3 added 1 character in body
source | link

The most applicable point of view is the idea of Freedom of Contract, which is the belief that individuals should be allowed to enter into any form of contract free of government intervention. This can be contrasted with such policies as minimum wage, since free individuals should be allowed to decide for themselves whether entering into a contract in the first place is in their best interests.

Some take this notion pretty far, for example Robert Nozick wrote in Anarchy, State, and Utopia about a thought experiment he termed Demoktesis in which people started incorporating themselves and selling shares off to people until everyone owned a single share of themselves and then also owned a single share of everyone else. In fact, Nozick went further, and said this about slavery:

The comparable question about an individual is whether a free system will allow him to sell himself into slavery. I believe that it would.

The Libertarian Party included the following statement on their 2016 Platform:

Since governments, when instituted, must not violate individual rights, we oppose all interference by government in the areas of voluntary and contractual relations among individuals. People should not be forced to sacrifice their lives and property for the benefit of others. They should be left free by government to deal with one another as free traders; and the resultant economic system, the only one compatible with the protection of individual rights, is the free market.

Taking these points of views into account, I don't believe most Libertarians would think the government should protect people from themselves.

A Libertarian would instead look to the free market to set the guidelines of what would or would not be acceptable under contract law. Credit ratings agencies and technology standards bodies are examples of the free market filling a need for neutral arbiters of fact, and something akin to them would likely be more palattablepalatable than the government mandating specific standards.

The most applicable point of view is the idea of Freedom of Contract, which is the belief that individuals should be allowed to enter into any form of contract free of government intervention. This can be contrasted with such policies as minimum wage, since free individuals should be allowed to decide for themselves whether entering into a contract in the first place is in their best interests.

Some take this notion pretty far, for example Robert Nozick wrote in Anarchy, State, and Utopia about a thought experiment he termed Demoktesis in which people started incorporating themselves and selling shares off to people until everyone owned a single share of themselves and then also owned a single share of everyone else. In fact, Nozick went further, and said this about slavery:

The comparable question about an individual is whether a free system will allow him to sell himself into slavery. I believe that it would.

The Libertarian Party included the following statement on their 2016 Platform:

Since governments, when instituted, must not violate individual rights, we oppose all interference by government in the areas of voluntary and contractual relations among individuals. People should not be forced to sacrifice their lives and property for the benefit of others. They should be left free by government to deal with one another as free traders; and the resultant economic system, the only one compatible with the protection of individual rights, is the free market.

Taking these points of views into account, I don't believe most Libertarians would think the government should protect people from themselves.

A Libertarian would instead look to the free market to set the guidelines of what would or would not be acceptable under contract law. Credit ratings agencies and technology standards bodies are examples of the free market filling a need for neutral arbiters of fact, and something akin to them would likely be more palattable than the government mandating specific standards.

The most applicable point of view is the idea of Freedom of Contract, which is the belief that individuals should be allowed to enter into any form of contract free of government intervention. This can be contrasted with such policies as minimum wage, since free individuals should be allowed to decide for themselves whether entering into a contract in the first place is in their best interests.

Some take this notion pretty far, for example Robert Nozick wrote in Anarchy, State, and Utopia about a thought experiment he termed Demoktesis in which people started incorporating themselves and selling shares off to people until everyone owned a single share of themselves and then also owned a single share of everyone else. In fact, Nozick went further, and said this about slavery:

The comparable question about an individual is whether a free system will allow him to sell himself into slavery. I believe that it would.

The Libertarian Party included the following statement on their 2016 Platform:

Since governments, when instituted, must not violate individual rights, we oppose all interference by government in the areas of voluntary and contractual relations among individuals. People should not be forced to sacrifice their lives and property for the benefit of others. They should be left free by government to deal with one another as free traders; and the resultant economic system, the only one compatible with the protection of individual rights, is the free market.

Taking these points of views into account, I don't believe most Libertarians would think the government should protect people from themselves.

A Libertarian would instead look to the free market to set the guidelines of what would or would not be acceptable under contract law. Credit ratings agencies and technology standards bodies are examples of the free market filling a need for neutral arbiters of fact, and something akin to them would likely be more palatable than the government mandating specific standards.

2 added 353 characters in body; added 26 characters in body; added 4 characters in body; deleted 4 characters in body
source | link

The most applicable point of view is the idea of Freedom of Contract, which is the belief that individuals should be allowed to enter into any form of contract free of government intervention. This can be contrasted with such policies as minimum wage, since free individuals should be allowed to decide for themselves whether entering into a contract in the first place is in their best interests.

