Do libertarians (not ancaps) believe that taxation is necessary or that it should be voluntary - as in, being able to choose which government services you want to benefit from?
What do they consider to be the most fundamental services that should not be provided by private entities?
taxation is necessary - we need borders. we need a standing army. we need police. we need courts. we need political offices. we need, sorry folks, public utility (government control over the land in which public utilities use and route is a necessity).
most other services can fuck right off and stop trampling on my rights
>>74387076
>public utility
You mean the roads and the like? Why couldn't toll roads be constructed and maintained by private companies? I'm not taking a side, I just want to understand.
Should there be entire parcels of land owned by the government? As in, national parks for example.
>>74387238
National parks are fine. I feel like there'd be too many conflicts over land, with roads, after a certain amount of time passed. i want a society that can run smoothly for a long time - territory disputes over necessary services will harm the american people and i would like that not to happen
>>74386911
The Libertarian Party may or may not have a plank on their platform about this or that, but generally speaking, libertarians have no set doctrine to define such things, certainly not in a 'one size fits all' sort of way. Every libertarian will have their own opinions about it, though it's easy to just say that taxation == theft.
>>74387387
I understand.
What do you think of the argument that border control isn't necessary since the lack of welfare and other social benefits would prevent immigrants from thriving?
>>74387515
ancap gobbledygook. a society as large as america could never realistically cut that many social benefits because of too many people voting to keep dem bennies
>>74387456
Right, I was mostly asking about the hardcore libertarians who support minarchy.
>>74386911
completely voluntary
people would start respecting the few remaining gov officials who exist only to enforce basic laws
>>74387789
>a society as large as america could never realistically cut that many social benefits
To what extent would the US cut down on the gibmedats then?
>>74388018
Isn't Molyneux full-on ancap?
>>74388018
yea he is but i like the memes that have emerged recently and i enjoy listening to him talk
the whole anarchy part is retarded imho tbqh
>>74388120
I honestly don't know. Whenever a country is in a rough financial situation, it calls for more socialism. But as the economy improves, people tend to more towards freer and freer policies, until things get so good that people wind up going back to socialism and fucking things up again. vicious cycle desu
>>74388303
>>the whole anarchy part is retarded
It's nice to think about in principle but absolutely impossible to actually implement, I suppose.
>>74388431
in principale its the final stage of a truly free society just like communism is the final stage of socialism
so impossible in practice
its fun to speculate about muh libertarian utopia but i just want to get the commies of the market first really
>>74389032
>i just want to get the commies of the market first
Pretty much, leftists are a fucking plague. They'll probably go away by themselves eventually, though.
Keep the Molymemes going
>>74389032
>its fun to speculate about muh libertarian utopia but i just want to get the commies of the market first really
this is pretty much the best stance we could take in these troubling times
