All libertarians are faggots

quit being faggots guys

also stop describing yourself as libertarian and start describing yourself and anti-food safety, anti-public universities, anti-environment, anti-labor law, anti-border security, etc...

stop describing the faggots who parade under the libertarian party as libertarians cuz they're not

real libertarians want more individual social freedoms and a free market economy; we're not normally radical to the point of denying ALL government regulation.

>>1
You just described the republicans...

>>1
I know you're a troll fag, but you have quite a nice line up of issues voters care about so I will explain how libertarianism solves all these problems.

Food safety: Only a liberal being apologetic towards his national socialist masters would say that poisonning people should be legal. Don't be absurd, of course we are pro-food safety.

Public universities: Subsidising universities corrupts the calculation as to whether a person's education will be beneficial to the economy which causes innumerable problems. For example it means talented people are tempted to take courses that are not as beneficial to the economy just because they enjoy them, as charitable and nice as this sounds tax payer's money should not exist to give people a free ride. Alternatives exist which achieve this, but have been stamped out and persecuted by liberals and the government as they are weak minded and afraid of change.

Environment: The environment will be bought and sold and coorporations will seek permanent revenues on their investments to ensure shareholder loyalty. As a result nations such as Cuba and North Korea which burn enormous quantities of fossil fuels will have to purchase the oxygen that they burn. Also the corporations involved will use their profits to remove carbon from the atmosphere and produce oxygen.

Labor laws: People are free to form unions under a libertarian government, they are merely not permitted to force it on others. In a highly competitive economy such as the current US economy, corporations favour a permanent workforce which is familiar with it's work environment as this improves productivity. Unions also thrive in this condition. Lowerring tax often causes the economy to heat increasing worker's pay and lowerring the need for populist unrealistic utopias, which is why liberals enjoy taxing people into poverty.

Border security: Unfortunately the entire world is not libertarian so in the interest of enforcing justice borders would be totally closed and a background check from only the most compliant and cooperative police forces from other countries would permit immigration. The military would be issued with closing the borders, we would bring the men and materials currently in Iraq over to the Canadian and Mexican border to achieve this.

The "border fence" is full of lulz.

Wasn't this the same govt. that wanted the Berlin wall pulled down?

Gawd I love hypocrites!

>>4
Best parody ever. Pure genius!

>>7

w/e you're just a malcontented, inarticulate democrat who thinks people will have more respect for you if you wave the libertarian flag.  Libertarians hate the government and you know it.

>>7

TIME PARADOX

the irony:

The academics who study to start a career are usually libertarians because they don't want to pay for those who didn't study for years and took the easy way out.
Academics who want to do state funded research are socialists on the other hand because they don't like being pressured into actually researching stuff.
Here we see that the socialists exploit the working class.

>>5
Use your brain.

People were fleeing out of the failed socialist state of east Germany into west Germany and east Germany built the wall to prevent their slaves from escaping.

On the US-Mexican border at the moment, Mexico is encouraging it's excess slave population to jump the border and the US will build the border fence to keep them out.

See the difference? East Germany wants to keep slaves in. The Us wants to keep slaves out.

>>6
It's not a parody. Crushing counter argument to follow?

>>9
Truth told.

libertarians are conformist fags

>>12
Conformity and non-conformity are irrelevant. People are free to be homosexual if they wish. So there is nothing necessarily wrong with being a conformist fag. It is highly unlikely that all libertarians are homosexual.

Non-conforming is conforming.

Let that logic blow ya fuckin' minds...

>>14
I blew my load.

I also contemplated the fact that what people believe is non-conformist is often merely conformism to something else.

>>9
Rofl, so I suppose the state-funded folks over at NASA never accomplished anything?

>>16

Now, that's a perfect argument for... well, nothing.
Nice example for totally missing the point thought.

Just a random though here: in the UK, all Universities are public, and here in Scotland, Scottish residents do not pay tuition fees at all. If I want to do a year at say, Boston College or UC Berkeley, the government will pay too. Most international students have to pay fees though, starting from about $20,000 p/a for arts degrees.

