I'm wavering from Libertarianism

2/3) I keep mis-speaking when I say small government. What I mean is limited government. By limited government I mean a government that doesn't infringe upon the rights of its citizens. I associate that with a government that doesn't have a lot of interaction in the citizen's daily life.
If government isn't in the people's lives then who takes over? Those with the money. You have to remember we're operating on a rigged system. A system that favors the rich. Try your own thought experiment: In a no-tax pure capitalist society, how far would the rich's control get without a prole revolution?

You would have to pay to send your kids to school out of your own pocket, which would mean only those who have money would be able to send their kids to school. Those who can't afford to send their kids to school would have to have their kids sell their labor at a very early age - like in some parts of India.

The rich would pay for the roads, which would mean only they can use them. Anyone who unlawfully used the roads would be dealt with by the police, which is paid for by the rich so they have all the control of what the police do. You can spend an extremely long time in jail for driving on the rich's roads because they control the legislation.
 
Last edited:

Back
Top Bottom