Well, it is really naive to think that private ownership of everything automatically solves all problems. For example, they realize that some kind of solidarily financed social security, health care, wellfare, education, environmet protection are necessary, and propose to 'encourage' people to finance them by tax deductions. But, what is that to be deduced from if they want to abolish almost all taxes?

These guys don't think that the statement that private ownership is efficient and rational, while public, cooperative or state ownership or control is automatically wasteful needs any proof. Yet, take the example of French (state-controlled) and British (private) railroads. Or government financed, universaly available health care in Costa Rica which costs ten times less par capita than in US and brings several years longer life expectancy. Or incredible waste going on in various private owned Enrons...

They are also not quite sure what they actually mean by 'private'. For example, in one place they say that private ownership of natural resources and wildlife is the solution to ecological problems, and yet complain that EPA, Forest Service etc cave in under pressure of 'corporate intersets' and allow unsustainable logging etc. Make up your mind, guys!

Also, their belief that US military presence around the world has the purpose of defending somebody other than American interests (whatever 'American' might mean in this context), and that bulk of 'foreign aid' ends up anywhere else than back in US economy is also incredibly detached from reality.

These guys should read some Dickens.

I think that Jim's, Genixia's and Roger's description of LP replacement of CDC and WHO is quite illuminating