[The One and Only...]

Originally Posted by KevinTheHerbivore

And this in itself is the key flaw in radical, Libertarian economics. Again, back to Grover Norquist. Let's get the baby (govt.) small enough to drown it in the bat tub (paraphrase). Why? Is government inherently evil? Most free market liberal thinkers, even Adam Smith, believed even in progressive taxation. Things take money to function. It seems to me that Libertarians would rather have a society with no police, no reliable mail, no libraries, no security services, or ANYTHING governmental in application, JUST as long as they can keep all of their money. This attitude, to me, seems contrary to the very notion of citizenship.

Among the libertarians, there are two distinct types: minarchists and anarcho-capitalists.

Minarchists beleive that the government should exist for the sole purpose of providing a court system, national defence, police, common sense laws (no murder, etc.), and a few other necessary functions (such as producing currency).

Anarcho-capitalists, or Individualist Anarchists believe that the market could privide all of these functions more efficiently, thus making government unnecessary. Exactly how they expect currency to be produce, I'll never know...

I tend to land somewhere inbetween the two.

In addition, many libertarians believe that anyone has the right to leave the union.

Steady businesses such as ENRON or MCI perhaps...? What happens when you put people's trust in the hands of people who have only private motivations driving them....?

Um, hello? Mutual funds? Possibly banks?

A buddy of mine recently payed extra for one (can't recall company, whoever cingular wireless deals through) to send him his new cell phone over night. He payed the extra price, and got it in two weeks. :/

Granted, maybe this is an exception. But have you ever heard the old saying if it ain't broke, don't fix it....? This again brings the psyche of a Libertarian into question. Why shut down a system everyone knows and trusts...?

This is why it isn't a top priority. It's not even a priority at all except to the extreme anarcho-capitalists. The point is, if it ever becomes inefficient, it might be time for the market to swoop in.

Because "rainy days" do happen, in both real life, and government. That isn't being a spend thrift, that's being prudent.

True, but if they sell the land, they get more money for those "rainy days" to use.

Uh huh.....so, uh, democracy goes out the window in a Libertarian utopia...?

Depends on what kind of libertarian. However, this is away from the point. What I mentioned is no less democratic than the President's right to appoint judges to the Supreme Court.

Personally, I would like to see it carried out when the art of speedy on-computer (though not necessarily online) voting has been perfected.

Good, we need to start taxing them.

We are.

I'll address the rest later, but right now I don't have time.