What bugs me with people who think Libertarianism is the be all end all of sociological projects, is that somehow they fail to see the huge gaps in the world they envision.

For all those libertarians out there who think that Ayn Rand is a gift to the literary world, I did read her book Atlas Shrugged, and one of the first things I noticed in the first few pages, is the total absence of children. Many a libertarian or a member of the sect of fanatics called Objectivists (who try maladroitely to follow some of her principles) when talking about their ideal world where nobody is there to prevent them from doing whatever the hell they want, often forget that very important element of humanity, its propensity to procreate. I mean, who would take care of the children in a libertarian utopia anyway? These bozos would all be busy doing their own thing, in their supremely egoistical manner, and furthermore, they DESPISE people who have to depend on others to function, so why the hell would they use THEIR money to waste on such parasites as children?
And the same would go for the old people or the handicapped.

But the really bugging feeling is the same propensity they have than all the other zealots who get caught in the philosophical flavor of the month to repeat endlessly mantras concerning "the free market" and the "natural freedoms of man" when not bragging how freeing everything from the shackles of the state will cure our deject society of all our ills?

Like the disciples of Karl Marx, they are bent on having sociey follow THEIR ideas of a perfect world and a stable economy.
Like the disciples of Groucho Marx, I scoff at the mere mention of "ideas" from feckless crackpots like Jean-Serge Brisson (leader of the Libertarian Party of Canada), or Newt Gingrich (former Speaker of the US House of Representatives).
Unfortunately not enough people are scoffing at those people.