What solution(s) do libertarians provide for externalities?

Not history, not humanities
>>>/pol/

File: Cx9nSQ6WQAUWIpa.jpg (168KB, 1437x908px) Image search: [Google]

168KB, 1437x908px

>>2975842
They don't, hence why we developed from classical liberalism to neoliberalism.

File: fortune.jpg (83KB, 960x934px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 960x934px

>>2975842
Define "externalities"

File: 7D4C72DA-B097-406C-8DAB-4A40BF65123C-193-0000002529579466.jpg (69KB, 1024x1009px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 1024x1009px

>>2975842

>>2975842

Libertarianism is not sold as some all-encompassing answer to society. I am a Libertarian myself and have some pretty big problems with the idea of pure Libertarianism. In my opinion, it's more of a general direction or philosophy that we should strive for rather than a static position.

Anyways, to answer your question, I can see that you are angling towards shilling government intervention in some capacity but you need to understand that in the eyes of a Libertarian, government intervention is an externality in itself (in a negative way). The difference between that a free market externality has a built-in way to correct itself as the market will internalize the cost. This is not the case with the government as evidenced by everything ever

>>2975859
>it's an autistic ancap asks for definitions of well defined words in economic literature episode

Define define
Checkmate

File: 1472016118448.jpg (39KB, 720x575px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 720x575px

>>2975984
>government intervention is an externality in itself
>a free market externality has a built-in way to correct itself as the market will internalize the cost.

>>2975984
>a free market externality has a built-in way to correct itself as the market will internalize the cost.
Do people actually believe this?