Market Failure vs. Government Failure, Part 5

* This is my guest article for suarakebebasan.org, a new website for freedom created by some Indonesian friends.
---------

Market Failure vs. Government Failure

Expert Column   Bienvenido Oplas Junior  | 15 Jun 2015

The main reason  why governments (local, national, regional/multilateral) around  the  world keep expanding is because they want to correct and address “market failure”, generally defined as the failure of the market players – firms and households – to supply certain goods and services at prices and  quantity that the public needs and demands.

While this is a generally accepted justification for government intervention, there is also  caution that “market failure” is only a necessary but not sufficient condition for such  intervention. There are two reasons for this.

One, market failure attracts market solutions (not government intervention) and such solutions may not be available today but will be available tomorrow. Good examples are mobile phones. Before, many poor people wanted to have their own phones but could not afford one. Today, prices of this commodity are affordable to the poor, including some of those cute, touch screen and  wifi-ready phones.

Two, it is highly probable that government will only exacerbate the problem and replace market failure with government failure. Good example is healthcare. There is widespread belief that governments should provide free or highly-subsidized healthcare to the poor, but systems are either too bureaucratic, or fast but wasteful and subject to corruption and robbery. And public dissatisfaction with government healthcare remains very high.

Sources of market failure

In economic theory, the two sources of market failure are identified. First,"public goods" character of a commodity or service. Once it is provided, it is difficult or impossible to exclude non-paying people from enjoying and free-riding the benefits of such good or service; or the cost of excluding the free-riders is high. Examples are national defense, traffic lights, peace and order and justice administration.

Second are "externalities", positive or negative. Examples of negative externalities are air, water and noise pollution, and examples of positive externalities are clean air and good peace and order situation.

With modern technology and management systems, various market solutions have been invented to deal with such perceived market failures. Examples are private villages, townships and industrial and economic zones. Almost everything that governments would normally provide are provided by the private sector there: roads and drainage, security, traffic lights, street lights, garbage collection, public parks, even schools and mini-hospitals. Thus, the “public goods” character of those services is not absolute. Their provision can be done entirely by the private sector, various market players and civil  society organizations.

The externalities aspect of those goods and services can also be internalized. Meaning the private sector players can internalize and absorb the full cost of providing such services, no government taxes and  fees are needed to finance them, partly of fully. These private villages and  ecozones have their  own systems of  internal revenue mobilization and local spending.

Sources of government failure

After identifying one "market failure" after another, governments began intervening in many sectors and sub-sectors of society. And the first source of failure is created: many bureaucracies. Government should be in healthcare, education, housing, roads, ports, credit, irrigation, trains, media, and so on. And many of those bureaucracies at the national government level are replicated at the state or provincial, city/municipality and barangay/village levels. Duplication, multiplication or missing of functions create wastes and distortions in society, not to  mention big opportunity for corruption in various levels of government.

A second source of failure has to be invented: more taxes, fees, fines, penalties, mandatory contributions, to finance the huge and  expansive bureaucracies. If one will check the World Bank’s “Doing Business” annual reports, as well as Price Waterhouse Coopers (PWC) “Paying Taxes” annual reports, one will see big number of taxes and fees, national and  local, that an average private enterprise will have to pay. Not included there are the costs of getting auditing, business compliance and law firms to help them understand and  comply with new and sometimes  overlapping requirements, permits and  fees to pay.

Since government administrators and officials are spending not their own money, the tendency and temptation to over-spend, to live beyond their means, is high. And huge public debts were invented. Almost all countries in the world now have public debts. While some have a debt/GDP ratio of only 20 percent or lower, many governments have debt/GDP ratio of 50, 80, 100, 200 percent or more.

The litany of reports and citizen complaints of government corruption, plunder and other forms of waste and crimes especially developing countries confirm that government failure is often worse than the market failure that such intervention wanted to correct.

Many people who demand more government intervention forget that aside from more taxes, fees and charges; huge and extensive bureaucracies also mean more regulations, inspections, registrations, accreditations, permits and licenses.

