There Ain’t No Such Thing As a Free Lunch

This is a useless statement because it is uncommunicative - it says nothing. Can you imagine being at a party and a libertarian comes up to you and says, "There ain't no such thing as a free lunch!" You would probably think the libertarian was a little loony. It would be better if, during a political discussion, the libertarian would word this sentiment this way: "There is no way the government can give a dollar to one person unless it takes a dollar from another person." "If the government takes a dollar from me and gives it to you, and if the government takes a dollar from you and gives it to me, the result is a wash; there is no net benefit." It is true that the government can take a dollar from you and give it to a poor person, and since the government does not take a dollar from the poor person, the net benefit to the poor person is one dollar. But the people you speak to at parties are generally not poor people. And the big problem today is not welfare for the poor; it's the delusional belief by the middle class that the government can give the middle class free services without anybody having to pay for them.

Libertarianism: "An" ideology" or "The" ideology?

I always advocated that libertarians attempt to position the libertarian ideology as a "hybrid" or "combination" ideology, one which combines positions associated with modern "liberalism" and conservatism, as a way of enabling people to understand, as a way a making the ideology seem less unusual. But radical libertarians would have none of this, because this would make libertarianism appear to be AN ideology, one of just several competing schools of thought, rather than THE ideology, the only school of thought permissible.