Those failure modes are things like when there is monopolisation, or it's dealing with externalities, information asymmetry or goods that should not be traded. This is where regulations are good, and I prefer a Pigouvian to a Coasian solution
Comments
Log in with your Bluesky account to leave a comment
I'm a sortitionist. I believe that elected bodies are prone to electioneering and corruption, but they are a good way of having the people's voice heard. They should be complemented with a body that is randomly selected from the population, to give thumbs up or down to proposed laws
I say this because elected bodies, such as parliaments and congresses, are made up of people that try to get elected, sometimes by doing 'whatever it takes'. There's opportunities for others to corrupt them by helping with electability in undue ways.
On the other hand, there's no better way I know of for people in general to express the direction they wish their government to go. I'm not sure a vote every N years for either evil or diet evil parties is a great expression of this. Perhaps voluntary voting on individual matters might work
But I think a randomly selected sample of the population that can assent or veto legislation would provide a better representation of the people being sovereign than a single monarch or head of state acting in this role
I also believe that government bodies should be distributed rather than centralised wherever possible, and with multiple member positions. For example, something like the Swiss federal council rather than a single powerful president.
This also leads into another belief I have, that borders should be open. I wish I could find the source of a quote that is stuck in my head: "Borders are the scars left on the map by war." I think that people should be able to move to the district that has the best opportunities for them
Comments