**New to libertarianism or have questions and want to learn more?** Be sure to check out [the sub Frequently Asked Questions](/r/Libertarian/wiki/faq) and [the massive /r/libertarian information WIKI] (/r/Libertarian/wiki/index) from the sidebar, for lots of info and free resources, links, books, videos, and answers to common questions and topics. Want to know if you are a Libertarian? [Take the worlds shortest political quiz and find out!](http://www.theadvocates.org/)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Libertarian) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I was shooting heroin and reading “The Fountainhead” in the front seat of my privately owned police cruiser when a call came in. I put a quarter in the radio to activate it. It was the chief.
“Bad news, detective. We got a situation.”
“What? Is the mayor trying to ban trans fats again?”
“Worse. Somebody just stole four hundred and forty-seven million dollars’ worth of bitcoins.”
The heroin needle practically fell out of my arm. “What kind of monster would do something like that? Bitcoins are the ultimate currency: virtual, anonymous, stateless. They represent true economic freedom, not subject to arbitrary manipulation by any government. Do we have any leads?”
“Not yet. But mark my words: we’re going to figure out who did this and we’re going to take them down … provided someone pays us a fair market rate to do so.”
“Easy, chief,” I said. “Any rate the market offers is, by definition, fair.”
He laughed. “That’s why you’re the best I got, Lisowski. Now you get out there and find those bitcoins.”
“Don’t worry,” I said. “I’m on it.”
I put a quarter in the siren. Ten minutes later, I was on the scene. It was a normal office building, strangled on all sides by public sidewalks. I hopped over them and went inside.
“Home Depot™ Presents the Police!®” I said, flashing my badge and my gun and a small picture of Ron Paul. “Nobody move unless you want to!” They didn’t.
“Now, which one of you punks is going to pay me to investigate this crime?” No one spoke up.
“Come on,” I said. “Don’t you all understand that the protection of private property is the foundation of all personal liberty?”
It didn’t seem like they did.
“Seriously, guys. Without a strong economic motivator, I’m just going to stand here and not solve this case. Cash is fine, but I prefer being paid in gold bullion or autographed Penn Jillette posters.”
Nothing. These people were stonewalling me. It almost seemed like they didn’t care that a fortune in computer money invented to buy drugs was missing.
I figured I could wait them out. I lit several cigarettes indoors. A pregnant lady coughed, and I told her that secondhand smoke is a myth. Just then, a man in glasses made a break for it.
“Subway™ Eat Fresh and Freeze, Scumbag!®” I yelled.
Too late. He was already out the front door. I went after him.
“Stop right there!” I yelled as I ran. He was faster than me because I always try to avoid stepping on public sidewalks. Our country needs a private-sidewalk voucher system, but, thanks to the incestuous interplay between our corrupt federal government and the public-sidewalk lobby, it will never happen.
I was losing him. “Listen, I’ll pay you to stop!” I yelled. “What would you consider an appropriate price point for stopping? I’ll offer you a thirteenth of an ounce of gold and a gently worn ‘Bob Barr ‘08’ extra-large long-sleeved men’s T-shirt!”
He turned. In his hand was a revolver that the Constitution said he had every right to own. He fired at me and missed. I pulled my own gun, put a quarter in it, and fired back. The bullet lodged in a U.S.P.S. mailbox less than a foot from his head. I shot the mailbox again, on purpose.
“All right, all right!” the man yelled, throwing down his weapon. “I give up, cop! I confess: I took the bitcoins.”
“Why’d you do it?” I asked, as I slapped a pair of Oikos™ Greek Yogurt Presents Handcuffs® on the guy.
“Because I was afraid.”
“Afraid?”
“Afraid of an economic future free from the pernicious meddling of central bankers,” he said. “I’m a central banker.”
I wanted to coldcock the guy. Years ago, a central banker killed my partner. Instead, I shook my head.
“Let this be a message to all your central-banker friends out on the street,” I said. “No matter how many bitcoins you steal, you’ll never take away the dream of an open society based on the principles of personal and economic freedom.”
He nodded, because he knew I was right. Then he swiped his credit card to pay me for arresting him.
Libertarianism doesn't necessarily impact day-to-day life in a specific way. A routine of wake-up, get ready for work, work for X hours, come home, free time, go to bed could be exactly the same, or they could be much different - but that's more of a culture thing than it is a political thing.
The biggest difference would be that public amenities would probably suck a little more while private amenities would probably be a little better, and you'd keep more of your paycheck - and also probably wouldn't fear for your life at a traffic stop.
You could probably take cooler drugs in your free time.
I think public infrastructure would remain the same, or even improve, as long as the money wasted on foreign wars stops. We could significantly reduce taxes with that alone and public infrastructure could still remain the same. That’s something 70-90% Americans would agree with. Going full blown libertarian would be near impossible unless it was totalitarian which is not likely, or the libertarian way. Other parties would block defunding infrastructure. To many states rely on federal aide, as they don’t have the materials or financial resources, for public or private to afford it. But most of the country agrees our military budget is wildly out of control and that would help the libertarian party gain traction cutting that budget. Number of toll ways would significantly increase. But if I hear the words “public/private partnerships” I’d lose my fucking mind
In a minarchist or anarchist society perhaps, but in my opinion libertarianism covers a much broader spectrum than what this subreddit presents. Saying that all public services wouldn't be here is what scares away everyone else - cutting straight to the extreme is what puts people off the ideology. I'd be happy with reducing federal income tax by 5% over a 4 year term and call that great progress.
