Originally Posted by ruben
I undertsand why minimum income is more libertarian than min wage, but it still seems odd that it's sorta a pet cause for a select bunch of libertaians. And isn't it a whole hell of a lot bigger,more intrusive and more expensive than our current welfare system? I just see a disconect, plus setting aside medicare/medicad and Social Security, I don't really have a problem with welfare in the US.
Libertarians (big L) are generally crazy and have reformed classical liberal thought into something so incredibly restrictive that it becomes a silly religion rather than a reasonable philosophy which allows differences of opinion. The idea was, back in the day, to create a society in which people could flourish to their fullest extent, with the belief that a general lack of constraint on both personal and economic freedom was the best way to achieve that goal. It did not mean, ever, that people should be left to die in the streets or that the poor should be hunted. Libertarianism seems to take on an awfully radical position that generally devolves into some sort of ugly social Darwinism if pressed too far. In other words, to use old terminology, Liberals and Socialists basically want the same thing, and that is a good, safe, ordered society in which people can flourish, they just disagree on what creates that necessary order and how much restraint is necessary in order to create it. Hardcore Libertarians, on the other hand, seem to understand only part of the equation, the lack of constraint, not the reasons for it. Here is a kind of crappy blog entry on it from Marginal Revolution