[Antoninus]

However, if the government would get out of the business of alleviating the consequences of poor choices and bad behavioral decisions, the problems would take care of themselves, and conservatives would get their way - reduction of immoral behaviors and decisions (through attrition).

Are you really that naive? In our semi-socialist society, moral problems wouldn't take care of themselves via attrition. They'd continue to get worse and afflict more people and YOU would have the honor and privilege of paying for it, whether you want to or not.

That scenario (libertarianism + socialism) is the worst of all possible worlds.

[atomicpossum]

Your scenario better describes the alliance between libertarian and liberal. The libertarians and liberals share a desire to unrestrict personal behavior, but the liberals then want socialism to provide a cure for the consequences.

[The Pack Knight]

I do believe he stipulated that, in his scenario, the government would have to “get out of the business of alleviating the consequences of poor decisions”. The result would, by definition, not be a “semi-socialist society”.

[Daveinyork]

Libertarianism and socialism are mutually exclusive. Socialism can lead to libertinism, which is actually the opposite of libertarianism, because socialism can shift the consequences of one’s actions to others.

If the government would get out of the way, we would not have a semi-socialist society.

The main problem with libertarians, as opposed to libertarianism, (with which I am in general agreement) is that they have no clue as to how to handle real threats to our freedom in the real world.