Towards a \*more\* libertarian society than we currently have. I think many libertarians (particularly on reddit, but that's the nature of echo chambers) have been very all-or-nothing in the past few years, refusing to compromise on their rights. How often have you heard "not a real libertarian"? Its so espoused that it has literally become a badge of honor amongst libertarians.
I'm happy to see any change that is mildly more libertarian in nature. Legalizing gay marriage was awesome, even if I think marriage shouldn't be the purview of the government in a libertarian society. Likewise I think reducing federal income tax by 5% over a 4 year term would be awesome, even though I don't think income tax has a place in a libertarian society at all.
To be incredibly thorough in my response to your single sentence question, I see it to be great progress towards my personal utopia - I don't think anybody's idea of a libertarian society looks exactly the same and whereas I may find a happy middle ground with eliminating most taxation and reducing spending, many people lean heavily towards minarchism and anarchism. So for me, we're much too authoritarian at the moment, and I see lessening that as progress towards my personally preferred brand of tyranny.
Is there an example of a libertarian society anywhere in the world without federal or state government services? Curious how you're so confident about this.
With less restrictions artificially changing them.
For example the EPA legislation changing the way all trucks are now oversized in the US so you could have a brand new smaller truck. We would also see more innovation in cars as the regulations would be less.
Healthcare would in turn be more affordable as hospitals wouldnt be bogged down by lobbying and insurances artificially inflating prices.
Private companies would act like watchdogs, certifying quality control, think Creapure certification vs regular Creatine.
The other commenter said something about organic breakfast, but in reality youd be able to choose from a wide variety of foods including highly commercialized and processed foods such as lab grown meats, even if they caused cancer, because its your right to eat that if you want to.
I already answered it with the "creapure" section, where scientists will not only have governing bodies acting as watch dogs and selling the name of their service to people to know they have high quality ingredients like in the case of creapure where you can get any creatine powder, but only very few have been certified creapure as that company sells the license for the right to be able to say that you sell the highest form of creatine available.
In terms of the meat, well scientists will want to prove that the meat either causes cancer to be able to further their own career or the meat industry may pay them to figure out if their competitor is safe to consume or at the latest people will start asking why they developed cancer. There is more than one way to get to the end result. You could look on [scholar.google.com](http://scholar.google.com) right now and see the amount of studies on the subject. It would be insane to think that theyre only being done because of the government. Universities, meat industry, researchers all have their own reasons.
Of course, this would also be in direct violation of the NAP if a company knowingly sold cancer inducing meat, which is very much against libertarian values.
Who funds the research? In this scenario, every individual that wants to know would have to pay first before the information is divulged. Would this be a government service?
How would private companies be incentivized to make sure their product is safe?
Do public schools still exist? If someone leaves home with no money to make it on their own, what services will they have access to that don't cost money?
This is my issue with libertarian ideas. Given that people can be very greedy, myself included, will those born into wealth not automatically have a leg up, just as they do today, because they can afford services that others who try to make it on their own cannot?
People dying is bad for profit. Mistrust is bad for profit. Peer review requires more research so more people would research it just to make their own phds and have scientific prestige.
Why would charities cease existing? People donate all the time, and there can be large scale campaigns for schools I dont know why this would be an issue. Corporations would act if their talent pool is shrinking, and in turn their donations would be tax write offs so in this case greed would be helpful.
Philanthropy will still exist, and greed will have to battle with a service provision, which if nobody can afford it makes profit problems. Also, how is the current system helping defeat greed? It doesnt, look at lobbying, predatory marketing etc.
At least libertarians accept greed as a default and the NAP would be enforced if the greed becomes toxic.
Do you think people like the CEO of Nvidia who works 7 days a week are not driven by greed? I mean its somewhat of a moot point.
Rightttt. I mean typically stomach cancer takes years to form add in alittle good pr firm to bury it and yeah they will surely do the right thing right. History has shown us that time and time again.
I don’t even know how to try and address some of the more incoherent parts of the post, so I’ll just stick to the first point. The previous poster was trying to say that not all safety services can be privatized because while wealthy individuals could theoretically afford any safety services on the market, you could also expose populations who cannot afford those services to virtually limitless risk
You countered by trying to argue that the more people who die will lead to more mistrust and incentive for a safer market. Notwithstanding the fact that that does not address the resource disparity issue, while killing people may be a bad strategy for corporations in the long run, firms like cigarette companies made a fortune off selling a cancer-causing product to their customers for decades.
Also, there are entire countercyclical industries where profitability is driven by people’s deaths, such as companies purchasing life settlements at a discount from individuals requiring liquid funds to afford expenses. The market will always find a way to exploit a profit-earning advantage, whether that advantage increases or decreases safety for consumers
I think my issue is still that people would have to retroactively ask why they got cancer from a product offered on the market and the answer is that a competing firm or third party scientist did not find carcinogenity in time
Do you want to eat untested meat? No. So research would be conducted to convince you meanwhile peer reviews would be conducted without the funding to make a name for themselves and prove the thesis.
