McGrath, I used to call myself a libertarian, but realized I wasn't "pure" enough in my beliefs to qualify. I will support (grumbling and muttering the whole time) a governmental solution to a problem if I'm convinced that the problem is serious enough that something must be done; that there is no effective private-sector solution; and that the proposed governmental solution is as limited as it can be and still hope to work. A good libertarian would oppose the governmental solution in any case.

I like the term "rational anarchist," which I got from Heinlein's The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress. The typical liberal, upon hearing me use the term, yells, "oxymoron." I explain, "anarchist" means I think all government is evil. "Rational" means I think that until every last person in society behaves rationally in terms of his/her long term self interest - which will not happen as long as people are human - some government is a necessary evil.

IMO, the job of the political process is to determine the exact size and amount of power government needs to fulfill its necessary functions, and keep it just that large and powerful, no more and no less. That doesn't furnish any answers, since there is a tremendous range of opinion as to how large and powerful that is, but it gives a clearer idea of the question.

For what that's worth.

Peter.