Libertarian ideology is logically solid, but it has two minor problems:
It heavily depends on assumptions that never hold in real life.
Any other ideology, when confronted with bad outcome predictions of their models, will try to explain why their way actually prevents these bad outcomes. Libertarianism… prefers to explain why these outcomes are actually a good thing.
Except it isn’t logically solid, because the premise is that Governing bodies cannot be expected to provide for the general welfare because humans are naturally greedy and selfish, and the solution is that we abolish all social safety nets and instead rely on voluntary charity to solve the problem of poverty…
But what voluntary charity exists if by Libertarian’s own logic: Humans are too greedy and selfish to give to the poor even when they’re literally mandated to do so?
Hence my first “minor problem”. There are more such assumptions though - e.g. the assumption that you can star/stop/switch t a business/career with zero cost.
Libertarian ideology is logically solid, but it has two minor problems:
Except it isn’t logically solid, because the premise is that Governing bodies cannot be expected to provide for the general welfare because humans are naturally greedy and selfish, and the solution is that we abolish all social safety nets and instead rely on voluntary charity to solve the problem of poverty…
But what voluntary charity exists if by Libertarian’s own logic: Humans are too greedy and selfish to give to the poor even when they’re literally mandated to do so?
It also seems to assume perfect knowledge and that all harms can be compensated for.
The lives Brian Thompson measured in dollars were priceless to the families they said goodbye to.
Luigi, number one!
Hence my first “minor problem”. There are more such assumptions though - e.g. the assumption that you can star/stop/switch t a business/career with zero cost.