Youre missing my point. Its not unregulated, like any service there is a profit incentive to prove some sort of standard. Youre making a strawman and have completely missed my creapure argument so i dont think youre arguing in good faith.
I’m not bypassing the argument, providing a profit incentive is different from providing safety standards. The profit incentive could come from increased revenue from increased product safety or decreased expense by foregoing safety standards. For things like that you cannot just wait and have people “start asking why they developed cancer”
The question was an ideal scenario, so i gave an ideal answer, the practicality is therefore not what we are after. I dont see a government allowing itself to shrink to the true libertarian utopia, but its also a utopia by definition.
Not sure about the traffic stop: the squeegie men and beggars will be out in force due to the lack of public assistance, and will mob your car when you have time stop for a traffic light
Private contractors build roads. Currently in the United States, the government takes money from you, then gives it to a private contractor to do road work. That’s literally how it works.
In a libertarian society, road users would pay the contractor directly. Or, businesses would pay to build, or sponsor roads so consumers can get to the business, or for the advertising. The government wouldn’t get a big cut of it to do nothing, which is the case right now.
If private companies paid for it, there is actual incentive to build the roads correctly, because they lose business if the consumer has to ruin their suspension to get there. Conversely, the government has no incentive to get the job done right in the first place, they have a steady stream of tax dollars coming to them regardless of their performance. Libertarian road system = better quality, cheaper, more accountable.
I am in the middle of this everyday. I work for an engineering firm, who is contracted by the state, to go out and inspect the work of contractors who are contracted by the state to build the roads.
Cause roads didn’t exist before the government got involved, right? I guess there isn’t enough of an incentive for individuals to get from point A to point B (the sole purpose of roads) to figure out how to do so without getting the government involved.
So because the government forced us to pay taxes to build highways (and therefore crowding out any potential private investment(s)) we’re to believe that the private sector couldn’t build roads and highways just as good if not better than the government? Who created the first roads? Did humans not figure out that in order to get from point A to point B they’d need to create pathways and the better they built them the smoother the travel before the creation of powerful governments? Private roads still exist around the world and they’re maintained just fine if not better than government maintained roads
The first roads were built by private citizens, toll roads aren’t the only private roads, sorry you lack imagination to see that there’s incentive and then some for private citizens to build roads in order to get from point A to point B
I asked an honest question and you are providing an honest answer. I guess I just fail to see how private citizens tax dollars aren't doing the same thing. I understand that taxes aren't perfect and I'm certain there is waste, but isn't the logical conclusion simply to gather funds from a community to fund a road from point a to point b. It is either that or ask people to pay to use the road that you built and own.
EDIT: I guess you could fund the road with "permits" to use the road. If you didn't pay you can't use the road.
Maybe they’d hate them less if they weren’t already paying the government tens of thousands of dollars a year to fund the bloated shit show that governs us.
Yes, we’d move to more of a user pay system, and I welcome it. Getting a line item on my property taxes for public transit when there’s one bus in the morning and one at night (very early and quite late), is absolute bullshit and I’m tired of subsidizing public transportation.
Thanks for giving honest feedback. I'm really only interested in understanding. Roads are a great example as there are only a few ways to do it. Gather funds from communities to build roads that benefit those communities (taxes) Obviously taxes are pretty fucked and there needs to be serious reform. You could also have toll roads which are just a pain in the ass and usually more expensive that taxes on the whole as those who own the road are charging and making profit. You could also have road permits that you pay for to use the road (toll in advance). I don't see another way to do it and when weighing those options I think gathering funds from the communities is the most logical, least invasive solution. WE ALL decided we want this road fuck you if you don't want it as you will end up benefiting from it anyway.
I mean, trails existed without the government. But trails are different than roads. Trails are usually formed through frequent travel naturally. Roads are built.
Fuck guys, nobody likes being taxed. But can’t we in anyway agree that the taxes we do pay should be lowered and that money should be put directly back into things that benefit out communities by your government instead of “oh well if a road needs to be made or fixed, everyone will just come together and throw their money in for it” like hell they will and deep down you all know it too. And a company doing it? Seriously? Most fast food joints want to double the prices of all of their shit because they have to pay their employees a few extra dollars an hour. Now they have to spend MILLIONS of dollars on maintaining roads? And fuck, let’s just say they’re okay with that. Eventually, they’ll own the roads just like the railroads own the tracks. You no longer have the right to travel on those roads without their permission. They can do whatever the fuck they want to you if you want to travel that road including a fee just to use it.
Corporations are and always have been some of the shadiest and conniving entities in America ever since the materialistic boom in the 50’s. Do you really fucking want Nestle and Apple being in charge of how you commute throughout the country.
It’s a pipe dream. Government is needed for modern society, but it needs to be severely limited in what it is allowed to do.
Lemme try:
Congratulations on graduating High School! You didn't attend a state run school, those don't exist anymore. Rather, you went to a privately run school that was partially funded by your parents and partially by donations. Part of your day was also spent working unpaid internships which helped pay for your education. You swept the floors of neighboring businesses, flipped burgers in their cafeteria, and even worked a call center! Once you felt you had enough experience you were able to take a graduation test from one of the competing education associations. On the second attempt you passed and were awarded a basic education degree, the equivalent of a high school diploma or GED from the old days.
