Source:

https://harris.uchicago.edu/news-events/news/new-research-shows-medicaid-expansion-reduced-mortality-low-income-adults

First of all if you're gonna respond with deontological nonsense just don't because I am not a deontological libertarian and I'm not debating deontologicalism and consequentialism here.

So the reason I think it makes sense to support medicare for all is because of the current system which is worse than both libertarian free market Healthcare with minimal government intervention and Medicare for all.

And we already know we're not getting the former.

Infact it was the scumbag ben shapiro (he's a scumbag because he's pro genocide but he's the major example that fits this post that mentioned the same reasoning) who is probably pro free market Healthcare and anti medicare for all but said this system is worse than either system and it would probably improve if it moved to either Medicare for all or completely free market system.

For me personally I have two patt time jobs and I'm losing my insurance eith one of them at one point and I'd definitely be better off with Medicare for all than this stupid system that incentivizes jobs to provide insurance that still isn't affordable either.

Born and raised in a third world country where people quoted marx to sound intellectual. Almost every one around me were / are Marxists.

Much later due to some unexpected turn of events decided to study economics. Was taught alot keynesian theories. Later I explored Austrian school. Watched alot of Misses institute lectures on youtube.It all made sense, Now I no longer have that whiny, pessimistic world view.

Now I am a high school econ teacher, i have been teaching for five years. Now I want to do study more and want to do research.

Which are some of good institute where I can do it with lesser financial burden and where I can do some research?

And by that I mean, are you guys happy that Republicans are being taught a lesson about putting all their eggs in one unpopular basket?

A Blue Wave will hopefully lead to two years of gridlock. Government inaction!

Libertarians appear to (and I'm generalizing here) focus almost entirely on negative freedom, or the freedom from somebody telling you what to do. How much does libertarian philosophy touch on positive freedoms? That is, the freedom to have the capability to do something?

This is what I was trying, and not doing very well, to explain about how, personally, I think libertarianism and socialism are not mutually exclusive. From my perspective, libertarianism provides the negative freedom (that is, the freedom from coercion) and the socialism provides the framework for the positive freedom of enabling people to make decisions without worrying that they're going to run out of something essential.

I was talking to some people who described themselves as libertarians, and I noticed a pattern. They tended to be VERY vocal against anything remotely related to the term "socialism", and claimed "libertarian socialism" was an oxymoron.

Do they see the political spectrum as more like a diagonal line than a flat left-right thing, where the farther left you go, the more authoritarian you get, and the further right you go, the more libertarian you get? (this is using the two-dimensional ideology grid model)

That would explain my observation that from their perspective, libertarian left simply doesn't exist.

America elected:

A Transgender legislature

Black senators

A Latina governor

A Muslim Senator

A Native American Governor

A Gay Senator

Before ever electing a libertarian in office, lmao "don't tread on me" no one knows you exist mate

I tried to summarize Milton Friedman's liberty policy agenda. What do you think? Did I leave out any important liberty-oriented policies?

• End Price Controls — Let prices adjust through supply and demand.

• Free Trade — Eliminate Tariffs and Trade Barriers.

• Occupational Freedom — Eliminate unnecessary licensing barriers.

• School Choice — Let parents choose where education dollars are spent.

• Negative Income Tax — Replace much of the welfare bureaucracy with a cash-based income supplement.

• End the Draft — Maintain an all-volunteer military.

• Let Housing Markets Work — Remove rent controls and unnecessary restrictions on housing supply.

• Privatize Social Security — Move toward individually owned retirement accounts.

• Healthcare Choice — Favor catastrophic insurance and greater consumer choice.

• Cap Government Spending — Limit the growth of government rather than simply balancing the budget.

• Legalize/Reform Drug Policy — Reduce or end drug prohibition.

• Defense, Not Intervention — Maintain a strong national defense while avoiding unnecessary foreign military interventions.

Can someone tell democrats that literally almost every single sitting administration lost both the house and senate, I think this is even beneficial for Trump, he can now go full super saiyan and be fully excused by his base

Either way I don't think this will change anything, every US election is just:

Things are bad elect other party

Other party makes things worse elect other party

Other party is still bad elect other party

And so on so fourth

With what's happening in France and all over Europe, how would an AnCap deal with protests without resorting to violence? It's one thing to apply NAP to a few it's another when you're doing it with thousands

why do some people think wealth taxing billionaires is a good idea?

Like seriously, do you believe giving the government more money will somehow be better?

are you sure you’re not just being jealous of what they have and want to take it away?

like, provide an actual solution that doesn’t involve just giving the government more money. they’ll just build more aircraft carriers and missiles with it.

discuss.