>>18
Which is why you'll find there are less and less places for locals and more and more for international students.

I'm in Australia and that shit is happening now. My govt sold us out and looks as if the Britsh govt is now doing the same...

No such thing as a successful Libertarian nation. Thread over.

>>19

Actually most people at Scottish universities are Scottish. I forgot to mention that EU students get their fees paid as well. We don't have racist quotas.

>>1

True.

The libertarians and for that matter greens and socialists are for the most part simply acting out a teenage fantasy of being "against the man".  It's a nice fantasy, because it allows you to take positions that would never work in the real world.  But since your parties are never going to impliment those policies ('cause they don't win any major office), you're free to potificate about how we'd have Utopia if we'd only do exactly what the green/libertarians/socialists WANT us to do.

If you really want to be a libertarian, you and a bunch of your buddies go find an islans somewhere (or build a rocket and go to Mars), and run a society on those priciples.  If you're a libertarian, that means no one can regulate anything, no taxes, and maybe a private army and police force.  For socialists, just the opposite -- send all your goods to the government, and have a bunch of free services.  Either way, I'll see you in two years.  You'll probably be trying to illegally re-immigrate back to the US or some other Western nation. 

Idealism is nice, but it's not real.  Utopia means nowhere, because there is no place on earth where people will act perfectly to each other.

>>22

Just a side note:
There's no free land on this world. Each spot is claimed by at least one country and if you do somethnig funny then they'll send troops to kill you.
And people already got killed because some fags tried to start their own kingdom.

>>22

You've muddled and crammed that political spectrum into your small post-teenage world view that you generalize them as RAGE-AGAINST-THE-MACHINE -- and you demean their practical position that authoritarianism can always create bad situations.

>>25

Well, from what I've seen, it's absolutely true.  They are raging against "the Machine".  In the more Socialist circles, "the Machine" means those evil capitalists and corporations making a profit and holding down the little people.  If not for the Evil Capitalist, life would be perfect and we'd dance to folk music and do nothing but make folk art all day.  Not a care in the world. 

And for Libertarians, "the Machine" is the government. Oh, if only there was no government, the invisible hand of the market would take care of everything and we'll spend our days doing whatever we want, and people will always be able to work hard and make enough money to get whatever they want.

And in most cases, the people who advocate for the political extremes are high school and college students who have absolutely NO contact with the economy other than a part time job.  Mommy and Daddy still take care of Louie the Libertarian and Stan the Socialist.  This isn't based on reality, it's a form of mental masterbation.  You get to pretend to be informed and challenge the system (girls like a strong independent thinker), yet you know deep down that the system you propose has absolutely no chance on actually existing. 
Neither one of them works in the real world.  The closest we have to a libertarian economy are places in Central and South America with relatively weak governments.  What seems to happen is that you have no middle class -- there are the very rich and the very poor and few in the middle. 

In socialist countries, you kill off most innovation.  Name three major inventions coming from Sweden (widely reguarded as Socialist Utopia).  You won't be able to, because without the profit motive, no one will bother to invent or improve anything. 

Both systems, in their pure form will destroy a society.  In pure capitalism, it's a fairly medieval system with a large wealthy "lord" class surrounded by poorly educated peasents.  On the socialist side you get stagnant societies where the worst thing you can do is rock the boat. 

The best solution seems to be balancing the two against each other, so that the free market does what it does best, and the government provides reasonable protection against the excesses of capitalism.  It takes negotiation and hard work to figure out what the best mix is, but it can be done.

All of you guys are right about idealism, but unfortunately Libertarianism is a science, if it were an idealism it would be about the government forcing people to abide by certain arbitrary laws in order to achieve an "ideal". Libertarianism is about letting people live their own way with the least interference needed to secure peace and law. If you want to be a socialist in a libertarianism you are free to set up your own hippy colony somewhere and attempt to create your ideal society there, maybe if it is succesful more people will join in. You're just not allowed to force other people to comply.

