would die because they didn't have the choice.
On another note, this prescription drug benefit is only going to make this worse for everybody.
Anyway, I don't agree with him 100%, but I do agree with him more than any of the other candidates. So, I'm voting for him. Hope this is what you were looking for!
- Rick