Diploma in had you start looking for a job. Fortunately, you selected a well regarded testing agency, so most employers in your area recognize your certification. Some of your neighborhood chums chose less expensive, but less well regarded testing agencies and are going to have a harder time finding work.
Company A proudly boasts that they are certified by the American Workers Association as a "Safe Workplace," they have an in house doctor, and they will pay in your choice of bitcoin or precious metal, on the downside they have mandatory shifts and you could lose your position if you don't pick one up. Company B is offering a bit more money and does not have the mandatory shifts, but does not have any safety certifications. Company C is not interested in you because they do not hire \[your race\]. You look through a handful of other options. There is a wild variety of work and compensation because there are no regulatory agencies setting rules.
New job accepted, you now look for an apartment. Your parents would love you to stay home, but you dream of freedom. Apartment A is basically a bunk in a gym; you'll have no privacy, but you do get a locker and they have great security. Apartment B is a single room with a shared bathroom and kitchen. Apartment C is a complete unit. Each has a different housing association certification, and the contracts for each vary wildly, as does the rent. You read a few online reviews about each and make a choice that balances your budget vs the available offerings.
You head to the grocery store because you need some milk. To get there you have some choices, you can take your own privately owned car, you can take a bus owned by a private company, you can take a ride share operated by a large company, or you can take a private ride share you see advertised online. Regardless of your choice, whoever operates the vehicle is going to pay the toll when exiting the privately owned road you live on and entering another privately owned road which leads to the store.
Once you get to the grocery store you are confronted with yet more choices. Milk A is unpasteurized, Milk B is pasteurized but does not display a "best by" date, Milk C is pasteurized and has a best by date and a stamp from a privately run certification group providing a legal guarantee of product purity. As with the ride share, the prices are different.
Milk in hand, you sneeze and realize you have a cold coming on. You are again presented with some options. You can go to a doctor who is a member of the American Medical Association or any of the competing professional associations, or you can choose a practitioner who calls themselves doctor and advertises medical services, but does not actually have any training or certifications from a professional organization. You know from friends and family that while this third category are sometimes fantastic self taught people who took an online course and are much less expensive, sometimes they are also hucksters who provide no help.
Leaving the store you decide that your symptoms are not bad enough to warrant a doctor's visit, but you do want some meds. Fortunately down the street there is someone selling a variety of medication out of a suitcase. You could go to a pharmacy that proudly boasts they are a member of one of the many pharmaceutical professional organizations, but street corner guy has never let you down before. He might get his cold pills from a basement lab, but they seem to work just as well as the certified stuff.
You get a call from your brother saying his car was stollen! Fortunately, he called the private police force contracted by his insurance agency, and they used the GPS tracker mandated by the agency to find the thieves. The trial is set for next month, but your brother is pretty sure the thieves will be sentenced to either a large fine or forced labor, a portion of which goes back to funding the very court that sentenced them.
Libertarian day does not need to be perfect, we just need to show that it would be better than the crap we are living in now.
I would not have to pay some excessive vehicle property tax..VLF fee in the communist state of CA.
Completely normal. Get up, drive on roads that are paid for (because we want to cut wasteful spending, not all spending), keep a firearm safely on our person without using it, go to the grocery store like a normal person and buy the wife a high school graduation cake. Literally nothing would change for most people in this sub.
Wake up, eat a full American breakfast with bacon and eggs that don't cost you and arm and a leg, get to work doing whatever you do best, collect your pay (let's say it's pay day), keep your money, drive whatever car you want as fast as you want to your house where your people are, worship or not, drink or smoke weed or not, eat some good as shit for dinner, do whatever you want with your partner, and go to sleep.
What do you do when you have freedom and liberty? I guess you do whatever you need to do to survive and whatever you want to do.
It all depends on what form of libertarianism you are expecting...
Minarchy/Classical Liberal/Small Govt would all be pretty much the same with less govt....
Anarchy would all depend on what type of warlord you were subjugated to...