>>25

*sigh* sweden is a country with a population of 9 million, most small nations can't brag about alot of major inventions, but they're pretty big on technology, the thing is that most "inventions" these days aren't basic neccesities and thus don't get world famous. look at switzerland, they're not socialist, name any major swiss invention?
Also sweden isn't a socialist utopia it's a modern well functioning socialliberal country.


>>26
tell me please, how is libertarianism a science?

>>27

It's a branch of political science (at best).

Also, Switzerland is a great place to live. They have a no-nonsense approach to politics, with their semi-direct system. Most households own guns, yet gun crime is proportionally much, much lower than the use.

>>25
One could argue that scientists search for things for the expansion of knowledge, which is true of about 90% of scientific discoveries, no inherent practical use, but it enlightens mankind.
Scientists are different from libertarians in this regard.

>>28

i said nothing about switzerland being a gerat place to live, i'm sure it is, but so is sweden, lol. I was just using it as another small country that had a system very much unlike sweden to say that just because switzerland doesn't have alot taxes they don't spit out huge paradigm-shifting inventions constantly.

>>25
You might want to do a little research on the straw-man fallacy, and as a quick tip, libertarianism is NOT the same thing as anarchism.

>>31

I didn't say that libertarian is exactly the same as anarchism.  But government regulations do protect people in some cases.

Things like the FDA are necessary, because a person has no way to test for himself that the food he eats is safe, and the drugs actually treat the diseases they're advertised for. 

Imagine that your doctor tells you you need a heart pill.  In a libertarian system where drug testing doesn't happen, it's a crapshoot.  Maybe one brand of pill is 99.99% MSG and does absolutely nothing, and the next brand is poorly manufactured so taking one pill could mean anything from 1/4 to 4x the recommended dose.  Nothing could go wrong there, let alone if your pills are made in a filthy factory.  Maybe the pill doesn't even really do anything, it's snake oil.  How do you tell the good from the bad?  It would take not only a medical degree, but a lot of chemistry knowledge to keep from getting scammed and possibly dying if some guy decides to make pills at a lower standard. 

That's the trouble with libertarianism in a nutshell, we live in a complex society, and we simply cannot protect ourselves from scams and fraud.  Especially in cases where we lack the knowledge or the ability to check for ourselves.

    SUDDENLY, NIGGERS! MILLIONS OF THEM!
    ☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻
    ☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻
    ☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻
    ☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻
    ☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻
    ☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻

libertarians are conformist fags.

>>34
u conform to non-conformists

☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻ 10
☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻ 100
☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻☻ 1000

>>moot
"Thanks for your contribution, but it was too large."

fag, i want my 1000000 nigras

I have an idea!!

http://dis.4chan.org/read/lounge/1181414581/1-

☻

>>32
The second a person dies because of a medication that company is fucked.  Just look at teh Peanut butter scandal.  That company is in  major financial trouble because they have to pull so many jars off teh shelf, etc.

>>40
What the fuck are you talking about?
Peanut Butter medication?
Peanut Butter company in financial trouble?
_teh_?

>>40
>>41
Maybe THIS scary business? I hope to god these pricks go bankrupt! It's called ACCOUNTABILITY, motherfucker.

The ConAgra facility in Longmont, Colorado, had the highest rate of salmonella among all the turkey processors tested by the Department during 2001. Nearly half of the turkeys processed at ConAgra’s Longmont, Colorado, facility were contaminated with harmful Salmonella bacteria, compared with a rate of 13 percent for the industry at large.
In 2002, ConAgra ... spent heavily to defeat Oregon's measure 27, which would have required food companies to label products that contain genetically modified ingredients.
In 1997 ConAgra pled guilty to federal criminal charges that its Peavey Grain unit illegally sprayed water on stored grain to increase its weight and value and also bribed Federal inspectors. The company agreed to pay $8.3 million to resolve the charges, which included a $4.4 million criminal fine, $3.45 million as compensation for illegal profits and $450,000 to reimburse the U.S. Department of Agriculture for storage and investigation expenses.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ConAgra_Foods#Health_record
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ConAgra_Foods#Ethical_record

>>42 also proves if your scam is big enough, and you rake in enough money, that you can buy your way out of almost anything.

