The cure for most cancers is toxic, involving killing cancer cells more effectively than healthy cells. The other widely used successful treatment is surgery. There are nontoxic cures in some cases, including selective immune enhancement. Rarely, some cancers are cured by removing the irritant causing the cancer and/or general health improvements.

The most fundamental right, upon which all other rights are based, is the right to life.

From the right to life derives the right to activities to maintain life. From the right to life derives the right to voluntarily trade for the goods (tools, food, clothing, real estate, etc.) necessary to maintain life. From the right to life derives the right to voluntarily trade for the goods that make life worth living, and real estate is also among those goods.

In such manner (with considerably more detail required) is the right to land ownership demonstrated. It is not just "convenient", it is a necessary component of the right to life most places on earth.

--

Social Contract, on the other hand, is a problem to discuss. First, it's not a contract, which (among its other properties) is a voluntary agreement, and there's nothing voluntary about something imposed on a person at birth. Second, the "social contract" isn't the same everywhere, and the social contract of North Korea requires the murder of Christians. --- Too often, "social contract" is a verbal fog that sneaks in hidden restrictions against the life of an insufficiently careful thinker.

Guatemala is 18 years out from decades of political turmoil in the form of armed revolutions. Recovery takes time, although it doesn't seem as if they're recovering very well.

The Guatemalan government's expenditures are in the range of 10% to 14% of the GDP. That's not bad by libertarian standards. Military expenditures are 3.4% of government expenditures, which implies that over 90% of government expenditures are waste. Guatemala has a "social security" system, which is explicitly not libertarian, and if it is like other SS systems, it is a burden on the poor.

the economic might of the rich

Pray tell, what does "the economic might of the rich" consist of?

The rich can buy and sell among themselves, in which case it doesn't involve the poor. Or, they can buy and sell goods and services with the poor, in which case

1. The poor are free to trade with the rich or not
2. The poor gain from the transaction, or they would not engage in it.

they will have less freedom than now since they will have exactly NONE influence...

Incomprehensible grammar notwithstanding, you have no understanding of libertarianism. Influence has no significance if influence doesn't lead to the use of force against someone. That force only exists in the context of a coercive government, i.e. a non-libertarian government.

Germany, France, Netherlands, Canada are mixed markets trending from freedom to socialism. To the extent that they abandon freedom, they lose their well-being.

The big problem with these kind of rich a**holes is that don't want to contribute to society but they want society to help them.

They are creating their own society, and they'll be paying a great deal of money for the physical plant. That does not qualify as not contributing.

Personally I am praying for a pirate attack on this island or something else.

This is precisely the sort of hateful bullying to be expected from a government apologist. "They won't give me their production! They won't follow my orders. KILL! KILL! KILL! "

Think of Hong Kong before the Chinese takeover. A superproductive entity without natural resources, in no sense isolated from the world at large.

So they want their forever teenage libertarian floating island as long as they are the ones in charge.

What part of "libertarian" do you not understand?

<sarcasm> Why of course! Only government has anything to do with sanitation! </sarcasm>

Official? A life-expectancy table has to be government-sanctioned in order to be true?

Over the last hundred years, additional life expectancy at age 40 in the US has increased from about 29 years to about 40. That means from living 4 years beyond 65 to 15 years beyond 65, increasing the burden on social security by a factor of 3 to 4. (OK, that's not exactly what the figures mean, but it does dramatically affect Social Security.)

Woman's suffrage has had many other bad results. Voting starts about the same time women leave their parents, and they tend to vote in a manner that gives them a government to replace daddy (especially if they're not married). In any close election where dependence on the welfare state or general irresponsibility is at issue, women provide the margin to the side of personal weakness.

My recollection is that wrinkles are caused by partially damaged cells that can't be removed by normal repair and waste removal processes. One way to approach the problem is the enzyme bromelain, which breaks up some proteins, allowing/forcing repair to take place. Ever notice the corner of your mouth getting sore after eating raw pineapple? That's bromelain in action.

BMWs are for youngish frustrated wannabes. They take out their frustrations in arrogant, aggressive driving. Hence the porcupine comparison.

You're almost a century late. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Water_Wars