# What do Libertarians think should happen when disasters strike? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [November 12, 2012, 5:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-libertarians-think-should-happen-when-disasters-strike/640758 "2012-11-12T05:22:36Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2012, 2:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-libertarians-think-should-happen-when-disasters-strike/640758/21 "2012-11-12T14:49:53Z")
> [@Debaser](#): > > You are starting with the assumption that kids would starve without the government. Libertarians don’t agree with this premise, and they are right. History shows that to be wrong. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Stamos\_Left\_Ear](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_stamos_left_ear/32/3198_2.png) [@John\_Stamos\_Left\_Ear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Stamos_Left_Ear)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2012, 3:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-libertarians-think-should-happen-when-disasters-strike/640758/22 "2012-11-12T15:13:01Z")
> [@Absolute](#): > > The idea of libertarianism is not that it produces a wonderful, happy outcome for everyone. I was unaware that anyone said that any political or social system would do this. > [@](#): > > If you decide to live in Florida, you’re going to get hit by hurricanes. And yes, in Libertaria you may have a very hard time finding cheap insurance if you live in an area that is likely to get hit by hurricanes. Not sure why this is surprising. Didn’t say that it was surprising. Only said that this is why the single word response of “insurance” to the OP is ineffectual - just as insurance by itself in the face of a disaster is ineffectual. > [@](#): > > Yes, the current system in the US is better for people who live in disaster-prone areas, because the tax dollars of people who _don’t_ live there subsidize their risk. First of all, you would be hard pressed to find any areas which do not have risks of natural disasters. The plains get tornadoes, there are earthquake zones in the west coast, Alaska and Missouri. Blizzards strike the northern part of the country. And with climate change, things will only get worse and affect more places. Also, the reason many people live on coasts (and [over half of Americans do](http://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/population.html)) is because coastal communities provide a great many products and industries that benefit people who live in the mainland including shipping, food, energy and for tourism. We need people to live in those areas and people who do not rely on them. You suggest that those people are commodities to be exploited by those who live elsewhere but as soon as they need help they shouldn’t be “subsidized?” > [@](#): > > So, insurers are unwilling to inexpensively insure people who live in an area likely to get hit by hurricanes. Gee, I wonder why that is. Which is why it is silly that a one word answer was given, huh. > [@](#): > > In Libertaria, you have to be careful who you deal with. Deal only with insurance companies that have good reputations. If you go with a cheap policy from a crap company, you might have to sue them. Your loss. If you have a good case, a lawyer will probably take the case on contingency. This assumes that there is competition. In Libertaria, nothing except the “free market” can stop a monopoly from occurring… We know in practice that the government was often needed to break up monopolies. > [@](#): > > Libertaria require a strong legal system that strictly enforces contracts. No way around that. So you need a lawyer to sign everything that might involve litigation down the road? Seems great… for the lawyers. > [@](#): > > Obviously, in Libertaria or in the US, the owner of the home carries their own insurance to cover the home itself. Not sure what your point is. Then point is that renters are another reason why “insurance” is an woefully insufficient reply to the OP. > [@](#): > > The only thing you’ve cited as “nasty” is that insurance companies are unwilling to lose money by cheaply insuring people who are statistically likely to have their houses blown away by a hurricance. That’s hardly nasty. You’re right… Nobody ever has to fight insurance companies for legitimate claims. This has never happened ever. Insurance companies love writing checks for all claims, even anticipating claims and writing checks in advance because they’re swell that way. > [@](#): > > It’s not “better”. Unquestionably, the current system is better, from the perspective of the people suffering, because they are provided with emergency services that they do not have to pay for. Really? Emergency services are free? Sweet, nobody has to pay taxes anymore! Yay! ---
**Author:** ![John\_Stamos\_Left\_Ear](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_stamos_left_ear/32/3198_2.png) [@John\_Stamos\_Left\_Ear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Stamos_Left_Ear)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2012, 3:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-libertarians-think-should-happen-when-disasters-strike/640758/23 "2012-11-12T15:14:02Z")
> [@Absolute](#): > > That doesn’t mean that insurance companies wouldn’t offer those services if the market demanded it. Are there any societies where disaster relief is privatized? ---
