Libertarian here

debate me, if you dare

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liechtenstein
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

In a structured society the government must manage its people to some degree. Therefore you cannot be completely free

the government doesnt own people

the government derives its purpose (its lawfulness) from the fact that every individual possesses the natural rights to life, liberty and property and the defense of these rights thus since these rights are systematic it is reasonable to pool those rights into a collective defense called "the government"

roads

How does a libertarian solve the problem of societal degradation which occurs naturally over the course of the life-time of a civilisation?

At what point does the fetus in the womb become a human life that is protected by law?

I used to say I was a libertarian but then I figured out the government controls our borders, if you take that away we're fucked.

Can't do that.

Why shouldn't America have an enforced border?

Why shouldn't America have an enforced border and immigration laws?

Why don't you just pull the fuckin' trigger?

conception except in cases of pre-viability rape

the woman waives her right to bodily autonomy when she engages in intercourse but rape is non-voluntary

What's your BMI

Australians are the property of Britons, sorry m8.

lol roads

Libertarian != AnCap

Controlling immigration can be congruent with libertarianism

we dont need government to build roads

we should

name me a single libertarian society that has ever been successful

>if you dare
you've got so many retarded piles of bullshit ready to hold up like they're legit, I'm just gonna leave this here.

Modern life is too complex for most people to manage very well. They need benevolent paternalism to guide them toward the right outcomes.

Asking people (for example) to figure out how to finance their own retirements in a modern service-oriented economy is just an act of cruelty. But libertarians have no problem with it.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liechtenstein

damn thats funny haha

deontology > consequentialism

turns out the government isn't very good at managing the economy either seeing how the government is ran by people

good news, we have an alternative: the free market

>Asking people (for example) to figure out how to finance their own retirements in a modern service-oriented economy is just an act of cruelty

t. nigger

Take a finance crash course and learn to invest.

What do you think about the idea that a decent amount of welfare state & redistribution is necessary to ensure the political support for free markets?

Libertarianism: the radical notion that other people are your property.

The problem is social welfare in itself is immoral

"But how is this legal plunder to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime.

Then abolish this law without delay, for it is not only an evil itself, but also it is a fertile source for further evils because it invites reprisals. If such a law — which may be an isolated case — is not abolished immediately, it will spread, multiply, and develop into a system.

The person who profits from this law will complain bitterly, defending his acquired rights. He will claim that the state is obligated to protect and encourage his particular industry; that this procedure enriches the state because the protected industry is thus able to spend more and to pay higher wages to the poor workingmen.

Do not listen to this sophistry by vested interests. The acceptance of these arguments will build legal plunder into a whole system. In fact, this has already occurred. The present-day delusion is an attempt to enrich everyone at the expense of everyone else; to make plunder universal under the pretense of organizing it." -Bastiat, The Law

*unsheathes katana*

not an argument

Fuck off Communist

I'm always suprised when people legitimately think the roads argument is some sort of silver bullet.

A lot of developements and communities already pay for their own roads. A lot of businesses would fail if they aren't located on popular roads. Commercial developers could easily shoulder the burdon of building roads. They would most likely prefer it to their current tax burdon.

roads

You can't argue with a liberal. Facts and logic are usually drowned out, only to be replaced with slogans and shouting.

That's a good question that Bastiat identifies, but isn't the least-worst solution basically to just haggle it out in within the nonviolent, rules-based system of democracy?

If your political philosophy never works because it's unsustainable in a democracy, what good is it?

Seems like the best parts of libertarianism are about regulation and free markets, rather than the 'size' of government and redistribution.

*liberaltarian

If by unsustainable you're implying that eventually the poor would overthrow the government and take the resources for themselves, I doubt that the bourgeoisie would just let them do that without resistance.

I meant unsustainable in a more relaxed sense of just getting voted out of office and replaced with politicians who support helping poor people either through regulation or redistribution. But yeah I guess a violent revolt would be the extreme example.

not an argument

Except the government has moved beyond collective defense of life, liberty & property and has become contradictory to its core purpose.

public transportation

>other people aren't my property

The societal degredation has a lot of causes originating from the concept of law makes right and the use of statism. (welfare for example).

You'll only have a Libertarian society when maybe 10% of the population leads a moral revolution back to base principles, you'll have a different culture then and as long as a state isn't seen as a necessary solution to complex social problems it won't grow and it won't cause the majority of the degredation.

There is a worry about people following their own values but that's how freedom works, if you want to change the outcomes of freedom change the culture.

Although even so, ostracism, economics & social incentives coming back to the forefront is what usually curbs these problems, you might even see a resurgence of spiritualism alongside the moral revolution of philosophy.

When you stay where you are you are limiting the freedom of other people to stay in the exact same space you are. You are infringing on the right other people have to control their property. And they actually doing the exact same thing to you. Hence, the very existence of the human race is immoral and libertarians should all kill themselves.

Scarcity necessitates property.

Also see the concepts of:
- negative rights
- ownership
- argumentation
- civilization

not an argument

How does lolbertarianism address slavery without government intervention?

If I get a bill of sale for a piglet from Somalia there is nothing that a libertarian can do without breaking the non aggression principle.

Liberate the slave?

A TL;DR or cba libertarian society is self-destructing.

Government mandated and forcibly maintained slavery which can't exist as a large institution without it.

As for smaller more discreet slave trade? 1. Government hasn't solved that yet and 2. you'd deal with it any way you normally would/could or maybe come up with something better since government hasn't worked for it.

>flag
So, is your libertarian ideology subverted by kikes, or is that just our mess here in burgerland?

...

not an argument