Wrong. They don't have a "who cares" attitude towards the poor in society. Rather, they merely state that it is not the role of government to forcibly take wealth and property from some people and redistribute it to others. That in no way means that the poor shouldn't be taken care of. Many libertarians generous people and philanthropists, who care for the poor and needy ... Libertarians believe that individuals and private organizations should spend on the poor - instead of the government forcing people to do so. Here's an example. Zakat is mandatory. So, the government could forcibly take 2.5% of our wealth and redistribute it to the poor. Now ... is sadaqa mandatory? If someone gave their Zakat, and took care of their dependents properly, are they blameworthy for not giving nafl sadaqa? What if the government forced you to give nafl sadaqa? Is that fair? Shouldn't the individual have the right to decide how much, and where to give his/her sadaqa? Who ever said the role of government to decide and forcibly take wealth from some sections of society and redistribute it to others? I've been meaning to make a post on this, discussing the true Islamic concept of government, and the role that government plays in an Islamic system. Specifically, what things are the government *responsible* for - to the extent they may forcibly take money and wealth from the citizens to accomplish. For example, defending/expanding borders, enforcing law/contracts, etc ..