Quote from: Richy_T on March 14, 2014, 02:40:24 PM

Quote from: JayJuanGee on March 14, 2014, 06:39:08 AM

Let's say for example, there is a decision by the libertarians (and maybe the convince the rest of us) to progress to a new and "better" society that does NOT have roads, there would be a lot of resistance in segments of society to those kinds of ideas and plans... so then we end up in a state of serious disagreement and tension b/c the bright ideas of libertarians want to progress to a "more advanced" state of affairs - a world without roads. GO figure!!!!

WTF JJG? You keep assigning these ambitions to others when that is not the case. Libertarians would decouple the roads from government and allow the system to develop in a natural and organic manner. My point with the roads is that what we would have *now* if this had happened a long time ago not that we magically jump from setup A to setup B. That is what collectivists do with their grand solutions and five-year-plans.

Yes... it may be a little unfair for me to attribute fuzzy logic to all libertarians - b/c certainly, some of the libertarian ideas are decent ones.

I am NOT opposed to getting value from ideas that can make us move in a better direction to improve personal liberties and even to improve voluntariness under current systems, to the extent those kinds of fixes are feasible.

A problem, however, in this discussion is that the vision of no government or little government gets so preoccupied with criticizing government but comes up with few if any realistic solutions to address public concerns and the roads example is a good one, especially if we are going to describe the proposed solutions systematically.

I really do NOT understand the point of arguing about our supposedly being in a better position (possibly) if we did NOT have roads. That makes very little sense (even if it were true). Currently we have roads, and that is our starting point.. NOT some hypothetical fantasy land world without roads, and that life without roads may be more of a Richy_T argument rather than attributable to other libertarians.

Anyhow, I do NOT mean to insult anyone (including you Richy_T) with any guilt by association type assertions; however, I had been using some of the labels, such as attributing certain kinds of ideas to libertarians) to simplify to some extent... b/c there is a common theme that seems to be, but I also find that labels do NOT always quite capture various nuances in what is being proposed (apart from the less government angle)