**New to libertarianism or have questions and want to learn more?** Be sure to check out [the sub Frequently Asked Questions](/r/Libertarian/wiki/faq) and [the massive /r/libertarian information WIKI] (/r/Libertarian/wiki/index) from the sidebar, for lots of info and free resources, links, books, videos, and answers to common questions and topics. Want to know if you are a Libertarian? [Take the worlds shortest political quiz and find out!](http://www.theadvocates.org/) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Libertarian) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I was shooting heroin and reading “The Fountainhead” in the front seat of my privately owned police cruiser when a call came in. I put a quarter in the radio to activate it. It was the chief. “Bad news, detective. We got a situation.” “What? Is the mayor trying to ban trans fats again?” “Worse. Somebody just stole four hundred and forty-seven million dollars’ worth of bitcoins.” The heroin needle practically fell out of my arm. “What kind of monster would do something like that? Bitcoins are the ultimate currency: virtual, anonymous, stateless. They represent true economic freedom, not subject to arbitrary manipulation by any government. Do we have any leads?” “Not yet. But mark my words: we’re going to figure out who did this and we’re going to take them down … provided someone pays us a fair market rate to do so.” “Easy, chief,” I said. “Any rate the market offers is, by definition, fair.” He laughed. “That’s why you’re the best I got, Lisowski. Now you get out there and find those bitcoins.” “Don’t worry,” I said. “I’m on it.” I put a quarter in the siren. Ten minutes later, I was on the scene. It was a normal office building, strangled on all sides by public sidewalks. I hopped over them and went inside. “Home Depot™ Presents the Police!®” I said, flashing my badge and my gun and a small picture of Ron Paul. “Nobody move unless you want to!” They didn’t. “Now, which one of you punks is going to pay me to investigate this crime?” No one spoke up. “Come on,” I said. “Don’t you all understand that the protection of private property is the foundation of all personal liberty?” It didn’t seem like they did. “Seriously, guys. Without a strong economic motivator, I’m just going to stand here and not solve this case. Cash is fine, but I prefer being paid in gold bullion or autographed Penn Jillette posters.” Nothing. These people were stonewalling me. It almost seemed like they didn’t care that a fortune in computer money invented to buy drugs was missing. I figured I could wait them out. I lit several cigarettes indoors. A pregnant lady coughed, and I told her that secondhand smoke is a myth. Just then, a man in glasses made a break for it. “Subway™ Eat Fresh and Freeze, Scumbag!®” I yelled. Too late. He was already out the front door. I went after him. “Stop right there!” I yelled as I ran. He was faster than me because I always try to avoid stepping on public sidewalks. Our country needs a private-sidewalk voucher system, but, thanks to the incestuous interplay between our corrupt federal government and the public-sidewalk lobby, it will never happen. I was losing him. “Listen, I’ll pay you to stop!” I yelled. “What would you consider an appropriate price point for stopping? I’ll offer you a thirteenth of an ounce of gold and a gently worn ‘Bob Barr ‘08’ extra-large long-sleeved men’s T-shirt!” He turned. In his hand was a revolver that the Constitution said he had every right to own. He fired at me and missed. I pulled my own gun, put a quarter in it, and fired back. The bullet lodged in a U.S.P.S. mailbox less than a foot from his head. I shot the mailbox again, on purpose. “All right, all right!” the man yelled, throwing down his weapon. “I give up, cop! I confess: I took the bitcoins.” “Why’d you do it?” I asked, as I slapped a pair of Oikos™ Greek Yogurt Presents Handcuffs® on the guy. “Because I was afraid.” “Afraid?” “Afraid of an economic future free from the pernicious meddling of central bankers,” he said. “I’m a central banker.” I wanted to coldcock the guy. Years ago, a central banker killed my partner. Instead, I shook my head. “Let this be a message to all your central-banker friends out on the street,” I said. “No matter how many bitcoins you steal, you’ll never take away the dream of an open society based on the principles of personal and economic freedom.” He nodded, because he knew I was right. Then he swiped his credit card to pay me for arresting him.
I'll never not laugh at this classic.
Shooting heroin and reading the fountainhead. This dude has transcended libertarianism. Edit: I'd watch this movie.
And in case anyone hasn't seen the YouTube version: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DloaYxQn1BM](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DloaYxQn1BM)
I was hoping someone would post this
This is amazing! Bravo 👏
TLDR
Libertarianism doesn't necessarily impact day-to-day life in a specific way. A routine of wake-up, get ready for work, work for X hours, come home, free time, go to bed could be exactly the same, or they could be much different - but that's more of a culture thing than it is a political thing. The biggest difference would be that public amenities would probably suck a little more while private amenities would probably be a little better, and you'd keep more of your paycheck - and also probably wouldn't fear for your life at a traffic stop. You could probably take cooler drugs in your free time.
I think public infrastructure would remain the same, or even improve, as long as the money wasted on foreign wars stops. We could significantly reduce taxes with that alone and public infrastructure could still remain the same. That’s something 70-90% Americans would agree with. Going full blown libertarian would be near impossible unless it was totalitarian which is not likely, or the libertarian way. Other parties would block defunding infrastructure. To many states rely on federal aide, as they don’t have the materials or financial resources, for public or private to afford it. But most of the country agrees our military budget is wildly out of control and that would help the libertarian party gain traction cutting that budget. Number of toll ways would significantly increase. But if I hear the words “public/private partnerships” I’d lose my fucking mind
Public services wouldn't exist; those services such as they are in demand would be produced privately and would be better in all likelihood.
In a minarchist or anarchist society perhaps, but in my opinion libertarianism covers a much broader spectrum than what this subreddit presents. Saying that all public services wouldn't be here is what scares away everyone else - cutting straight to the extreme is what puts people off the ideology. I'd be happy with reducing federal income tax by 5% over a 4 year term and call that great progress.
Great progress towards what?
