Most Objectivists would agree that there isn’t an ideal presidential candidate to vote for in the upcoming elections—none driven by a rational set of principles, seeking to unequivocally and consistently protect individual rights. However, there is no doubt that the head of the government holds significant sway over the rights of Americans. It makes sense, then, to identify the candidate that poses the greater threat to one’s rights, and vote against him by voting for the alternative candidate. And it is in this identification that many Objectivists are divided. In this Meetup, we discuss and debate which candidate is the bigger threat to one’s rights, and should be voted against. With us are two Objectivist intellectuals on opposite ends of this debate—with Dr. Andrew Bernstein voting against Joe Biden, and Dr Robert Stubblefield voting against Donald Trump.
Elon Musk claim that humanity is headed for “universal high income” instead of UBI is possible to the extent that peace, easy taxes, and a tolerable administration of justice prevail. That means reducing the power of the state rather than extending it with UBI or other collectivist social experiments.