Badnarik's VP is an Embarrassment!

[swarch]

Badnarik's campaign manager has seen to it that tax returns have been filed. My understanding, although second-hand, is that Badnarik is actually due a modest amount of refunds. Although I respect him for originally standing up for his beliefs, he never expected to become the nominee, and the situation was indeed a potential source of embarrassment.

I don't know what's sillier about Campagna's doctorate, the fact that it's from a diploma mill or the "discipline" it's in. Go figure.

LP presidential candidates often have more private sector experience than many Demopublicans. A few have also had political experience:

Hospers: philosophy professor
McBride: Virginia elector who voted for Hospers/Nathan (first woman to receive an electoral vote) instead of Nixon
Clark: corporate lawyer
Bergland: businessman (unsure on this one)
Paul: congressman (Republican-TX)
Marrou: state legislator (Libertarian-AK)
Browne: best-selling investment author
Badnarik: computer scientist

[swarch]

I oppose payroll taxes and sales taxes...but I still am perfectly willing to pay them.  Our tax policy is decided by the political process, and our society would collaspe if everyone just paid the taxes they wanted to pay.  Seriously, people who deliberately refuse to pay taxes should be imprisoned.

Some government programs would collapse, but not society. If taxes--as opposed to user fees--are so great, why do they have to be compelled by the threat of imprisonment? If enough people were happy with government programs, they would pay for them voluntarily. Like many other posters on this board, I contribute to charitable causes, and would have a lot more to contribute in the absence of government inefficiencies and boondoggles.

[swarch]

I respect Paul and Marrou for their experience.  Browne as well, though he ran fairly disorganized campaigns.

Badnarik was a candidate for state house in 2002, I think... and he got around 2-3% of the vote.  That alone should be a clue that he's not much of a campaigner and cannot attract a great deal of support.

Seems like they had 2 fairly good choices for the nomination (Russo or Nolan) and they went with the hardcore nut-jobs instead.  I really don't understand why, though....

Fear of success? lol

Haa haa!

What happened was that some Nolan supporters indulged in negative campaigning against Russo. Badnarik was above this and did so well in the debate--remarkable, given that there was little difference on the issues--that he turned the first ballot into a virtual three-way tie. He squeaked past Nolan on the second ballot and won after Nolan endorsed him. But even without the endorsement, he would have won. He was simply that much better.

[swarch]

I oppose payroll taxes and sales taxes...but I still am perfectly willing to pay them.  Our tax policy is decided by the political process, and our society would collaspe if everyone just paid the taxes they wanted to pay.  Seriously, people who deliberately refuse to pay taxes should be imprisoned.

Some government programs would collapse, but not society. If taxes--as opposed to user fees--are so great, why do they have to be compelled by the threat of imprisonment? If enough people were happy with government programs, they would pay for them voluntarily. Like many other posters on this board, I contribute to charitable causes, and would have a lot more to contribute in the absence of government inefficiencies and boondoggles.

Yes, society may in fact collapse if we don't pay for the upkeep of police, the military, and the roads.

People won't pay taxes because they want to get something for free and their individual marginal tax dollar won't degrade government services enough.
Why people download free MP3 that they could also get by buying a CD, is it because they aren't satisfied with the music?  No, its just they would rather get the same thing for free than have to pay for it.

And how do you charge "user fees" for the military?

Sorry for the confusion.

By user fees, I mean payments where you get something in return. This includes gasoline taxes (unless spent on things other than roads) and taxes for police and the military. I don't have a problem with these, so long as whatever service the government provides is open to competition on a level playing field. Competition in the above areas would be limited (roads and police) or non-existent (military), but government does a lot of things (social security, education) where competition is feasible.

By taxes, I mean payments where you get nothing in return, like all corporate welfare, entitlement programs, and school taxes when you send your kids to non-government schools. These should be funded by voluntary charitable contributions.

[swarch]

It seems to me that libertarians fundamentally don't believe in democracy.

"Democracy is a form of religion. It is the worship of jackals by jackasses."
--H.L. Mencken