That isn't what Libertarians think.
Libertarianism is not code for rude, thoughtless, meanness, uncharitable, stealing, defrauding, enslaving, etc.
It's code for people doing what they want to, as long as they don't hurt others.
For example, I follow recommendations for making my web sites more usable for people using screen readers. Not because anyone makes me do it - I'm happy to do it.
A lot of accommodations cost money and are supported by taxes. Are you one of the rare Libertarians who doesn't also believe "taxation is theft"? Other accommodations require regulation because incentives (money) alone don't work (and have been repeatedly proven not to). Have you squared your Libertarianism with the need for useful regulations of accommodations?
The extreme nihilistic version has deep roots in modern American Libertarianism, I'm glad you anecdotally don't think you subscribe to it. I don't have any cookies to hand out for someone feeling happy to do the low hanging fruit when part of the point is about doing the hard things for equity (not equality) and compassion.
There's plenty of reasons that a voluntary approach can (and does) work. Not perfectly, of course, but nothing is perfect. But it arguably works better than the more authoritarian approach you prescribe.
So you mean saying "oh poor you!" giving a sad look and moving on with your day?
I'm sure the less fortunate are really happy about that.
Or can you detail what's the plan to help the less fortunate without taxation on the more fortunate?
Oh what a zinger! You got me there! /s
Honestly, why should I waste time arguing with you?
To show good faith… you succeeded at showing you didn't have that.
> So you mean saying "oh poor you!" giving a sad look and moving on with your day?
This was insulting.
Of course, I literally didn't say that. I think it's probably obvious to most people how what I said differs from your interpretation.
> So I offered my view of what that looks like… he didn't care to state his view, but preferred to pull the "i'm offended" card to not reply.
I did not play the "I'm offended" card. You chose to be a dick. If you want people to engage with you in substantive dialogue, don't be a dick.
You never had any worthwhile opinion to share.
I'm not asking for cookies. I'm pointing out that you have a misinformed view of Libertarianism, and gave an example.
I appreciate that today we have less likely to be confused with nihilism memes on "equality" versus "equity" such as this now classic: https://i.pinimg.com/736x/94/b9/cf/94b9cff6e57f8bff9db127a21...
I think it is a shame that we've almost lost some access to good humor/satire/farce such as Vonnegut's in what increasingly feels like a Post-Poe's Law Singularity world where the internet makes it painfully obvious how much "most" people associate any given satire with its most facile arguments and miss the forest for the trees, miss the punchline, or miss the general point.