you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Only71Genders 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

It's a win for us libertarians. Eventually people will learn to stop using the government to legislate against things they don't like.

[–]Nemacolin 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

Like slavery, homicide and stuff like that?

[–]Only71Genders 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Those are direct acts of aggression on other human beings. Completely different than saying what someone can do with themselves and other consenting adults. If someone wants to slam dope into their veins, then that's their choice. Assuming they aren't committing another crime or injecting into an unwilling participant.

[–]Nemacolin 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Oh. I do wish you would have said that.

[–]RuckFeddit 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (5 children)

who builds the roads?

[–]Only71Genders 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Do you believe libertarian means anarchist, or that libertarians advocate for absolute abolition of the government?

Roads can still be built through tax funding, but at a much smaller scale. Private companies can pick up the slack and do it at a fraction of the cost. And through consent, instead of force. And with much better quality.

Also, advocates of large, tax funded, government programs can opt in to pay taxes on the programs that they cherish. And donations. This won't result in very much revenue, in comparison, but it won't be zero, and again, it is through consent over force. Non-profits operate on this principal and some are incredibly well funded. They bring in hundred of billions of dollars every year on the premise of consent to programs that people cherish and believe to be for the greater good. No force necessary.

[–]RuckFeddit 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Roads can still be built through tax funding, but at a much smaller scale. Private companies can pick up the slack and do it at a fraction of the cost. And through consent, instead of force. And with much better quality.

You need a better answer than this. The planning alone would be an infrastructural catastrophe.

[–]Only71Genders 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Lol I need a better answer? Good one. Are you aware that private companies already build roads throughout the United States? The responsibility would be pushed on to them over time. I don't need to map out the timeline and form and operations plan for a general concept. Hilarious.

[–]RuckFeddit 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I am well aware, and you already have corruption with the likes of building contract distribution in a government that has so much power to fight corruption already. You even want private companies to eventually be solely responsible for road construction. Batshit loony stuff that makes libertarians look like economic retards.

Are you even getting my point here?

[–]Only71Genders 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Your point is that you love government and are scared of a world without it being the parental figure for our society. Our world will still continue with less government, trust me. Meanwhile, no one is saying that eliminating the government is a good idea. Just reversing the trend of an ever-growing government. You call libertarians "economic retards" but won't even make a honest argument. You are literally claiming I said the exact opposite of what I said. In a thread that shows exactly what I said. And then arguing against something that I never said. It's weird. Don't be one of those guys.