**Author:** ![John\_Stamos\_Left\_Ear](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_stamos_left_ear/32/3198_2.png) [@John\_Stamos\_Left\_Ear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Stamos_Left_Ear)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2012, 3:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-libertarians-think-should-happen-when-disasters-strike/640758/24 "2012-11-12T15:21:10Z")
> [@Musicat](#): > > Just because you feel all libertarian-ish doesn’t mean you won’t help your fellow man. Nobody said that you couldn’t. But as I said before, natural disasters often take out the rescuers and relief agencies. And as I said, when disasters strike, those agencies are often spread very thin. Why are we to assume that when you take out the government that these agencies will be able to do the job by themselves when they cannot do it with the government? > [@](#): > > I support, in money and time, government actions that have a similar outcome. The difference is I don’t get to say how much or which actions and it’s not voluntary. So when you donate blood you get to say who gets it? When you donate food you get to say who eats it? When you donate money, you get to know who it is directly helping? Seems to me there are degrees of how much control you have no matter who is getting the money or donations. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Stamos\_Left\_Ear](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_stamos_left_ear/32/3198_2.png) [@John\_Stamos\_Left\_Ear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Stamos_Left_Ear)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2012, 3:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-libertarians-think-should-happen-when-disasters-strike/640758/25 "2012-11-12T15:26:24Z")
> [@Debaser](#): > > Regarding Florida. The situation in Florida isn’t caused by the weather. It’s caused by incompetent government. The legislature makes unfair demands of the insurance companies there and that’s why they pull out of the state. Cite? ---
**Author:** ![Learjeff](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/94ad74/32.png) [@Learjeff](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Learjeff)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2012, 3:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-libertarians-think-should-happen-when-disasters-strike/640758/26 "2012-11-12T15:31:29Z")
> [@John\_Stamos\_Left\_Ear](#): > > I saw a few [cartoons](http://blog.chron.com/nickanderson/files/2012/10/and103112blog1.jpg) and Facebook images shared about how everyone is a Libertarian until they’re on their rooftops and the helicopter is there to rescue you. I’m not a libertarian, but I’d like to defend them against one interpretation of this trope. The US is not Libertaria. Libertarians pay taxes, and those taxes go towards disaster relief. They’d be fools not to take advantage of a service they’ve paid for, even if it’s a service they’d rather not be forced to pay for. Also, I suspect even many libertarians would back government responses to truly unpredictable disasters (unlike hurricanes, tornados, floods, draughts, and earthquakes). They would definitely be in favor of using the military to sustain the rule of law in the immediate aftermath of a disaster, since it’s the government’s job (and only the government’s job) to wield coercive force. ---
**Author:** ![Learjeff](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/94ad74/32.png) [@Learjeff](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Learjeff)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2012, 3:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-libertarians-think-should-happen-when-disasters-strike/640758/27 "2012-11-12T15:37:38Z")
> [@John\_Stamos\_Left\_Ear](#): > > This assumes that there is competition. In Libertaria, nothing except the “free market” can stop a monopoly from occurring… We know in practice that the government was often needed to break up monopolies. Do we know that in practice? I’m not a big fan of Ayn Rand, but she makes a pretty good argument that monopolies don’t exist without government support. Can you cite a monopoly that government had to break up, that wouldn’t have existed without protective legislation in the first place? I can: Microsoft/Windows. It’s an interesting counter-example to Rand’s arguments. In this case, the market _wanted_ a monopoly of sorts, so that application developers could focus on a single platform. However, as the need for this bootstrap fades, so does the monopoly status of Windows. IMHO, this is market forces working correctly, and nearly an exception that proves the rule. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Stamos\_Left\_Ear](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_stamos_left_ear/32/3198_2.png) [@John\_Stamos\_Left\_Ear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Stamos_Left_Ear)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2012, 3:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-libertarians-think-should-happen-when-disasters-strike/640758/28 "2012-11-12T15:49:50Z")
