Universal healthcare wouldn't work? We Norwegians seem to be able to pull it off just fine.

why not?

Free colleges are an excellent idea.

Plus Gary Johnson has some crazy beliefs:

Cutting medicare and medicaid by 43% immediately.
No government involvement in healthcare.
Anti-union.
Little/no gun control.

Having said that, there are a number of things I agree with him on, but too many are ridiculous.

"Free" colleges are not free. They're paid for by higher taxes, and the more you tax people, the more you take away their economic freedom to choose how to spend their own money. Alternatively you could just borrow all the money to fund "free" colleges, but that would drastically increase the debt and consequently the interest we have to pay on that debt - even if we never pay back the debt in full.
And if we want our "free" education to be high-quality, that would cost massive amounts of money - plus we'd have to accommodate all those new college students who can suddenly afford to go to college. So- no.

Also if public universities received all their money from the federal government, consider how much power that would give the government over higher education. Currently nearly all public universities are funded by state governments, as are public schools in general. If all public universities depended on the federal government for funding, the government could set federal standards for higher education and enforce them by giving universities more or less funding depending on their performance. Affordable education is a noble cause, but it should not be achieved by a federal takeover.

Denmark has free colleges at the cost of higher taxes. I don't like Johnson because he thinks that government should have no hand in health care whatsoever, which I completely disagree with.

Do you think private security firms are going to be concerned about harming locals? I've served two tours in Afghanistan, they don't give a fuck about anything but their paycheck.

Okay, I don't think you understand what the Letters of Marque are in this context. Basically, private security firms like Blackwater to go kill and/or capture those responsible and then paying them for that. So that is the American government funding acts of violence on foreign soil. If you think collateral damage is bad in places the US military operates, try a group of people who's sole aim is money. So imagine the blow back from that.

I understand that but we wouldn't be necessarily obvious it would be all undercover although it would be on foreign soil we wouldn't be harming and locals or governments just taking out responsible terrorists. Blow back is trying to help like for example helping Osama bin laden and Saddam Hussein during Kuwait then back firing on us.

Do you think private security firms are going to be concerned about harming locals? I've served two tours in Afghanistan, they don't give a fuck about anything but their paycheck.

I didn't say blowing up other countries, I said blowing up things in other countries. Fundamentally, that's what issuing Letters of Marque would do. Except when those people who did those things couldn't be prosecuted or extradited but instead would be paid and protected. Tell me, how do you think other countries would react to that?

I think you misunderstood what he said. The people who find those responsible get paid not the terrorists...

Okay, I don't think you understand what the Letters of Marque are in this context. Basically, private security firms like Blackwater to go kill and/or capture those responsible and then paying them for that. So that is the American government funding acts of violence on foreign soil. If you think collateral damage is bad in places the US military operates, try a group of people who's sole aim is money. So imagine the blow back from that.

I understand that but we wouldn't be necessarily obvious it would be all undercover although it would be on foreign soil we wouldn't be harming and locals or governments just taking out responsible terrorists. Blow back is trying to help like for example helping Osama bin laden and Saddam Hussein during Kuwait then back firing on us.

Do you think private security firms are going to be concerned about harming locals? I've served two tours in Afghanistan, they don't give a fuck about anything but their paycheck.

Well, you didn't read very much into it. Ron Paul advocated the issuance of Letters of Marque to private parties to attack those involved in the attacks. Pretty much, he defined the 9/11 attacks as an act of air piracy and wanted to give people federal money to kill and blow things up in other countries. How isolationist does that sound?

Actually it was to find the people responsible for 9/11 not blow up countries.

I didn't say blowing up other countries, I said blowing up things in other countries. Fundamentally, that's what issuing Letters of Marque would do. Except when those people who did those things couldn't be prosecuted or extradited but instead would be paid and protected. Tell me, how do you think other countries would react to that?

I think you misunderstood what he said. The people who find those responsible get paid not the terrorists...

Okay, I don't think you understand what the Letters of Marque are in this context. Basically, private security firms like Blackwater to go kill and/or capture those responsible and then paying them for that. So that is the American government funding acts of violence on foreign soil. If you think collateral damage is bad in places the US military operates, try a group of people who's sole aim is money. So imagine the blow back from that.

I understand that but we wouldn't be necessarily obvious it would be all undercover although it would be on foreign soil we wouldn't be harming and locals or governments just taking out responsible terrorists. Blow back is trying to help like for example helping Osama bin laden and Saddam Hussein during Kuwait then back firing on us.

Do you think private security firms are going to be concerned about harming locals? I've served two tours in Afghanistan, they don't give a fuck about anything but their paycheck.

Sorry compare to how we should approach our foreign policy.

Obviously you never read about his stance on the 9/11 attacks. Letters of Marque and Reprisal was his answer. Why don't you ponder on that bit and see how idiotic that is.

Actually I did, towards blow back and we pretty much cause 9/11 which is true if you know your history on Kuwait you would know we did cause 9/11. But excuse my ignorance towards the Letter of Marque of Reprisal I believe he is using it to compare blow back.

Well, you didn't read very much into it. Ron Paul advocated the issuance of Letters of Marque to private parties to attack those involved in the attacks. Pretty much, he defined the 9/11 attacks as an act of air piracy and wanted to give people federal money to kill and blow things up in other countries. How isolationist does that sound?

Actually it was to find the people responsible for 9/11 not blow up countries.

I didn't say blowing up other countries, I said blowing up things in other countries. Fundamentally, that's what issuing Letters of Marque would do. Except when those people who did those things couldn't be prosecuted or extradited but instead would be paid and protected. Tell me, how do you think other countries would react to that?

I think you misunderstood what he said. The people who find those responsible get paid not the terrorists...

Okay, I don't think you understand what the Letters of Marque are in this context. Basically, private security firms like Blackwater to go kill and/or capture those responsible and then paying them for that. So that is the American government funding acts of violence on foreign soil. If you think collateral damage is bad in places the US military operates, try a group of people who's sole aim is money. So imagine the blow back from that.

I understand that but we wouldn't be necessarily obvious it would be all undercover although it would be on foreign soil we wouldn't be harming and locals or governments just taking out responsible terrorists. Blow back is trying to help like for example helping Osama bin laden and Saddam Hussein during Kuwait then back firing on us.

Do you think private security firms are going to be concerned about harming locals? I've served two tours in Afghanistan, they don't give a fuck about anything but their paycheck.

Sorry compare to how we should approach our foreign policy.