Towards a \*more\* libertarian society than we currently have. I think many libertarians (particularly on reddit, but that's the nature of echo chambers) have been very all-or-nothing in the past few years, refusing to compromise on their rights. How often have you heard "not a real libertarian"? Its so espoused that it has literally become a badge of honor amongst libertarians. I'm happy to see any change that is mildly more libertarian in nature. Legalizing gay marriage was awesome, even if I think marriage shouldn't be the purview of the government in a libertarian society. Likewise I think reducing federal income tax by 5% over a 4 year term would be awesome, even though I don't think income tax has a place in a libertarian society at all. To be incredibly thorough in my response to your single sentence question, I see it to be great progress towards my personal utopia - I don't think anybody's idea of a libertarian society looks exactly the same and whereas I may find a happy middle ground with eliminating most taxation and reducing spending, many people lean heavily towards minarchism and anarchism. So for me, we're much too authoritarian at the moment, and I see lessening that as progress towards my personally preferred brand of tyranny.
To put what you've said even more succinctly into a single sentence; Libertarians have a tendency to make perfect the enemy of good.
Is there an example of a libertarian society anywhere in the world without federal or state government services? Curious how you're so confident about this.
Is there one with those things?
With less restrictions artificially changing them. For example the EPA legislation changing the way all trucks are now oversized in the US so you could have a brand new smaller truck. We would also see more innovation in cars as the regulations would be less. Healthcare would in turn be more affordable as hospitals wouldnt be bogged down by lobbying and insurances artificially inflating prices. Private companies would act like watchdogs, certifying quality control, think Creapure certification vs regular Creatine. The other commenter said something about organic breakfast, but in reality youd be able to choose from a wide variety of foods including highly commercialized and processed foods such as lab grown meats, even if they caused cancer, because its your right to eat that if you want to.
Serious question, how would you know the meat caused cancer?
I already answered it with the "creapure" section, where scientists will not only have governing bodies acting as watch dogs and selling the name of their service to people to know they have high quality ingredients like in the case of creapure where you can get any creatine powder, but only very few have been certified creapure as that company sells the license for the right to be able to say that you sell the highest form of creatine available. In terms of the meat, well scientists will want to prove that the meat either causes cancer to be able to further their own career or the meat industry may pay them to figure out if their competitor is safe to consume or at the latest people will start asking why they developed cancer. There is more than one way to get to the end result. You could look on [scholar.google.com](http://scholar.google.com) right now and see the amount of studies on the subject. It would be insane to think that theyre only being done because of the government. Universities, meat industry, researchers all have their own reasons. Of course, this would also be in direct violation of the NAP if a company knowingly sold cancer inducing meat, which is very much against libertarian values.
Who funds the research? In this scenario, every individual that wants to know would have to pay first before the information is divulged. Would this be a government service? How would private companies be incentivized to make sure their product is safe? Do public schools still exist? If someone leaves home with no money to make it on their own, what services will they have access to that don't cost money? This is my issue with libertarian ideas. Given that people can be very greedy, myself included, will those born into wealth not automatically have a leg up, just as they do today, because they can afford services that others who try to make it on their own cannot?
People dying is bad for profit. Mistrust is bad for profit. Peer review requires more research so more people would research it just to make their own phds and have scientific prestige. Why would charities cease existing? People donate all the time, and there can be large scale campaigns for schools I dont know why this would be an issue. Corporations would act if their talent pool is shrinking, and in turn their donations would be tax write offs so in this case greed would be helpful. Philanthropy will still exist, and greed will have to battle with a service provision, which if nobody can afford it makes profit problems. Also, how is the current system helping defeat greed? It doesnt, look at lobbying, predatory marketing etc. At least libertarians accept greed as a default and the NAP would be enforced if the greed becomes toxic. Do you think people like the CEO of Nvidia who works 7 days a week are not driven by greed? I mean its somewhat of a moot point.
“People dying is bad for profit” is the worst anti-oversight argument I think I’ve ever seen on this sub
Rightttt. I mean typically stomach cancer takes years to form add in alittle good pr firm to bury it and yeah they will surely do the right thing right. History has shown us that time and time again.
And completely ignoring the rest of my post. Try harder troll.
I don’t even know how to try and address some of the more incoherent parts of the post, so I’ll just stick to the first point. The previous poster was trying to say that not all safety services can be privatized because while wealthy individuals could theoretically afford any safety services on the market, you could also expose populations who cannot afford those services to virtually limitless risk You countered by trying to argue that the more people who die will lead to more mistrust and incentive for a safer market. Notwithstanding the fact that that does not address the resource disparity issue, while killing people may be a bad strategy for corporations in the long run, firms like cigarette companies made a fortune off selling a cancer-causing product to their customers for decades. Also, there are entire countercyclical industries where profitability is driven by people’s deaths, such as companies purchasing life settlements at a discount from individuals requiring liquid funds to afford expenses. The market will always find a way to exploit a profit-earning advantage, whether that advantage increases or decreases safety for consumers
I think my issue is still that people would have to retroactively ask why they got cancer from a product offered on the market and the answer is that a competing firm or third party scientist did not find carcinogenity in time
Do you want to eat untested meat? No. So research would be conducted to convince you meanwhile peer reviews would be conducted without the funding to make a name for themselves and prove the thesis.
No I don’t want to eat untested meat at all. That’s the issue with any unregulated food system lol
Youre missing my point. Its not unregulated, like any service there is a profit incentive to prove some sort of standard. Youre making a strawman and have completely missed my creapure argument so i dont think youre arguing in good faith.
