hi csl,
i reject the political extremes but i don't know if minimal government is optimal. there's a large space in between libertarianism and communism in which there is room for manouevre.
i don't agree that unfettered markets necessarily generate greater wealth and innovation.
sometimes unfettered markets generate more corruption. witness the years leading up to 2008.
sometimes unfettered markets pass negative externalities to other folks - such as a farm that sends pesticides downstream and harms the fishing industry.
sometimes regulating risks in the finance industry reduces risks on main street.
sometimes regulation creates the market - for instance, intellectual property cannot exist in the absence of government protection. many medicines would not exist but for IP rights as no one would invest in the research if there was no guarantee of the protection required to monetise it.
the fact that property exists as a result of laws is the clue: it tells you that regulation can actually be creative of value. if this is so, how much regulation optimizes value? i don't know. but i don't think minimizing regulation necessarily makes more wealth, any more than maximising regulation increases it. the sweet spot might be somewhere in the middle. who knows?
my feeling is that the best method is to set aside the grand principles and just treat the issues you are looking at as best as you can.
| 