Because there's no rule saying that any of us cannot be rich. That's your answer, troll.

For example, very early on, Muirgeo started asserting that markets require regulation, therefore there is no such thing as a 'free' market, therefore it's never wrong to regulate markets. Everyone here can see the lack of logic, and I've corrected him MANY, MANY times, but does he ever learn?

You know you're being trolled when the troll says increasingly outrageous things in an attempt to keep you on the hook (hence "trolling"). Then, when you get disgusted and stop responding, the troll goes back to making reasonable arguments.

Wash, rinse, repeat for endless amusement. When you're under attack by a troll, the only successful response is 100% silence. If someone breaks discipline and responds, they're on the hook and the troll starts reeling them in and out.

If 100% silence is not possible, then moderation (human filtering) is required. I've seen this again and again and again (google for "russ" if you doubt my experience).

Ooooh, based on Harrison Bergeron. I cannot wait!!!

Anyone care to take a shot at explaining this data and how it's consistent with libertarianism?

Certification required to join the Libertarian Party:
"To validate my membership, I certify that I do not advocate the initiation of force to achieve political or social goals."

Oops. Sounds like you're lost.

And this:
"Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel."

muirgeo, you approach that jewel very suspiciously whenever you start talking about me paying for others' health care. And I'm not put at ease by your belief that you're using force to advance liberty, even if that's how you rationalize it.

I think that pretty much rules you out as a libertarian. And that's fine, because you're not the first person to make that mistake.

And I'm going to offer you one more thing. The opposite of "libertarian" is "authoritarian." As a supposed libertarian, tell me the difference between your views on health care, and those of an authoritarian.

Now you may not realize this, but nothing that's transpired here, up to this point, bothers me in the slightest. I can dispatch socialist claptrap in my sleep. See? No hard feelings!

What does bother me is that now you will begin to insist that you are a libertarian and I am not. In fact, it's been clearly established that you are a leftist, a socialist, a progressive, a Democrat. You are a liberal, but not the type referred to by Hayek and Boudreaux. You seek security above all else, and while you paste pretty quotes, you in fact fear and despise liberty, because it does not produce the results you want. Liberty is too hard for you.

You are what is known as a "concern troll."

If you want civil treatment, you can start by not insulting the intelligence of everyone here who wants real liberty. They don't want what you want. This is firmly established, and it's all that matters.

Suppose for a second, that you are the true libertarian, and the rest of us are all just anarchists, for example. Aren't you being silly to hang out on an anarchy blog just because it calls itself libertarian? I mean, it's well established that you are not about what this blog is about. Are you here to defend the use of "libertarian" among us anarchists, or do you really hope to convince us that you know a better way?

When your Marxist fallacies are identified, will you at least show us the dignity of getting new ones instead of repeating them?