Gary Johnson: Trump's a pussy

[Edwardo Piet]

Hell, there's not even enough weed in the universe to make Trump's face look as good as a squirrel's arsehole.

[mlmooney89]

This amused me. lol. Also he really is stoned lmao

[Cato]

Trump + pussy = disturbing mental image.

Goes a long way towards explaining the bush on his head though.

[Excited Penguin]

You don't agree with him about anything else, like legalizing weed for example?

Hyperbole, son.  Look it up.

How can I know if you're being serious or using hyperbolic language? 

I'll let this pass, just don't condescend to me. Johnson seems to me like he's getting a lot of things right, he certainly doesn't call for that level of sarcasm.

[Minimalist]

Oh, horseshit.  The Libertarian party wants to abolish the income tax and how one funds the government after that seems to be no concern of theirs.  As I have challenged libertarians many times before, name me one modern state which could function under such fiscal constraints.

Why the fuck do you think this cartoon is so accurate?




If Johnson agrees with that platform plank then he is a horse's ass, too.

[Excited Penguin]

They also get a lot of things right. And assumming a libertarian president/party is going to be able to fuck up the country all by itself if it comes to them winning is a little crazy, especially in America. They might provide a fresh perspective, though, and change some things for the better. I'm not advocating anything extreme here.

And Johnson would still be better than Trump on his most drugged out of his minds day. I say that with a straight face.

[FatAndFaithless]

Oh, horseshit.  The Libertarian party wants to abolish the income tax and how one funds the government after that seems to be no concern of theirs.  As I have challenged libertarians many times before, name me one modern state which could function under such fiscal constraints.

Why the fuck do you think this cartoon is so accurate?




If Johnson agrees with that platform plank then he is a horse's ass, too.

Just in response to this point specifically - I was curious myself so I went on his website.  Here's him on the income tax:

Governor Johnson advocates for the elimination of special interest tax loopholes, to get rid of the double-taxation on small businesses, and ultimately, the replacement of all income and payroll taxes with a single consumption tax that determines your tax burden by how much you spend, not how much you earn. Such a tax would be structured to insure that no one’s tax burden for the purchase of basic family necessities would be increased. To the contrary, costs of necessities would likely decrease with the elimination of taxes already included in the price of virtually everything we buy.

[Minimalist]

Well he isn't going to win.  By the time election day comes he'll probably repeat the trend of most 3d party candidates who fade badly.  People tell pollsters they'll vote for them but then can't be bothered to get off their asses and waste their time voting for someone who doesn't have a prayer.  There is a long history of this sort of thing in the US.

There is nothing you can say about Drumpf which is bad enough that I will disagree with.  The motherfucker is nuts.

[FatAndFaithless]

Well he isn't going to win.  By the time election day comes he'll probably repeat the trend of most 3d party candidates who fade badly.  People tell pollsters they'll vote for them but then can't be bothered to get off their asses and waste their time voting for someone who doesn't have a prayer.  There is a long history of this sort of thing in the US.

There is nothing you can say about Drumpf which is bad enough that I will disagree with.  The motherfucker is nuts.

I'm certain Johnson won't win, but the idea of a 'consumption tax' instead of an income tax rather intrigues me.  Is this something that's been addressed a bunch by historians/economists and discarded?  Or it is kind of a new-ish idea?

EDIT: found a couple of interesting articles on it.

http://www.investorguide.com/article/118...mpact-igu/

http://www.howmoneywalks.com/consumption...axes-only/


The biggest argument against it seems to be that it would raise less tax money for the gov't, which might be the reason no incumbents are arguing for it, heh.

[Minimalist]

Why?  Because it falls more heavily on the poor than the rich?  Because that is what a consumption tax does.

Anyway, here is the Libertarian Platform section:

2.4 Government Finance and Spending

All persons are entitled to keep the fruits of their labor. We call for the repeal of the income tax, the abolishment of the Internal Revenue Service and all federal programs and services not required under the U.S. Constitution. We oppose any legal requirements forcing employers to serve as tax collectors. Government should not incur debt, which burdens future generations without their consent. We support the passage of a “Balanced Budget Amendment” to the U.S. Constitution, provided that the budget is balanced exclusively by cutting expenditures, and not by raising taxes.

You see something about a consumption tax?  I don't.