pull down to refresh
Yes I do, that's the exact libertarian stance on the state's reason to exist.
Ok good to know you accept that fundamental good the state provides.
However I am guessing you reject the states provision of health care, roading, education, public transport, retirement programs and other welfare?
Ok good to know you accept that fundamental good the state provides.
It's not that I "accept it" like if it's an uncomfortable confession, it's an explicit libertarian stance you will hear from any exponent and read from any book. It's the one thing we claim the state should exist for. You might be mistaking libertarianism by anarchy if you ever thought otherwise.
Other than that, any sort of welfare policy can't but destroy a country economy, infrastructure, and it's society from the core. Healing from such cultural and economic damage can take decades and requires a complete generational cleansing to fully heal.
Ok so any policy by government that seeks to advance the opportunities of some or all citizens is bad - unless it is related directly to the protection of citizens from other states or citizens within the state?
If so how would such a state prevent monopolies and cartels?
So you place no value upon the protection the state provides you from other states?
And from criminals within the state who might seek to take your property and or harm you directly?