Libertarians are the BEST PARTY EVER!!!

Libertarians are like some doctors. They can see what is wrong. But they can't treat it without serious complications. Possibly terminal ones. thats the idea I get when I look at your plan. Your problems hold true. But your solutions only create new problems, sometimes without solving the old ones. What I'm gonna do now is go through your plan and take a look at all the problems with it. then I'm going to address the main point of your argument: that the Libertarian Party is the best ever. First: victims rights. Sure its a good idea. Restitution. Its even biblical. But in the real world how would your plan work. Say you capture a criminal who, after robbing a convenience store, murders the 5 people in the store at the time, and injures 2 more while escaping. you know have 2 problems. 1: how are you going to make them pay for the pain, suffering and injuries of the live victims and the dead victims families? How will you come up with that #? Will he use the money he stole? 'cause he also has to pay back the store. 2: If he can't pay, will the government? How does that tally with the no welfare, small government part of you plan? Next: Prohibition. You state that you will only deal with real crime. Crime that hurts people. But its going to be very hard to argue that drugs don't hurt the person that uses them. And that thus by taking drugs the addict is not hurting somebody, that body being their own body. And the fact that criminals that commit crimes other than drug possession use drugs does not mean that if you get rid of the criminality of the drugs you will get rid of the criminal behavior. The prohibition didn't create the mobster, it just made him rich. A very small portion of the population commits a large portion of the crimes. And they are not committing the crimes because of the drug culture, the drug culture exists because of the crimes. You would simply be eliminating one of the more useful charges the police can bring a career criminal in on. As well as allowing self destructive behaviors that harms individuals and by leaving them in society, harms society. Crime. I'd like to ask where you et your drug related criminal statistic. How old is it? And why would drug offense imprisonments result in violent offenders being released. This may sound good at the outset, but it is a ridiculous proposition when looked at closely. It should not be considered until we have credible proof of it. Self Defense. I must say, there is only one thing wrong with this one. and that is details. How do you propose to go about allowing everyone to carry firearms? Will there be enforcement of any regulation at all. Or will it be dodge city style, "good guys better shoot better than bad guys cause all of them will have guns"? Root causes of crime? This is one of the vaguest arguments I've ever seen. All i et from this is that you'll kill welfare, a source of income to millions of underprivileged people.... I'll get to that later. Free speech. This is possibly the most doable of your plans. I have no problem with it. Health care. This is probably the least doable of your plans, as well as being the most problematic. The MSA part of your plan is admirable. Let people use their own money to pay for their own health care. 1. Then you eliminate welfare, or in this case Medicaid & Medicare. And you eliminate the only way many people have of payin for medical care. They don't have money to put into an MSA. They don't have the insurance or the benefits to get the care they need. And you abruptly pull the carpet out from under them. Without assistance, they go without preventative medical care. they will get sick. they will turn to the ER. Many are already doing this, its the reason you have to wait hours to a broken leg even checked. And the problem will only get worse, incredibly fast, if you put your plan into effect. 2 & 3. Then you deregulate the health care industry. The stops that guarantee good care for those who can pay just disappear. Now not only are the poor barred by their circumstances from getting any health care, the well off must pay more to get good care because all health care is no loner held to a high standard by the law. Reform Education? This beats the root causes of crime for vagueness. You see a problem. But are you unable to state a solution? To even see a solution? Defend Our Rights This is simply a statement of the fact that the Libertarian Party thinks the government should be smaller. Most Americans think this. It is not unique to the Libertarian Party, nor is it a real argument. Because it is a statement of position in what is becoming a policy debate, I will not address it until later. How To Cut Taxes? A restatement of the former argument in financial instead of vaguely constitutional terms. My comments above apply. Privatize and Cut Taxes? Where does the government own airlines, power plants, and factories to sell to private investors? The answer is nowhere. Even factories building military vehicles and equipment are private. We have a free market, capitalist economy. We have never had any other type of economy. the countries mentioned by yourself are coming out of government controlled economies, so this argument applies to them. but not to the US. Its pointless and moot. I will not mention it again unless you can come up with proof the problem exists substantially in the US. Defend America. This is not only poorly titled (its not cutting taxes, its cutting foreign aid), but its also poorly thought out. How do you plan on doing this? Withdrawal from NATO? Withdrawal from the UN? Do you plan on pissing off the international community by cutting off welfare to third world countries that are struggling? How will you deal with the flak after a camp in Dafur that was receiving primarily US aid is hit by an epidemic because of lack of medicine? This is either reducing the resources available to those that need them to survive or reducing the defensibility of the US by reducing its treaty obligated allies. Neither helps defend the US. Bailing Out Industry. We need evidence before this can be argued. Until then, its a moot statement of not real credibility. Replace Welfare. With what? will you require that private causes provide welfare? If so, How? If not, how will you make sure that the poor are receiving what they need, and that they aren't being taken advantage of by the private causes? Income Tax. This argument says absolutely nothing except that you haven't done enough homework to see the necessity for the amount of money brought in by the income tax. Its a throwaway loose argument. It flaps in the breeze and distracts. I won't address it. Now. I've one through your plan. I've addressed it. I'll address the main topic o this debate. The libertarian party is not the best party ever, not only because a party is only as strong as the people in it (not a large number in the case on the Libertarian Party). But because, as I said at the beginning this debate: THEY HAVE NO ANSWERS. They have a PROBLEM. They have a goal. But they are essentially Utopians. They grasp for perfect world, a world whose solutions fail to solve the problems of the REAL world, a world that can never be. (Barring armed revolution, a massive break down of the economy and subsequent restructuring of the government, or a secession) Libertarian goals, at least as outlined in my opponents plan, can never be achieved without catastrophic consequences. Consequences, it would not be unrealistic to state, that might end in armed revolution, economic disaster, or some attempt at succession. while the benefits may look good. The risks of adopting a LIBERTARIAN plan this drastic are to many, and to hue, for it to even be on the table of a realistic policy maker. For these reasons, and reasons to be outlined in more depth in later posts, the libertarian party is far from the greatest party ever.