> [@Learjeff](#): > > Do we know that in practice? Standard Oil? AT&T? > [@](#): > > I’m not a big fan of Ayn Rand, but she makes a pretty good argument that monopolies don’t exist without government support. Can you cite a monopoly that government had to break up, that wouldn’t have existed without protective legislation in the first place? > > I can: Microsoft/Windows. It’s an interesting counter-example to Rand’s arguments. In this case, the market _wanted_ a monopoly of sorts, so that application developers could focus on a single platform. However, as the need for this bootstrap fades, so does the monopoly status of Windows. IMHO, this is market forces working correctly, and nearly an exception that proves the rule. You are claiming that monopolies will always break up regardless of the government? Even if this is true, a lot of people can potentially be screwed over until that happens. And I think there is a distinction at the products offered: operating systems seem a little trivial compared to the life and death ramifications that search & rescue teams and even insurance companies can hold. ---
**Author:** ![Musicat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/musicat/32/20189_2.png) [@Musicat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Musicat)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2012, 3:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-libertarians-think-should-happen-when-disasters-strike/640758/29 "2012-11-12T15:55:33Z")
> [@John\_Stamos\_Left\_Ear](#): > > So when you donate blood you get to say who gets it? Yes, the American Red Cross. It is also possible in some circumstances to specify your blood is to be used for a particular medical patient (or swapped for the equivalent in a different blood type), or earmarked for a particular relief project. > [@](#): > > When you donate food you get to say who eats it? Yes, I can earmark it for a particular project. > [@](#): > > When you donate money, you get to know who it is directly helping? Yes, since I can usually earmark it for a particular project or purpose. > [@](#): > > Seems to me there are degrees of how much control you have no matter who is getting the money or donations. True. The degree of control is much greater for private donations. I’ll give an example. I can contribute to a local land preservation fund and know that it will be going to purchase or maintain land in a specific area (if I so specify). If the fund does not do what they promise, they can be sued. If I am taxed, the only degree of control over my money is to elect or defeat legislators who may or may not lean towards my personal choices. I cannot tell them what I want that money to be used for and threaten to withdraw it if they do not comply. You can’t sue a legislator if they don’t vote they way you want. > [@John\_Stamos\_Left\_Ear](#): > > Nobody said that you couldn’t. But as I said before, natural disasters often take out the rescuers and relief agencies. And as I said, when disasters strike, those agencies are often spread very thin. Why are we to assume that when you take out the government that these agencies will be able to do the job by themselves when they cannot do it with the government? And who’s to assume the government can do the job? If you’re going to say, “they have unlimited tax powers to get the job done,” who’s to say that draining money from people who don’t volunteer it is a good thing? ---
**Author:** ![Sitnam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/6a8cbe/32.png) [@Sitnam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sitnam)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2012, 4:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-libertarians-think-should-happen-when-disasters-strike/640758/30 "2012-11-12T16:10:17Z")
nm… ---
**Author:** ![Sitnam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/6a8cbe/32.png) [@Sitnam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sitnam)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2012, 4:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-libertarians-think-should-happen-when-disasters-strike/640758/31 "2012-11-12T16:11:46Z")
> [@Learjeff](#): > > II’m not a libertarian, but I’d like to defend them against one interpretation of this trope. > > The US is not Libertaria. Libertarians pay taxes, and those taxes go towards disaster relief. They’d be fools not to take advantage of a service they’ve paid for, even if it’s a service they’d rather not be forced to pay for. Right, Rand drew SS, a right she was entitled to as an American citizen. One would think though, that since her popularity and profit stemmed from decrying exactly that type of social contraption designed to alleviate human weakness she’d had the dignity to deny it, entitled or not. Homosexuality isn’t morally wrong and not illegal, a politician should be able to engage in such without repercussion. Though if that politician became powerful and substantially wealthy fighting against it, well… ---
**Author:** ![John\_Stamos\_Left\_Ear](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_stamos_left_ear/32/3198_2.png) [@John\_Stamos\_Left\_Ear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Stamos_Left_Ear)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2012, 4:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-libertarians-think-should-happen-when-disasters-strike/640758/32 "2012-11-12T16:16:25Z")
> [@Musicat](#): > > Yes, the American Red Cross. And you know who they give it to? ETA: I mean specifically? Seems unlikely I can tell the Red Cross where to send my blood. You trust them to make the best decisions, just as you trust the government to do the same. > [@](#): > > And who’s to assume the government can do the job? If you’re going to say, “they have unlimited tax powers to get the job done,” who’s to say that draining money from people who don’t volunteer it is a good thing? I still have yet to see any citation of a society where disaster services are privatized. ---
