Thing you hate about the Libertarians the most

[Bono]

Well, for once they are all irrealist, political onnanists, who don't realize the only way of moving toward a libertarian direction, adn election libertarians to office, is the Republican Party.
Another thing I tend to notice in some, is their obsession over the constitution. The constitution do protects the freedoms, altough activist judges keep geopardizing even that, but is by no means a perfect document. Having the feds coining money or regulating interestate commerce is by no means a good thing. We should be more concentrated in making a ethical case for our opinions and less on arguing legalisms.

[Bono]

The way they blame government for all our problems, deserving or not, as though  the problems would disappear once we got rid of government.

Their belief that government is being "oppressive" simply for taxing people to deliver the greater good. It just seems like a very heartless ideology.

Are people justified in stealing from others to delvier the "greater good"(as that was ever possible of measuring)? No! Then why are governments?
Kant formulated a Categorical Imperative, not a Categorical-Except-If-You're-A-Government-Agent Imperative. God delivered a commandment "Thou shalt not steal", not "Thou slhalt not steal, except to deliver the common good."

[Bono]

Are people justified in stealing from others to delvier the "greater good"(as that was ever possible of measuring)? No! Then why are governments?
Kant formulated a Categorical Imperative, not a Categorical-Except-If-You're-A-Government-Agent Imperative. God delivered a commandment "Thou shalt not steal", not "Thou slhalt not steal, except to deliver the common good."

If you think taxes = theft, you don't understand what theft means.

´

Dictionary.com search for theft:

Theft   Audio pronunciation of "theft" ( P )  Pronunciation Key  (thft)
n.

   1. The act or an instance of stealing; larceny.
   2. Obsolete. Something stolen.

Stealing:
teal   Audio pronunciation of "stealing" ( P )  Pronunciation Key  (stl)
v. stole, (stl) sto·len, (stln) steal·ing, steals
v. tr.

   1. To take (the property of another) without right or permission.
   2. To get or effect surreptitiously or artfully: steal a kiss; stole the ball from an opponent.
   3. To move, carry, or place surreptitiously.
   4. To draw attention unexpectedly in (an entertainment), especially by being the outstanding performer: The magician's assistant stole the show with her comic antics.
   5. Baseball. To advance safely to (another base) during the delivery of a pitch, without the aid of a base hit, walk, passed ball, or wild pitch.


How is taxation not taking away property without permission?

[Bono]

Dictionary.com search for theft:

Theft   Audio pronunciation of "theft" ( P )  Pronunciation Key  (thft)
n.

   1. The act or an instance of stealing; larceny.
   2. Obsolete. Something stolen.

Stealing:
teal   Audio pronunciation of "stealing" ( P )  Pronunciation Key  (stl)
v. stole, (stl) sto·len, (stln) steal·ing, steals
v. tr.

   1. To take (the property of another) without right or permission.
   2. To get or effect surreptitiously or artfully: steal a kiss; stole the ball from an opponent.
   3. To move, carry, or place surreptitiously.
   4. To draw attention unexpectedly in (an entertainment), especially by being the outstanding performer: The magician's assistant stole the show with her comic antics.
   5. Baseball. To advance safely to (another base) during the delivery of a pitch, without the aid of a base hit, walk, passed ball, or wild pitch.


How is taxation not taking away property without permission?

Permission is given when the government received its mandate from the people to carry out its agenda.

So you're saying the government is stealing from YOU, so that YOUR kids can go to school? So that the roads and highways YOU drive on are paved?

Is the mother who demands child support from the father stealing from him? Does a baby require "permission" to receive her mother's milk?

Libertarians keep talking about "individual rights", but what about responsibility? Citzenship comes with rights and duties. They never talk about the needs of the community and contributions toward the common good. Is it fair to ask for representation without taxation? That's why I think libertarianism is a heartless ideology.

Can everyone benefit from taxation? No, some people, or in our case, most people, will be at a net loss, therefore taxation is immoral.

[Bono]

Can everyone benefit from taxation? No, some people, or in our case, most people, will be at a net loss, 

It's going to take a lot of maths for you to even begin to prove that, It's  probably almost impossible to work out whether it's true or not. Maybe you should just look at whether you gain or not.