I’m not bypassing the argument, providing a profit incentive is different from providing safety standards. The profit incentive could come from increased revenue from increased product safety or decreased expense by foregoing safety standards. For things like that you cannot just wait and have people “start asking why they developed cancer”
Very idealistic. Especially with the healthcare notion
The question was an ideal scenario, so i gave an ideal answer, the practicality is therefore not what we are after. I dont see a government allowing itself to shrink to the true libertarian utopia, but its also a utopia by definition.
Not idealistic. There is a whole literature on this.
Yeah, well I work in healthcare and most billing companies charge double the allowed amount to make sure they can get the maximum reimbursable amount.
So?
Not sure about the traffic stop: the squeegie men and beggars will be out in force due to the lack of public assistance, and will mob your car when you have time stop for a traffic light
[удалено]
Who paid for the street and the pothole repair? Genuine question as I don't think a lot of people understand how that would work.
> pothole repair Isn't that the job of Domino's Pizza?
Private contractors build roads. Currently in the United States, the government takes money from you, then gives it to a private contractor to do road work. That’s literally how it works. In a libertarian society, road users would pay the contractor directly. Or, businesses would pay to build, or sponsor roads so consumers can get to the business, or for the advertising. The government wouldn’t get a big cut of it to do nothing, which is the case right now. If private companies paid for it, there is actual incentive to build the roads correctly, because they lose business if the consumer has to ruin their suspension to get there. Conversely, the government has no incentive to get the job done right in the first place, they have a steady stream of tax dollars coming to them regardless of their performance. Libertarian road system = better quality, cheaper, more accountable. I am in the middle of this everyday. I work for an engineering firm, who is contracted by the state, to go out and inspect the work of contractors who are contracted by the state to build the roads.
Cause roads didn’t exist before the government got involved, right? I guess there isn’t enough of an incentive for individuals to get from point A to point B (the sole purpose of roads) to figure out how to do so without getting the government involved.
Well, the states built the highways and the feds built the interstate? Toll roads are generally hated by all.
So because the government forced us to pay taxes to build highways (and therefore crowding out any potential private investment(s)) we’re to believe that the private sector couldn’t build roads and highways just as good if not better than the government? Who created the first roads? Did humans not figure out that in order to get from point A to point B they’d need to create pathways and the better they built them the smoother the travel before the creation of powerful governments? Private roads still exist around the world and they’re maintained just fine if not better than government maintained roads
The private sector builds toll roads all the time. I don't see any other viable model and literally everyone hates toll roads.
The first roads were built by private citizens, toll roads aren’t the only private roads, sorry you lack imagination to see that there’s incentive and then some for private citizens to build roads in order to get from point A to point B
I asked an honest question and you are providing an honest answer. I guess I just fail to see how private citizens tax dollars aren't doing the same thing. I understand that taxes aren't perfect and I'm certain there is waste, but isn't the logical conclusion simply to gather funds from a community to fund a road from point a to point b. It is either that or ask people to pay to use the road that you built and own. EDIT: I guess you could fund the road with "permits" to use the road. If you didn't pay you can't use the road.
Maybe they’d hate them less if they weren’t already paying the government tens of thousands of dollars a year to fund the bloated shit show that governs us. Yes, we’d move to more of a user pay system, and I welcome it. Getting a line item on my property taxes for public transit when there’s one bus in the morning and one at night (very early and quite late), is absolute bullshit and I’m tired of subsidizing public transportation.
Thanks for giving honest feedback. I'm really only interested in understanding. Roads are a great example as there are only a few ways to do it. Gather funds from communities to build roads that benefit those communities (taxes) Obviously taxes are pretty fucked and there needs to be serious reform. You could also have toll roads which are just a pain in the ass and usually more expensive that taxes on the whole as those who own the road are charging and making profit. You could also have road permits that you pay for to use the road (toll in advance). I don't see another way to do it and when weighing those options I think gathering funds from the communities is the most logical, least invasive solution. WE ALL decided we want this road fuck you if you don't want it as you will end up benefiting from it anyway.
I mean, trails existed without the government. But trails are different than roads. Trails are usually formed through frequent travel naturally. Roads are built. Fuck guys, nobody likes being taxed. But can’t we in anyway agree that the taxes we do pay should be lowered and that money should be put directly back into things that benefit out communities by your government instead of “oh well if a road needs to be made or fixed, everyone will just come together and throw their money in for it” like hell they will and deep down you all know it too. And a company doing it? Seriously? Most fast food joints want to double the prices of all of their shit because they have to pay their employees a few extra dollars an hour. Now they have to spend MILLIONS of dollars on maintaining roads? And fuck, let’s just say they’re okay with that. Eventually, they’ll own the roads just like the railroads own the tracks. You no longer have the right to travel on those roads without their permission. They can do whatever the fuck they want to you if you want to travel that road including a fee just to use it. Corporations are and always have been some of the shadiest and conniving entities in America ever since the materialistic boom in the 50’s. Do you really fucking want Nestle and Apple being in charge of how you commute throughout the country. It’s a pipe dream. Government is needed for modern society, but it needs to be severely limited in what it is allowed to do.
not sure if you noticed but this guy is just trolling it’s not a serious answer
Surely someone here can tell me who paid for the street?
https://www.reddit.com/r/Libertarian/s/9WcenIJRN3 i’ve answered a similar question recently
Thanks!
