Is there a term for someone that is libertarian inclined, but does believe in a minimal level of government regulation and intervention? A "Lite-Libertarian" of sorts.
I do not think there is a label that accurately represents even one individual person's views.
I would suggest you try not to think in labels and embrace the reality: no person is a democrat/republican/tory/labor/whatever. Those are political parties, sure, but what happens when a person disagrees with the platform of that party? Are they no longer a 'whatever'? No, they were never a part of the party to begin with, they just identified with the group that most closely aligned with their views.
Yes, this is the definition of neoliberals. In their view the government should only ever operate and enforce market rules (which includes protecting the market from external threats via military). The government should have no opinion on anything and just let the world unfold as the market dictates.
Of course there are no pure neoliberal politicians as such a being would have no policies except cutting popular things and privatizing them. Hard to get elected. So we have neoliberalism with left or right characteristics as the mainstream ideologies.
Classic liberal. That was at peak around 100 years ago, when there was more freedom and way less tax in the countries that lived it (Europe). One can argue that in a very limited way it was similar in US in the period of 1800 to 1900, but that is a bit different.
The more modern way (still in Europe) is seen as reasonably minimal level of government regulation, but strongly applied. For example the libertarians I know are for minimal government (and associated taxes), but very strong consumer protections - this is because individuals have very little power against huge corporations, so it is just leveling the field.
I consider myself to be economically liberal in the "laissez faire, laissez passe" sense to a large extent. No government should pick winners or losers, no government should protect uncompetitive businesses.
But I believe that the government must protect the free market against capitalism's inherent tendency towards monopoly, and that likewise, it must protect consumers against exploitative business practices (which arguably, a properly competitive free market could help achieve).
In theory libertarians might be into that, but I don't exactly see prominent libertarians calling for antitrust action. An actual political group that is ostensibly pro-market but also big on making sure rules are followed to keep the market in optimal condition are German ordoliberals.
I was going to say neoliberal. But then I have to remember self-confessed neoliberals pushing for war in Iraq and basically giving a blank check to the military industrial complex. And needlessly expanding government on the war on terror. So that term isn't apt either.
"Libertarian" is a sliding scale from basically anarcho-capitalism to traditional Republicanism.
While it has been humorous to see these faux-libertarians say in one breath they want small government, but in the very next breath demand to be saved, tankies and other far-left extremes have used this as an opportunity to lump all libertarians into the same boat.
There's no such thing as a "true" libertarian as most libertarians believe in small government, but what that government can do, is generally up to interpretation in all but the most extreme cases. A major central belief the non-aggression principle. However social issues tend to be more wishy-washy.
Prior to the balkanization of America Libertarian-lite could probably be approximated by a classical liberal.
I would suggest you try not to think in labels and embrace the reality: no person is a democrat/republican/tory/labor/whatever. Those are political parties, sure, but what happens when a person disagrees with the platform of that party? Are they no longer a 'whatever'? No, they were never a part of the party to begin with, they just identified with the group that most closely aligned with their views.