**Author:** ![levdrakon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/49beb7/32.png) [@levdrakon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/levdrakon)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2012, 4:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-libertarians-think-should-happen-when-disasters-strike/640758/33 "2012-11-12T16:35:21Z")
Libertarianism seems to basically say “don’t forget personal liberty; it’s important.” That’s a basic American value. I’m not sure it even needs a special name. When it comes to addressing any real life issues, Libertarianism doesn’t really have much to contribute to the discussion. The US is a country of 300 million and growing, and “making your own way” is not an option. There isn’t enough land, water or resources for that. ---
**Author:** ![otternell](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/ecc23a/32.png) [@otternell](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/otternell)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2012, 4:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-libertarians-think-should-happen-when-disasters-strike/640758/34 "2012-11-12T16:44:14Z")
> [@Musicat](#): > > Yes, the American Red Cross. It is also possible in some circumstances to specify your blood is to be used for a particular medical patient (or swapped for the equivalent in a different blood type), or earmarked for a particular relief project.Yes, I can earmark it for a particular project.Yes, since I can usually earmark it for a particular project or purpose.True. The degree of control is much greater for private donations. > > I’ll give an example. I can contribute to a local land preservation fund and know that it will be going to purchase or maintain land in a specific area (if I so specify). If the fund does not do what they promise, they can be sued. Just a brief hijack: In the great state of Iowa, they have a law that if you donate and specify what activity that donation has to be used for, the charitable organization has to use it for only that purpose, and they actually end up throwing stuff away. In other words: you give $50 to the red cross for the floods last year in Iowa, and you specifically earmarked those funds for that purpose. The red cross goes out and buys a bunch of useful stuff to help people to deal with the floods. If they don’t use it, they have to get rid of it. They can’t repurpose it to another cause, because then they wouldn’t be using your money as you told them to do. On one hand, people who think they need to “have control” have unleashed some unintended consequences of poorly written legistlation. On the other hand, my neighbor got a bunch of wool blankets he didn’t need and some pretty nice heavy duty extension cords. Yay for “control”. :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![dataguy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/eada6e/32.png) [@dataguy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dataguy)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2012, 4:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-libertarians-think-should-happen-when-disasters-strike/640758/35 "2012-11-12T16:54:26Z")
Is there someplace I can go to get an “official” description of the aims/principles/beliefs of libertarians? Also, do libertarians identify themselves consistently as members of the Libertarian Party? ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2012, 5:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-libertarians-think-should-happen-when-disasters-strike/640758/36 "2012-11-12T17:00:36Z")
> [@Absolute](#): > > The idea of libertarianism is not that it produces a wonderful, happy outcome for everyone. If you decide to live in Florida, you’re going to get hit by hurricanes. And yes, in Libertaria you may have a very hard time finding cheap insurance if you live in an area that is likely to get hit by hurricanes. Not sure why this is surprising. > In Libertaria, you have to be careful who you deal with. Deal only with insurance companies that have good reputations. If you go with a cheap policy from a crap company, you might have to sue them. Your loss. If you have a good case, a lawyer will probably take the case on contingency. > > Libertaria require a strong legal system that strictly enforces contracts. No way around that. > And Libertaria does not preclude a strong legal system that strictly enforces contracts. In fact, it pretty much requires one. > Libertaria is more economically efficient, and more free. The claim is that libertaria is a better society overall, not that it produces “better” results for every person in every situation. There are plenty of people who benefit from subsidies of one form or another in the current US economic structure, who would be worse off in Libertaria. People who live in disaster-prone regions are one such group. Sure, so most insurance companies would be happy to cover hurricane areas. They’d just have some clause hidden away that would allow them to not pay out claims if a disaster hit. Which means that the consumer would think they were covered but they wouldn’t be. Deal only with companies with good reps? That’s easy. Have a company with a bad rep re-org and rename and spend a few million to rebrand itself and give itself a new rep. Viola! And yes, the “contract would be strictly enforced” it’s just that Insurance companies can hire better lawyers who can write contracts that have loopholes. ---