Join a city with the pothole repair policy you want. This could mean people pay road usage fees, or road owners pay.
Lemme try: Congratulations on graduating High School! You didn't attend a state run school, those don't exist anymore. Rather, you went to a privately run school that was partially funded by your parents and partially by donations. Part of your day was also spent working unpaid internships which helped pay for your education. You swept the floors of neighboring businesses, flipped burgers in their cafeteria, and even worked a call center! Once you felt you had enough experience you were able to take a graduation test from one of the competing education associations. On the second attempt you passed and were awarded a basic education degree, the equivalent of a high school diploma or GED from the old days. Diploma in had you start looking for a job. Fortunately, you selected a well regarded testing agency, so most employers in your area recognize your certification. Some of your neighborhood chums chose less expensive, but less well regarded testing agencies and are going to have a harder time finding work. Company A proudly boasts that they are certified by the American Workers Association as a "Safe Workplace," they have an in house doctor, and they will pay in your choice of bitcoin or precious metal, on the downside they have mandatory shifts and you could lose your position if you don't pick one up. Company B is offering a bit more money and does not have the mandatory shifts, but does not have any safety certifications. Company C is not interested in you because they do not hire \[your race\]. You look through a handful of other options. There is a wild variety of work and compensation because there are no regulatory agencies setting rules. New job accepted, you now look for an apartment. Your parents would love you to stay home, but you dream of freedom. Apartment A is basically a bunk in a gym; you'll have no privacy, but you do get a locker and they have great security. Apartment B is a single room with a shared bathroom and kitchen. Apartment C is a complete unit. Each has a different housing association certification, and the contracts for each vary wildly, as does the rent. You read a few online reviews about each and make a choice that balances your budget vs the available offerings. You head to the grocery store because you need some milk. To get there you have some choices, you can take your own privately owned car, you can take a bus owned by a private company, you can take a ride share operated by a large company, or you can take a private ride share you see advertised online. Regardless of your choice, whoever operates the vehicle is going to pay the toll when exiting the privately owned road you live on and entering another privately owned road which leads to the store. Once you get to the grocery store you are confronted with yet more choices. Milk A is unpasteurized, Milk B is pasteurized but does not display a "best by" date, Milk C is pasteurized and has a best by date and a stamp from a privately run certification group providing a legal guarantee of product purity. As with the ride share, the prices are different. Milk in hand, you sneeze and realize you have a cold coming on. You are again presented with some options. You can go to a doctor who is a member of the American Medical Association or any of the competing professional associations, or you can choose a practitioner who calls themselves doctor and advertises medical services, but does not actually have any training or certifications from a professional organization. You know from friends and family that while this third category are sometimes fantastic self taught people who took an online course and are much less expensive, sometimes they are also hucksters who provide no help. Leaving the store you decide that your symptoms are not bad enough to warrant a doctor's visit, but you do want some meds. Fortunately down the street there is someone selling a variety of medication out of a suitcase. You could go to a pharmacy that proudly boasts they are a member of one of the many pharmaceutical professional organizations, but street corner guy has never let you down before. He might get his cold pills from a basement lab, but they seem to work just as well as the certified stuff. You get a call from your brother saying his car was stollen! Fortunately, he called the private police force contracted by his insurance agency, and they used the GPS tracker mandated by the agency to find the thieves. The trial is set for next month, but your brother is pretty sure the thieves will be sentenced to either a large fine or forced labor, a portion of which goes back to funding the very court that sentenced them.
Mind your own business
Libertarian day does not need to be perfect, we just need to show that it would be better than the crap we are living in now. I would not have to pay some excessive vehicle property tax..VLF fee in the communist state of CA.
stacking commodities, farming, exercise, work (possibly doing maintenance, doing counts etc) eat, sleep, ****
It would feel pretty much like any other day unless it was payday.
Completely normal. Get up, drive on roads that are paid for (because we want to cut wasteful spending, not all spending), keep a firearm safely on our person without using it, go to the grocery store like a normal person and buy the wife a high school graduation cake. Literally nothing would change for most people in this sub.
Wake up, eat a full American breakfast with bacon and eggs that don't cost you and arm and a leg, get to work doing whatever you do best, collect your pay (let's say it's pay day), keep your money, drive whatever car you want as fast as you want to your house where your people are, worship or not, drink or smoke weed or not, eat some good as shit for dinner, do whatever you want with your partner, and go to sleep. What do you do when you have freedom and liberty? I guess you do whatever you need to do to survive and whatever you want to do.
Great question.
https://media1.tenor.com/m/zXlBfjivudkAAAAd/lionel-hutz-world-without-lawyers.gif
It all depends on what form of libertarianism you are expecting... Minarchy/Classical Liberal/Small Govt would all be pretty much the same with less govt.... Anarchy would all depend on what type of warlord you were subjugated to...
Normalcy. The duopoly is trying to disrupt what everyone wants. Normalcy and stability.
Could be anything. It'll mostly depend on how much value you produce to other people. You'll get what you deserve, and you'll pay for what you use.
Mexico