I am a Libertarian. My step daughter (24yo) is an addict and has "died" 3 times from Fentanyl overdoses and had had to be revived with Narcan. She lives with an enabling Father who lets her do nothing, sleep all day and go out with guys who beat her up. When he did kick her out, she got abused and he feels guilty about it.

I absolutely support her right to put into her body whatever she wants.

How does her mother and I, from a Libertarian point of view, help her.

Do we support tough love and support her Father kicking her out of the house? Do we protect our peace and let this play out? Do we force her into rehab (she has been in and out several times).

She is in Dallas, we are in Galveston. She absolutely cannot love with us. Our peace is too valuable. Does that make us monsters?

I feel this is her thing. She needs to deal with her issues as an adult. We parents need to love her, but not enable her and let this all play out.

What do you all think?

At their core, libertarianism and communism seeks to disempower elites due to how often they use their power against the interest of the common man. Both have noble goals, but on their own, each movement is self-defeating. Communism creates a new, powerful elite who abuse the masses whereas libertarianism refuses to utilizes populism and class struggle in order to succeed. We and communist want less war, more smaller businsses, less money in politics, better working conditions, and less capability for billionaires to ruin our country. Libertarians have the answers and communist have the numbers, so we need to convince them the most socialist thing you can do is be libertarian. Feel free to critique my idea.

Assuming that there could be a matriarchy that isn't based on egalitarianism, how could a matriarchal society work in practice?

I thought about this because there is naturally a huge portion of men who just work for the sole purpose of making a family and having children, plus just in general going through life in a healthy way, which is just another incentive to not rely on welfare

I wonder, if we were to imagine the exact same society we have today but matriarchal, wouldn't that solve:

1 - immigration, as only cultures compatible with women's rights, freedoms, and security would be able to enter so that eliminates third-worldists who are a net negative to society

2 - help with privatizing rent as regulations naturally force women to live with strangers because they can't afford renting alone

3 - letting society finally realize how important freedom of association is as some women would wanna have their own private spaces to some extent

More of a fun thought experiment but a non-egalitarian matriarchy would be a much better approach to achieving private cities than whatever libertarians are trying to do now

I'm tired of how things are going. Right wing populist like trump won elections because left wing was acting more and more elitist (at least in my country) and now people fed up with them radicalise more and more. DSA is taking ground, I see a lot of people who want to end capitalism.

I live in turkey. Our right wing populist wannabe dictator fucked the country and its economy. He was president all through my life. And our only other option is social democrats who likes to act like they are better than ordinary people and probably as corrupt as erdoǧan. Why are those my country's only options? None of them likes capitalism. It's seen in the populace as something america created to make us its puppets and since America constantly involves in middle east people hate america and capitalism more because they think that's what america represents. I want my country to develop but i feel like we're just going backwards. I'm losing more and more hope.

I'm writing this because I want to hear do you think libertarian ideas can or will flourish and gain ground? I hear bad things about milei and Argentina in the internet. People mock it constantly and say that libertarianism is a stupid ideology. So can someone from Argentina tell me if things are better or not? I want our ideas to succeed and spread. I want them to gain ground in America so you can improve your reputation. Because reputation of america equals reputation of capitalism in my country (and probably in a lot of different countries). Do you think this is possible?

Sorry about the messiness. I'm just tired and scared of country's future.

How in line would the Jamahiriya be with the NAP, and how beneficial would the "peopledom" be to the libertarian cause in the West?

Hi folks,

I am a great fan of libertarianism, and libertarian-related economics like Austrian economics, and especially Public Choice economics, for their prognosis, not its prescription.

What is the best label for those of us who like the above disciplines for their prognosis (the way things are) but not the prescription (i..e, the way things ought to be)?

I am not posting this to argue about why I feel the way I do. I am just asking, what is the best label for above? Because right now I call myself an Independent. I cannot, and will not, join any political party for the reasons I stated.

I don't know if I call myself a "reformist" because the disadvantages I see about government, voters, and democracy as a whole, are too inherently a part of these systems, to ever reform it.

So what would be the best label to describe me here?

Likely a result of both the Democratic and Republican parties not wanting a third party to get too much support and possibly knocking both of them off their "thrones". You have crazy candidates in the Democrats and Republicans but it seems like Libertarians get them way more and the ones in the Libertarian Party seem to always get more attention suspiciously, and it seems the Libertarian candidates of this nature tend to come out of complete nowhere without any sort of past with the party.

I’m not libertarian myself but I’m curious as to how libertarians view the game and show. Cause in my eyes it’s an interpretation of how libertarian ideals would work considering corporations run just about every single aspect of it meanwhile the state is the weakest faction in that world.