Perhaps a little more reading and a little less trolling is in order here. Somalia is a failed state, and if it represents anything at all it is Anarchy
The successful implication of Libertarian philosophy upon a society would result in effective “anarchy”. There would be little distinction between Anarchy and a full on Libertarian society beyond the few basic laws maintained (if possible) by a Libertarian government.
Anarchy and Libertarism are two shades of the same color, just like Communism and Fascism.
In terms of what a true Libertarian society would look like; there would not be welfare, but neither would there be any restrictions on your offering charity to those less fortunate than yourself.
Show me a time in history when there have been actual laws or restrictions against giving to charity?
I doubt there has ever been such laws, but that has never prevented mass poverty. Today as it stands the world rich could easily end world starvation and vastly improve the conditions of hundreds of millions of the world poor. But they don’t. Why would it be any different in a Libertarian society?
Charity only goes so far, and Charitable originations only have resources and political abilities that extend so far. No origination is as effective and efficient in providing needed aid and bettering the social and economic conditions of our citizens than the government. Stopping them from doing that is morally reprehensible.
While you object to privatization of the police, fire department etc. it should be noted that a: these are relatively modern constructs
And society evolved to create such establishments, what benefits is there in reverting to practices that our society has seen fit to eliminate?
b: private security firms and volunteer fire departments far outnumber "public" ones.
Quality over quantity. Public departments provide equal coverage to all people. Look what happened when private fire departments were established in 17th century England. When you paid a fire department they would put a plaque up on your house indicating that you were provided coverage by a certain company. If your house was on fire and another company responded but you did not pay them, they would let your house burn.
To say that private corporations, motivated by profit, are the best originations to protect our cities and home from fire is illogical. If you don’t pay them, there is no motive for them to protect your house. The rich would be well covered, where the poor would be lucky if they even showed up to put the fire out.
As for private security, they do nothing other than supplement public institutions. There is no situation in the western world where private institutions take over the rolls of investigation and prosecution of crimes.
Poor children in public schools get whatever the State decides to provide, which in my experience (from dealing with recruits who have graduated from such schools) isn't much.
Public education is what you make of it. We are taught the exact same things in public school as private schools.
The fundamental issue here is that Libertarians believe only those who can afford it deserve education, and since children are depended on their parents really Libertarians believe that only those born into money deserve education, poor parents would be unable to educate their children (sins of the father).
That is a barbaric, the cornerstone of developed society is free and universal access to education. It is morally despicable that any individual in our society would seek to deny those of lesser means their fundamental right to education.
The evidence of private industry and free trade outperforming government institutions is overwhelming
The free market has it’s place, but it’s freedoms must be balanced with the wellbeing and needs of society. Libertarians take a free market to the extreme and advocate that it is the magical cure for everything. Unfortunately for them, the market force is not the answer for everything.
Wal-Mart saves the poor millions of dollars and provides them greater consumer choice
Well at the same time providing workers with no benefits, as minimal pay as possible and absolutely no rights as workers (if a store unionizes, they shut the store down).
Tell me, what do you think Wal-Mart would pay it’s employees if the government didn’t set a minimum wage as Libertarians would advoicate?
The facts are there
I think the only fact that is ultimately relevant is the few thousand votes nationally the Libertarian party gets at best and the fact that no moral and educated society will ever embrace libertarian principles.
Somalia has none of these
They did for many years, but like I said. Somalia today is the ultimate evolution of a Libertarian society. That small, minimally funded government was disregarded as soon as the private corporations (in this case Somalia) gained more power than the government did. Any libertarian society would go the same way, as corporations gained more and more power fueled by their need for more and more money ultimately the government would only stand in their way and they would disregard it and eliminate it.