playpianoking

Hi Gary, thanks for joining us again to answer our questions. My question is: Why do you support the notion that government should mandate food companies to label their food as GMO if it fits the FDA's definition? Isn't this against what libertarianism is all about?

We'll see if he answers. I have a feeling it might be similar to why most libertarians support the Supreme Court's decision to uphold unlimited funding by corporations to SuperPacs. I agree that people can spend money on ads if they want to; it's ultimately up to the viewer to believe it or not. Private prisons aren't necessarily the problem per say; it is that government officials are corrupt and are getting kickbacks. It's essentially corporatism that is the problem - and citizens just keep voting for candidates that get involved in this, rather than one's like Ron Paul.

There is a realistic chance at winning under a preferential voting system. Until that happens, most republocrats will buy into the lesser of evils argument and not risk their vote. You should advocate for that system.

Is the support of a national sales tax (the "fair tax") really that much better in principle than the income tax? It seems that in both cases, two parties are voluntarily conducting a transaction, but government agents (IRS) will want to step in the middle in either case and demand 20% or else. Just as someone can voluntarily decide to sell their labor, they can also voluntarily decide to engage in purchasing another person's products or services. So how can a national sales tax be justified as a non-aggressive alternative to the income tax? Thanks Gary!