In fact I would suggest it for all of us.

I see a lot of libertarians here supporting a flat income tax or flat sales tax when they really ought to be supporting land taxes.

There are variety of reasons most major economists support the land value tax (LVT)

It’s efficient, taxing land doesn’t generate deadweight loss

It’s just, for all these reasons

It’s progressive, the wealthier pay more

It’s widely supported by those who know what they are talking about, https://youtu.be/yS7Jb58hcsc

It’s been successful wherever it’s used, Taiwan, Singapore, Australia, Denmark

It’s actually good for the economy, it discourages harmful speculation

So please, if you support any tax at all, let it be the land value tax!

Fuck corporate interests.

In my old age 38. Most libertarians leaned right. Ron Paul and Gary Johnson. From what I've always thought libertarians were socially liberal do what you want with your body pray to whoever you want love whoever you want just don't bring me into it. Fiscally conservative taxes is theft smaller government free and open market. And the big one leave me alone! But wouldn't socialist be the opposite of all that?

Am I right?

I have a family member who is ALL IN on the election fraud claims. According to him, we are living in 1984, I'm too blind to see. He insisted I would vote for Putin (?). He also believes the attack on the Capital Building was a false flag. However, I'm starting to think he doesn't actually believe the crazy stuff flying out of his mouth.

He talks about having children soon. Why would you want to bring children into a country that's about to fall to communism? The deep state seems like a terrible place to raise a family.

He works for the military. Shouldn't he quit? He's supporting a communist government. Who knows what they'll have him doing soon?!

He isn't looking into work visas or opportunities to move abroad. If all of his allegations are true, I'd be doing everything possible to get the hell out of this country- you know, while I still can.

Point is, I don't think most of these people really believe what they're saying. I try to offer some grace to people who believe in conspiracies, because it usually comes from a place of fear or insecurity (though it goes without saying that grace ends when you start commiting acts of domestic terrorism). Anyone else have similar experiences? Do these people actually believe what they're saying?

Honestly I’m torn- how do we protect free speech in an age where tech companies control so much discourse, without handing power to the government to control right and wrongthink?

My issue though is with the folks I’ve see posting previously on how bakers and clerks and all sorts of others should be able to turn away gays or not bake a cake they don’t like, but act like google removing something it doesn’t like is horrible.

Be consistent. If you don’t respect your own beliefs, no one will.

EDIT: to be clear, I’ve seen the opposite too. Folks who believe businesses should be compelled to serve every customer now cheering on the Parler ban. Equally gross.

In light of Twitter, Facebook, and other tech giants banning and censoring speech that they disagree with, the knee-jerk reaction from Libertarians seems to be: “they’re a private company, they can do what they want”. Yes, they are, and they can, but why shouldn’t we be outspoken against their actions? What they’re doing is still morally wrong. I don’t see the contradiction in accepting their right to censor, but still speaking out against it.

edit: a lot of you seem to be confused as to why I think censoring speech in a de-facto public forum is morally wrong. Free, unrestrained speech (especially controversial speech that challenges the zeitgeist) is critical in a free society; without such a forum, the only alternative is violence. I’m appalled that anyone on this subreddit would disagree.

Maybe he could get on Tik Tok?

Genuine question, also, would you ever consider joining?

Not because of Twitter not wanting a political nut-job doing damage from their platform. That's sort of fine.

It's just that they don't apply the same bar to all political nut-jobs causing damage.

The prime example is Maduro, that, while a smaller fish, has gotten away with greater atrocities within his own country, and also posts similar caliber tweets.

Twitter has banned Maduro in the past, but now it lets its pretty public accounts go free.

It makes it feel as the reason behind these bans is not the spread of violence and misinformation as twitter claims.

I hate hate hate hearing comparisons to China because Trump was banned. In China, Jack Dorsey would be disappeared if he did this.

It is a profoundly wonderful thing that America allows a company to grow so big, and still hold even the most powerful man in the country to the same standard as the rest of us.

Do not allow even the tip of the governments finger to influence our social media. The system we have now is imperfect, but the alternative is the real slippery slope.

As it stands, twitter enforces TOS so they can maintain a platform they believe is best. And who decides if that platform is the best? We do.

No it is not Orwellian to have twitter ban people per TOS violations. What is Orwellian is to forget you had the choice to use the platform in the first place.

I cannot think of a more Orwellian action than to cry foul that a platform is censoring you, that a platform is destroying discourse, but yet you still scroll to the bottom of the page and click that box: I agree.

Drug addiction incentivizes people to find and use drugs. It’s not crime it’s an illness. Plus we should be free to use our sovereign bodies how we want. That’s LIBERTY. Law enforcement incentivizes cops to make drug arrests - leading to destroyed lives and alas a not uncommon practice of planting drugs on people. What’s to be done? Legalize all drugs. Redirect prison money to addiction counseling. Cut taxes. Thanks for coming to my TED TALK.