Some take this notion pretty far, for example Robert Nozick wrote in Anarchy, State, and Utopia about a thought experiment he termed Demoktesis in which people started incorporating themselves and selling shares off to people until everyone owned a single share of themselves and then also owned a single share of everyone else. In fact, Nozick went further, and said this about slavery:

The comparable question about an individual is whether a free system will allow him to sell himself into slavery. I believe that it would.

The Libertarian Party included the following statement on their 2016 Platform:

Since governments, when instituted, must not violate individual rights, we oppose all interference by government in the areas of voluntary and contractual relations among individuals. People should not be forced to sacrifice their lives and property for the benefit of others. They should be left free by government to deal with one another as free traders; and the resultant economic system, the only one compatible with the protection of individual rights, is the free market.

Taking these points of views into account, I don't believe most Libertarians would think the government should protect people from themselves.

A Libertarian would instead look to the free market to set the guidelines of what would or would not be acceptable under contract law. Credit ratings agencies and technology standards bodies are examples of the free market filling a need for neutral arbiters of fact, and something akin to them would likely be more palattable than the government mandating specific standards.

The most applicable point of view is the idea of Freedom of Contract, which is the belief that individuals should be allowed to enter into any form of contract free of government intervention. This can be contrasted with such policies as minimum wage, since free individuals should be allowed to decide for themselves whether entering into a contract in the first place is in their best interests.

Some take this notion pretty far, for example Robert Nozick wrote in Anarchy, State, and Utopia about a thought experiment he termed Demoktesis in which people started incorporating themselves and selling shares off to people until everyone owned a single share of themselves and then also owned a single share of everyone else. In fact, Nozick went further, and said this about slavery:

The comparable question about an individual is whether a free system will allow him to sell himself into slavery. I believe that it would.

The Libertarian Party included the following statement on their 2016 Platform:

Since governments, when instituted, must not violate individual rights, we oppose all interference by government in the areas of voluntary and contractual relations among individuals. People should not be forced to sacrifice their lives and property for the benefit of others. They should be left free by government to deal with one another as free traders; and the resultant economic system, the only one compatible with the protection of individual rights, is the free market.

Taking these points of views into account, I don't believe most Libertarians would think the government should protect people from themselves.

The most applicable point of view is the idea of Freedom of Contract, which is the belief that individuals should be allowed to enter into any form of contract free of government intervention. This can be contrasted with such policies as minimum wage, since free individuals should be allowed to decide for themselves whether entering into a contract in the first place is in their best interests.

Some take this notion pretty far, for example Robert Nozick wrote in Anarchy, State, and Utopia about a thought experiment he termed Demoktesis in which people started incorporating themselves and selling shares off to people until everyone owned a single share of themselves and then also owned a single share of everyone else. In fact, Nozick went further, and said this about slavery:

The comparable question about an individual is whether a free system will allow him to sell himself into slavery. I believe that it would.

The Libertarian Party included the following statement on their 2016 Platform:

Since governments, when instituted, must not violate individual rights, we oppose all interference by government in the areas of voluntary and contractual relations among individuals. People should not be forced to sacrifice their lives and property for the benefit of others. They should be left free by government to deal with one another as free traders; and the resultant economic system, the only one compatible with the protection of individual rights, is the free market.

Taking these points of views into account, I don't believe most Libertarians would think the government should protect people from themselves.

A Libertarian would instead look to the free market to set the guidelines of what would or would not be acceptable under contract law. Credit ratings agencies and technology standards bodies are examples of the free market filling a need for neutral arbiters of fact, and something akin to them would likely be more palattable than the government mandating specific standards.

1
source | link

The most applicable point of view is the idea of Freedom of Contract, which is the belief that individuals should be allowed to enter into any form of contract free of government intervention. This can be contrasted with such policies as minimum wage, since free individuals should be allowed to decide for themselves whether entering into a contract in the first place is in their best interests.

Some take this notion pretty far, for example Robert Nozick wrote in Anarchy, State, and Utopia about a thought experiment he termed Demoktesis in which people started incorporating themselves and selling shares off to people until everyone owned a single share of themselves and then also owned a single share of everyone else. In fact, Nozick went further, and said this about slavery:

The comparable question about an individual is whether a free system will allow him to sell himself into slavery. I believe that it would.

The Libertarian Party included the following statement on their 2016 Platform:

Since governments, when instituted, must not violate individual rights, we oppose all interference by government in the areas of voluntary and contractual relations among individuals. People should not be forced to sacrifice their lives and property for the benefit of others. They should be left free by government to deal with one another as free traders; and the resultant economic system, the only one compatible with the protection of individual rights, is the free market.

Taking these points of views into account, I don't believe most Libertarians would think the government should protect people from themselves.