**Author:** ![Learjeff](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/94ad74/32.png) [@Learjeff](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Learjeff)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2012, 5:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-libertarians-think-should-happen-when-disasters-strike/640758/37 "2012-11-12T17:05:04Z")
> [@John\_Stamos\_Left\_Ear](#): > > Standard Oil? AT&T? Surely you’re joking. > [@](#): > > Even if this is true, a lot of people can potentially be screwed over until that happens. True. > [@](#): > > And I think there is a distinction at the products offered: operating systems seem a little trivial compared to the life and death ramifications that search & rescue teams and even insurance companies can hold. I’m not arguing the libertarian case here. > [@John\_Stamos\_Left\_Ear](#): > > And you know who they give it to? > > ETA: I mean specifically? Seems unlikely I can tell the Red Cross where to send my blood. You trust them to make the best decisions, just as you trust the government to do the same. It’s called a “directed donation”. I used to donate platelets regularly, and often saw the pages of info for those. Next time you give blood, read the stuff you’re supposed to read, and you’ll see it. > [@](#): > > I still have yet to see any citation of a society where disaster services are privatized. I assume you mean a “developed / civilized” society. There are plenty of societies where there’s no government help for anything. The rich look after themselves; the poor suffer. > [@dataguy](#): > > Is there someplace I can go to get an “official” description of the aims/principles/beliefs of libertarians? Also, do libertarians identify themselves consistently as members of the Libertarian Party? There are a lot of libertarians who are not Libertarians (i.e., members of the Libertarian Party). For starters, you can google the Libertarian Party Platform. But just as there are conservatives who are not Republicans, the party platform does not speak for them all. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2012, 5:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-libertarians-think-should-happen-when-disasters-strike/640758/38 "2012-11-12T17:07:20Z")
> [@MandaJo](#): > > How are kids handled in Libertaria? I can almost see letting Bob and Suzie sleep on the beach and slowly starve as they struggle to pull themselves out of poverty–maybe making it and maybe not, serving as terrifying examples to others–but it seems impossible that a society would let their three kids starve with them, as the kids make no choices. Now, the kids could presumably sue the parents, for failing to provide for them, but that seems pretty pointless, as the parents have no resources. Do we, as a society, provide a place where parents can voluntarily release their kids if they can’t support them, and can only get them back when they’ve paid off whatever it cost to support them in the meantime? Do we forcibly take kids away from parents who can’t support them but refuse to admit it because they are hoping against hope things will turn around and they can keep their kids? Do we let a generation starve to death as a vivid learning experience about contraception? “Are there no workhouses? “ ---
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2012, 5:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-libertarians-think-should-happen-when-disasters-strike/640758/39 "2012-11-12T17:08:49Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > Which means that the consumer would think they were covered but they wouldn’t be. Shame on you, **DrDeth** , you have not studied the post-rational Libertarianism advocated here at SDMB. In their system, humans are filled with charity and, even though financial gain is their only motive, they forget this totally whenever they see suffering, and instead rush to share their entire fortune out of pure kindness. Except government employees of course. These “people” are sub-humans whose highest priority is to pretend to vaccinate your children while actually sterilizing or brain-washing them. ETA: A relatively intelligent Libertarian will show up and complain that I’m caricaturizing their “philosophy” again. Fine, but if you do show up, _please_ (demonstrate whether your elevator goes all the way up to the top floor and) offer an opinion on the “Insurance” answer given to OP. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2012, 5:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-libertarians-think-should-happen-when-disasters-strike/640758/40 "2012-11-12T17:09:42Z")
> [@John\_Stamos\_Left\_Ear](#): > > Standard Oil? AT&T? I’ll let someone more knowledgeable about SO speak to that, but wikipedia says that at the time of its actual breakup, its market share was down to 64% from ~90% a few years earlier. Seems like the market was already working. Before I talk about AT&T, can you answer one question: **Are you fucking kidding me?** [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-libertarians-think-should-happen-when-disasters-strike/640758.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-do-libertarians-think-should-happen-when-disasters-strike/640758.md?page=3)