Originally Posted by Dumpy Dooby
For one, libertarians can fall anywhere between socialism and capitalism. That fact alone tells us that libertarianism does not necessitate any particular socioeconomic philosophy. Indeed, the term was originally used to refer to a person that is an anarcho-communist, and there is presently a growing movement of libertarian socialism, which can be of anarchistic or minarchistic varieties.
Even if we accept the the more popular version of libertarianism as it's espoused by the Libertarian Party here in America, there are still some issues. Some guys might lean toward freshwater economics, e.g., Friedman, while others might lean toward Austrian economics, e.g., Mises. These are two completely different approaches to economics, despite often being in political agreement, i.e., they agree on policy but not philosophy. Freshwater is neoplatonic. Austrian is rational. Freshwater is Keynesian. Austrian is Hayekian.
Randian Objectivism, on the other hand, is a complete and cohesive philosophical package deal. It doesn't require one to subscribe to it to acknowledge that trait as a mere matter of fact.
Oh, and I moved the discussion about Ron Burgundy
As you can see by my avatar, I am a Hayekian. But the Mises/Rothbard wing will dispute the good von Hayek being the principal Austrian. As for your "Freshwater" part, never heard of it before. Also, you left out the Wanniski "Supply-Siders". Regardless, all of this is Classical Economics, with the exception of the "Demand-Side" Keynesians(Monetarism is officially dead)
And to be perfectly honest with you, this is the reason why I really don't care all that much for using the word "Libertarian", but choose to go with the more accurate designation of "Liberal", used in it's true sense. If you know what classic Liberalism really represents, you can tell what my opinions will be, with 95% accuracy, at the very least.
I have several primary goals in life. First and foremost, is the utter defeat, and banishment, of Collectivism in all it's various heresy. And second is the repudiation of the FDR myth, in that he led us out of the Great Depression, and that he stole the word 'Liberal', and cloaked it around his Progressivism. There are others, but these are my primary scholastic goals. Oh, also I will continue to help others learn more about Classic Economics, so they will not believe all this class envy Keynesian manure, that helps fortify Collectivist ideology.