If you find yourself to be making a net loss from taxation (Because I just can't help but think that this is in the least some kind of a motivation) then you can justify all the baseless assertions you like!

And by the way, if you're really are right that perhaps a (narrow) majority makes a loss from taxation, if we were to do a away with taxes and the services they provide - What would happen to that narrow (or even small or tiny) minority who stand to lose out? Do they matter?

That isn't the point. I'm applying the categorical imperative here. If People can't all benefit from taxation then taxation is immoral.

[Bono]

The paleo-libertarian/anarcho-capitalist branch which gives the party a bad name (Philip/Richius/Bono)

Almost all paleo-libertarians are republicans.

[Bono]

The fact that they stole that beautiful name, once a synonym for Bakunist Anarchism.
I don't hate Libertarians.

It's the left's fault for hijacking the the name "liberal".

[Bono]

The standard would be fully automatic weapons I think.

Thus making it, in fact, harsher then today's legislation, which allows the owning of RPGs, Artillery Devices and others.

[Bono]

I would say that they don't think the governmentshould put limitations on some business's no matter how much they screw up.  For example (some not all) libertarians think that if a company such as Enron completley cooks the books & lies about everything that they shouldn't be punished for it

The Government should not be involved in the stock market. The London Exchange is not regulated by the British Government, they themselves fiscalize teh books. The NYSe should addop the same posture, and the unconstitutional SEC should be ended.

[Bono]

I would say that they don't think the governmentshould put limitations on some business's no matter how much they screw up.  For example (some not all) libertarians think that if a company such as Enron completley cooks the books & lies about everything that they shouldn't be punished for it

The Government should not be involved in the stock market. The London Exchange is not regulated by the British Government, they themselves fiscalize teh books. The NYSe should addop the same posture, and the unconstitutional SEC should be ended.

The Republicans in the 20s followed those policies. There was a minor problem in October 1929.

Yes, that had nothing to do with Taft-Hartley and money supply manipulations.

[Bono]

I would say that they don't think the governmentshould put limitations on some business's no matter how much they screw up.  For example (some not all) libertarians think that if a company such as Enron completley cooks the books & lies about everything that they shouldn't be punished for it

The Government should not be involved in the stock market. The London Exchange is not regulated by the British Government, they themselves fiscalize teh books. The NYSe should addop the same posture, and the unconstitutional SEC should be ended.

The Republicans in the 20s followed those policies. There was a minor problem in October 1929.

Yes, that had nothing to do with Taft-Hartley and money supply manipulations.

Taft-Hartley?

Do you mean Smoot-Hawley?

Probably.

[Bono]

Funding is one of the least of the Libertarians problems. 
The biggest problem with the Libertarians is that they are completely self-delusional.  They think that everyone would ultimately agree with them if they just heard their message, and every year, they think the next election will be the one where the finally "break out". 

It's not going to happen.  They should have had a perfect chance in 2004, with the Republicans running on an overtly moralist, intrusive-government platform.  What do the libertarians do?  They nominate a candidate with no political experience who brags about how he drives without a license and never files income tax. 

Yet still they believe he's the one.  There were several libertarians on this board that claimed that Badnarik would win 5% in many states states, and a couple that genuinely believed he would win states.  Yet the Libertarians managed their worst result ever, failing to get close to 1% in a single state.

If the Libertarians were really serious about one day becoming politically relevant, they wouldn't nominate some wacko in every district who is destined to poll 0.5%.  Seeing that result across the board just reinforces their joke status.  If they were serious, they would give real funding and support to a few candidates in a few local races, concentrated in a single state, where they could actually be competitive.   

Look at the Vermont Progressive Party.  Get a single Congressman, even a couple state legislators somewhere.  Don't bother running nobodies for President until you've proven you have actually appeal in a well-funded race.

No kidding, a sudden strong third party needs one of the following:

massive splinter of existing parties: 1860
established candidate running: 1912
two really crappy 2 party choices: 1924 (didn't come close to winning)
self funding billionaire: 1992 (didn't come close to winning)

Those tend to be pretty rare.

Calvin Coolidge was pretty well liked.

[Bono]

Trouble with the Libertarians is that they don't lie.