>>40

But they only have to pull peanut butter off the shelf because the EEEVIL government is FORCING them to.  If the FDA and the CDC hadn't been investigating them and enforcing our "Socialist" food and drug laws, those cans of peanut butter would still be on the shelves. 

They certainly weren't pulling those cans off the shelf before the government got involved.

>>44

how comes you mistake libertarianism for anarchism?

>>45

that's not anarchism, people would find out that it was unhealthy, and then they would stop buying it and the peanut butter company would go out of business. don't you understand anything about libertarianism?

>>46

oh, i must have confused libertarianism for the one that acknowledges private property

>>46
Like they did tobacco?

>>47

seems like you must.

>>48
yes, just like that.

>>49
What, are you dense? Seen any tobacco company gone out of business lately? And what, you prefer that some people get cancer and die so the rest can say "Shit, smoking and peanut butter seem to kill people, better not buy that shit, oh man i would die for some mercury laced crackers now"? Thats really nice, but i think i prefer our way, sorry.

>>50

not my fault people are stupid, survival of the fittest.

>>51
Thats why the fittest animals hunt in packs...

>>52

sure, but do the strong ones take care of the weak ones in the pack? no. there's no reason to, because the weak ones have weak genes and they aren't worth keeping alive.

>>53
GB2TheCaves

NATURE DOESN'T CARE ABOUT BLACK PEOPLE

in fact, nature is completly amoral and doesn't care about anyone

>>53
Yes they do, or rather, the pack divides the food hunted with those who did not hunt according to pack hierarchy. Also, each individual is to weak to fell larger prey and it is only through cooperation they can succeed and survive. Also, the pack minimizes misfortunes, i.e. even the strongest individual can wind up not catching any prey but through pack it doesnt have to go hungry. This also means the strongest is the one giving up most of its killings to the pack, but the insurance it gets in return is well worth it (otherwise this behaviour would not be represented in nature). The degree of cooperation is among other things determined by the abundance of resources in the environment, the harsher the conditions the more important cooperation gets and vice versa.

>>56

hah! try again! everyone here can see you're getting nowhere with your communist propaganda.

>>57
Okay, u remember darwin? You explain why not all animals act as spiders in evolutionary terms mr Scientist!

Don't worry, Darwin recanted. The world is 6,000 years old you devil-worshiping heathen. And no, there's no such thing as evolved altruism: http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=altruism+evolution

>>59
Troll needs work.

>>58
>>59
If some animals are better off working together, those that are inclined to do so are more likely to pass on their genes. However when these new cooperation genes are widespread, those that find ways to leach off the group will be more likely to pass on their genes, halting cooperative evolution.

This means there are emotions that make someone selfish and emotions that make someone altruistic. If you make people too stupid to realise they are better off ignoring their altruistic emotions you also increase the prevalence of their naturally greedy emotions.

>>1

Only if you start describing yourself as anti-freedom first.

>>61
For the freeriders to halt evolution it would mean that the advantage of cooperation was low to begin with. Rather, freeriding exist as an undercurrent but since cooperation is needed to survive it cant be completly eradicated.
I dont believe these facts can be readily transferred to human psychology, its a little more complex than that, so i wont comment altruism or greed.

>>63
You are just repeating my point that it is a balance between the benefits of cooperation and selfishness. You denied selfishness existed in the first place and I corrected you, why not simply admit you were wrong instead of pretending otherwise?

