libertarians, in a libertarian society who takes care of the disabled?

Short answer: The people who are INTERESTED in taking care of the disabled.

Long answer:

- To some degree, the disabled would take care of themselves, just as they do now (only through private insurance instead of government Social Security disability "insurance"), and by working to the degree that their disabilities allow.

- To some degree, the families and friends of the disabled would care for the disabled, just as they do now. The political "safety net" covers some necessities (inefficiently at an exorbitant price-to-benefit ratio), but even with it, most disabled people I know depend on their families and friends for a lot of help.

- Charities with an interest in assisting -- like now, only in an environment where less money is going to government and is therefore available to support those charities as contributions.

People could and would help them out. We didn't have a federal income tax until the 16th amendment was passed, as it was deemed "unconstitutional." Do you think that everyone treated the disabled like "Old Yeller" before hand?

I guess that most of us can't even picture a world in which the government isn't so heavily involved in our lives as it is the only thing that we know. They are doing a great job of making us all so reliant. There is no end in sight!

In addition, without all of the ridiculous taxes, the government would be better. More and more people would be able to afford to open their own businesses and there would be a competitive job market. We really don't need the large government and one couldn't articulate it well enough to these free-thinkers out there that want the thing to grow. Have you ever heard of responsible use of government money or commerce laws that really make that much sense? We have these people on government payroll to make new laws that you couldn't make up.

In a truly Libertarian society, the disabled are either taken care of by their family, or they are considered weak and simply die.

If they cannot make it on their own and their family will not or cannot take care of them, then they die and the resources they would be taken up will eventually be split amongst those who are not as weak.

Something along the lines of natural selection and evolution, and how they are supposed to work.

libertarians expect that the 'community' and charities would be much better at doing this and providing all other necessary social services currently provided by the government.

Kudos for picking on this point because it's always been a real nagging point for me when i speak to libertarians, this idea of no safety net and all tax as government perpetrated theft- coincidentally i'm actually a teacher who works for a vision impairment program and without government funding nobody would be able to afford to pay me to provide the services i do to some of our countries least financially -fortunate children.