When I think about certain political issues, there is a tiny libertarian in the back of my head taunting me and giving me room for doubt. That is, from a philosophical point-of-view, libertarianism is quite attractive, as it is simple and easy to apply. For instance, we might wonder with uncertainty as to whether or not a given regulation will have good consequences. For the libertarian, this is inconsequential. If the regulation, say, requires one party to help another party, it is impermissible - simple as that. Since I am not quite sure exactly what I should think of this view, in what follows I shall discuss a particular (possible) problem for libertarianism with the hopes of making some progress on the issue. 'Libertarianism', of course, gets used in different ways. So, for my purposes, I shall use the term to refer to a view that is committed to the following principle NO (no obligation): we have no (non-derivative) obligation to help others . (The reason for adding &#