Can government work programs be compatible with the libertarian view point?

[jack555]

From a libertarian point of view is there anything wrong with a program for citizens with no job to work on infrastructure projects (like fixing our nations bridges)? The infrastructure jobs need to be done...why not have american citizens do them? How would the cost of this compare to having a private work force do them? It would keep people employed and not going into crime...and also train people for when the program stops...and our infrastructure would get its much need improvment, what do you guys think?

We believe in limited government and limited taxes. I think fixing infrastructure and some other jobs falls under what I view as the governments job. Constitutionallu it is the states who should do these programs in their own states (and not the federal government) right?

[Truth Warrior]

Upper case "L", yes, lower case "l", no.<IMHO> Another of the major and obvious conflicts and differences. :p :rolleyes:

[Truth Warrior]

bump

[krazy kaju]

No, it is not compatible with true libertarianism. Roads should be privatized. Even if they aren't, businesses that fix roads still employ American residents, so nationalizing road fixing does nothing.

Now, pseudo-libertarians like those at Reason Magazine might support infrastructure projects, but they are not REAL libertarians by any sense of the word.

[heavenlyboy34]

From a libertarian point of view is there anything wrong with a program for citizens with no job to work on infrastructure projects (like fixing our nations bridges)? The infrastructure jobs need to be done...why not have american citizens do them? How would the cost of this compare to having a private work force do them? It would keep people employed and not going into crime...and also train people for when the program stops...and our infrastructure would get its much need improvment, what do you guys think?

We believe in limited government and limited taxes. I think fixing infrastructure and some other jobs falls under what I view as the governments job. Constitutionallu it is the states who should do these programs in their own states (and not the federal government) right?

It is utterly wrong to create make-work programs for infrastructure problems. It only serves to distort the market. It could only cost more than the free market price, because there will naturally be a government apparatus attached, which costs money (and always more money than "planned") to operate.

Who do you think built the original infrastructure in the first place? It was the individuals and companies who were working on the ground. IMHO, none of the stuff you mentioned falls under the general welfare clause (or any other article) in the constitution.

[jack555]

thanks for the views on the matter