>>64
Can you paste where i denied that selfishness existed? Firstly, i believe its retarded to source complex human emotion to evolutionary processes, human mind does not work like that. Cooperative behaviour is not altruism at all, its among other things knowing whos your master and whos your underling, and when the master is weak so you can depose him etc. These things are necessary for the pack to survive. What i was meaning with the natural example is that in environments where survival of the fittest is the governing law cooperation can be the only way of survival. Cooperation is not everybody being fucking hippies, its everybody giving something up for the benefit of the pack, since without the pack there can be no individual. And this is true where resources are scarce. Now plez admit that u are an hero.

ragidfesu

ITT creationists talk about evolution

I AM FROM THE FUTURE

KILL ALL NIGGERS BEFORE THEY KILL YOU

(future is dominated by nigger-liberals!)

Fucking stupid libertarians don't even realize libertarianism is drawn directly from marxism.

>>69
No it isn't. It was around before Marx's dad had even learned how to fap.

i'm so glad this thread constantly has more posts than the other libertarian thread

>>71
This is because libertarians thrive on criticism, unlike socialist who enjoy ignoring criticism, facts and anything generally related to reality.

or maybe just because there are no realy socialists on 4chan

>>72
one word response: lol

>>40
Without food safety laws the company would have had no financial incentive to pull the product and thus would have possibly simply left it on the shelves.

OP has to be a troll, no one can be that dumb

>>73
>>76
Considerring how much time they spend trying to be apologetic towards socialism I doubt they are all trolls.
>>74
No facts, no rational argument. gb2 socialistology class
>>75
Food safety laws are important in preserving justice which libertarians support.

Yeah, people are very rational and reflective consumers and "vote with their currency."

"Libertarians" are 99 times out of 100 Republicans who are afraid to admit it because of what that admission would do to their koolness quotient.

The real Libertarians, while offering some good ideas, have a utopian belief that YOUR NEIGHBORS can unite to make a great place to live, if only they were given the responsibility.  HAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...my neighbors would do what?
Here's what my neighbors would strive to do with the last drop of their heart’s blood:
a.)    establish a Committee for Public Safety and get the show trials and executions started
b.)    open a welding supply company right outside my bedroom window
c.)    let insane people wander the streets, so they can self-actualize…wait, we already do that. 
d.)    Teach the young ones all the science that people in my neighborhood believe to be true…wait, we already do that too.

That said, noted Libertarian & fruitcake Ron Paul rules for saying just what he thinks in the middle of a bunch of Republicans.

>>79
I stopped reading at the assumption manifested into statistic of '' ''Libertarians'' are 99 times out of 100 Republicans.''

>>80
So theres a lot of leftwing libertarians? This is news to me.

>>77
"Food safety laws are important in preserving justice which libertarians support."
But just as long as these laws are not written or enforced by the government but by a private enterprise. Well, i forsee a dystopia...

Jewpanese

Libertarians could be described as pro-personal freedom non-corrupt Republicans.

Libertarians are true compassionate conservatives.

>>79
a.) Libertarians who glorify shooting politicians, protests, guerilla warfare and shouting "LIBERTY OR DEATH DONT TREAD ON ME" at opportune times are the least likely to let that kind of thing happen.
b.) Noise pollution is damage to your property and would be against the law under a libertarian government. Unlike current laws it would be a little more straightforward. A police officer comes to your home during work hours for proof that you are sufferring from noise pollution and arrests everyone in the supply shop next door. Yes, that simple.
c.) Because immigration would only be allowed if it increases GDP per capita, companies would make investments in insane people to rehabilitate them so they can be used to work for them as cheap labour. Psychologists approve of this since picking lettuce and having mroe independance is therapeutic.
d.) Schools make investments in their pupils. If their pupils do not make much money in later life they lose out. In a heavily competitive atmosphere schools which do not teach functional subjects will go bankrupt and be bought up buy an education company that does.

man, libertarians are so insane.

>>83
pro-personal freedom ... Republicans.
oxymoron
non-corrupt ... Republicans.
oxymoron
compassionate conservatives.
oxymoron

>>85
libertarians are so insane
redundant

>>1

>>87

>>86
Bush proves compassionate conservatism exists here and now!