A Call for Candidates

Cool. I wonder where Altman stands on Citizens United and the aftermath that is super PACs. A big problem to me is how to keep money out of politics wherever possible.

I guess this would fall under his "fair government" policy, although I don't see it explicitly mentioned.

Do libertarians support having super PACs? That would be yikes to me.

Unless that is a primary issue for a candidate, I don't see how we'll ever get back to fair government, with one person one vote. There's just too much money in it already.

> Today, we have massive wealth inequality, little economic growth, a system that works for people born lucky, and a cost of living that is spiraling out of control.

Mr. Altman seems highly capable in affecting change here by funding and encouraging startups outside of the valley.

Of course the encredible story of wealth creation in the valley is the envy of most of the world, and they would kill to be in the situation we're in, as bad as it is.

The structural problems of American democracy are because candidates are unaccountable outside (except to their donors) outside a small election window, where they temporarily perform whatever act will allowed them to attain or hold onto power.

If Altman is sincere about wanting better candidates, I'd suggest pushing for technology-driven direct democracy, candidates who, in real time, act and respond to feedback from their constituencies. Trump was elected because he did an informal version of this via Twitter. John Robb outlined how this would work:

http://globalguerrillas.typepad.com/globalguerrillas/2017/02...

We essentially need to disrupt the notion of candidates and turn them into our true avatars for interfacing with the political system.

It's not really about fair government. Just different government.

I don't think government will ever be fair, but at least ours can be changed.

Citizens United is very clear - it's about free speech. if the New York times wants to release a documentary about a candidate before the election would you stop them?

Libertarians, of course, support super PACS, people do not lose their ability to speak when they form a group.

To illustrate this point imagine 2 people: a famous movie star and a wealthy movie producer. When the famous person speaks it is news and spread freely, whereas the producer needs to pay to get their message out. If you restrict one, you should restrict the other.