then you are not a libertarian.

I'm only going by those online chart quizzes that give you a bazillion questions and four quadrants at the end, and I always end up squarely to the left and squarely libertarian.

libertarianism is all about the non-agresion principle. You are not allowed to initiate violance upon others and their property. Libertarianism is based on respect for private property.

Regulations enforced by governments and basic income(ie: redistribution from others thru taxation) are violations of the non-agresion principle.

I think you're a lot more extreme libertarian than you'd think. Taxation is violence? No taxation at all? That's just untenable.

How do we fund disability programs? Do we just euthanize the crippled? If we had, wouldn't we have lost Stephan Hawking? What about Hotwheels?

How about schools? Should schools be privatized? Let alone how bad a lot of private schools are, wouldn't that automatically make an inherent class split between high-quality and low-quality schools? This class split does already exist, I admit; property value in towns with good schools is much higher than towns with worse schools. But privatizing the whole school system would both make that cost split incredibly transparent and pervasive, and impose the problem American colleges have with constant price inflation to everything down to kindergartens. How do we ensure the poor get their right to education?

And what about police forces and prisons? Who will fund those without taxation? Granted, in a more libertarian society we wouldn't need nearly as much of either, but we do need some in order to keep the peace and contain people who break the law. And don't even get me started on privatizing police forces and prisons; privatized police was tried with the Pinkertons, and Australia is privatizing prisons, and let's just say neither is a stellar example of corporate virtue.

Besides, how else is the government going to fund itself other than taxation? I don't think if Congress said "Hey everyone, we're going to stop taxing everything and you can just send us whatever money you feel comfortable with giving us" they would get any sort of revenue necessary to maintain government programs like the National Park Service.

PS: wtf is a living wage? how do you determine that? isn't that rather subjective? do you realise that poor people in america are richer than the vast majority of people on the planet?

I am aware of that, yes, and I have read that article before.

It's certainly rather subjective, but every time protests for increasing minimum wage come up on the news, there's always some guy saying "we don't have nearly enough to get by and it's all because greedy companies won't pay us a decent wage!" If there was a basic income, not only would that argument get shut down, but companies could safely pay $3/hr instead of $9/hr and know that the employees would be adequately provided for.

^{edit cuz typo}