How does a libertarian society deal with homeless?

By letting them be.

Let Darwin eat them.

>burgerland
>lolbertarian

nice meme

they all die so there are no homeless people

Lol!

lel doesnt seem to be going to well

im becoming more lulbertarian every day

In the idiotic words of Ron Paul: "The Church will take care of them!"

can you name a country with more liberty? obviously it's bastardized, but still, not all hope is lost.

Ina woods

How is that idiotic?

The Catholic church is the biggest charity in USA.

somalia

>heritage.org/research/reports/2014/09/the-war-on-poverty-after-50-years

its almost as if government stepping into fix something fucked it up

kek. touche.

if they're on private property then the landowner is allowed to eject them. if they're on their own property but haven't built a house on it yet who cares?

By calling 1-800-RWDS so they get picked up and sent to a privately owned konzentrationslager.

To play devils advocate, homeless should be easily able to get a job if they're healthy. Plus nothing is stopping them from erecting a shack somewhere to serve as their home.
If they're not healthy, they can just die desu.

The same way it does now. You would have people volunteering to help the homeless people. People in this thread seem to think that government is society and that only the government can help the poor people. There are homeless shelters downtown where I live with Christians setting up rooms for the homeless people and even workstations to get them back up on their feet. When there is no room they let people camp outside a lot near the shelter.

did everything start fucking up around the 1960s? what happened?

This. We would have no socialist programs so anyone who can't take care of themselves (with the exception of mental and certain physically disabled people, in my opinion) would have to rely on charity. Incentivize charity not force people to take care of others

Everything happened during the 60s, user.

Lyndon Baines Johnson...After Kennedy's assassination the democrats basically had the run of the place. LBJ managed to get "The Great Society" through Congress...non-stop shit storm

What about a public park?

Soylently

Lyndon B. Johnson and the Great Society.

One of the worst three presidents next to FDR and Woodrow Wilson.

>libertarian society
>public park

God San Francisco seems to have more homeless than actual residents. Fuck that city.

charity is not a systematic solution desu

This. It used to be a wonderful place and then the decline of western civilization happened (aka hippies and postmodernism)

Homeless in America exploded in numbers largely due to the dissolution of sanitariums. Prior to that the vast majority of them were committed due to a list of mental health disorders. This was the result of several years of propaganda by the left. COBRA under Reagan was the final nail in the coffin and as a bonus required illegals to be treated in emergency rooms regardless of their ability to pay.

It is not society's responsibility to 'deal' with homeless people.

Street collectors will pick them up and use them to fuel bioreactors. Since homeless people will never be able to afford protection or court fees it's okay.

never give them money, only food and tell them to go to a food bunk, dont give anything the secound time, they have already been shown the way

Well before I even answer that, it's safe to say that due to low taxation, pro-business policy, low government restriction/legislation and no prison industrial complex, the rate of homelessness would be very low in the first place, much lower then it is now. You would be able to live under the radar and thrive just fine, jobs would be plenty and charities and altruistic institutions would litter our cities to care for the lame and lazy alike.

That said, like I was getting into above, because of the low restriction and emphasis on altruism and private intervention, there would be charities to care for the weaker peoples who could seemingly not find a job or housing, and if they were not able to find such a place, there family could take care of them. If neither of these options are available, and if a prospecting businessman could not give them incentive (like perhaps booze or heroin for payment), then they would be left to their own devices and I'm sure they would starve or die or whatever it is those people do, but the rate would be marginally low and the body cleanup/moral decay would be a minimum. I am confident of this.

Hire them as manual labor for city, state and federal needs. Trashmen, ditch diggers, etc. Should they desire not to work, that is their right. No gov programs or campaigns to keep them slothful and lazy should be allowed. Educate the public and kick them out of cities and counties (as incorporated or legally judicious to do so)

One of the great tragedies of welfare programs is how it has killed charity. The idea of community and charity has been destroyed by the forced charity through taxation which has also been woefully ineffective.