It is now difficult to identify any sector or industry and sub-industries in our social and economic lives where there is no government intervention and registration required. In many cities and countries, ven repairing or remodeling one’s office or condo requires city hall permit or license. And to reoccupy said office after a remodeling would require another city hall permit.

Those in the "informal" or "underground" economy do not exactly escape 100 percent of  those government permits and licenses. It is more like out of 10 or 20 business registrations, taxes and fees required by government, they only managed to escape perhaps 50-70 percent of them.

Good governance can cure government failure?

Very often, government failure is addressed or “corrected” by another set of government intervention. Like creating a new anti-corruption office or task force, creating new internal regulations and mechanisms to check and double check procedures and release of funds. These moves are essentially pouring more public money to determine how much public money have been stolen and wasted already.

The new key word being sold to the public to accept new interventions is "good governance", more transparency and accountability of public institutions and government officials and personnel. Implied in this formulation of course is the retention of a big, expansive, and interventionist bureaucracy; only to expect them to behave more transparently.

An option to go "back to the market" and "less government intervention" is far out among the minds and demands of many groups and people, even from those very vocal sectors and individuals that regularly note government failure, like those in media, the academe, NGOs and civil society groups.

Anyone anywhere can create a “market failure”. If people demand a USB with 20 GB memory and sold for only US$10, they create a market failure.  Demand is there but supply is zero. The price these people are willing to pay is too low compared to what producers are willing to sell. Or a biotech firm supplies a particular rice variety with several nutritional values but sold at $10 per kilo and no one buys it, also creates  a market failure. Supply is there but demand is zero, market failure.

Rent seeking

In the book, "Government Failure: A Primer in Public Choice" written by Tullock, Seldon and Brady (2002, published by Cato Institute, Washington DC), Chapter 4 is entitled “The cost of rent-seeking”. Examples of rent-seeking are (a) trade protectionism, where the protected local industry benefits but the local consumers are worse off; (b) private monopolies, and (c) direct income transfers by government where A is taxed and B receives the money.

Trade protectionism is trade dictatorship. The domestic consumers are being told that they can only buy or import from this country but not from other countries; or they can buy from anywhere but only for xx tons volume; or they can buy anywhere at any amount but at 10 percent, or 100 or 500 percent more expensive price because of import tariff and  other national and local taxes and fees.

Private monopolies via government franchising is enterprise dictatorship. The public, the consumers are told that they can only purchase a particular product or service from a single company.

Direct income transfers are political cronyism and nepotism. Very often the targeted beneficiaries are old political supporters, relatives and clan members of the  politicians  and officials in charge of money transfer, in cash or in kind.

Voluntary Exchange vs. Forced Exchange

In voluntary exchange, producers come or attract consumers to sell their products or services like fruits, fish, beer, hair cut, tutorial, cell phone repair and so on. Consumers choose from various producers who offer the same or  similar goods and services, and chose those who offer them good value for their money.

No one is coerced or arm-twisted to surrender his/her money to someone else. Only when the consumer is satisfied with  the product or  service will  he/she give the money to the product seller.

In forced exchange, people are coerced to surrender their money to a big and armed body or institution. Their monthly salaries are automatically deducted of a certain percentage; their earnings in bank deposits, stocks and commodity markets, are automatically withheld of a certain percentage. When they buy or purchase something like hamburger, the price they pay is higher because of taxes and surcharges imposed on the original price of those services and commodities.

And even if the people do not like the personnel and officers assigned to help them because they are arrogant or lazy or corrupt, their taxes and fees will be used to sustain these people.  Or if people feel that certain services being offered and already budgeted are unnecessary, there is little choice to stop them. Lazy and arrogant government personnel can be kicked out of office, true, but one must set aside substantial time and effort, and money of course, to take short leaves from work and stand up as witness to usually long court procedures.

Market, state and civil society

Markets and trade were invented to fulfill certain human demands for survival and modernization. Fishermen who have surplus fish catch need wood, nails and carpentry tools to build their house. They also need a boat, fuel and fishing gears and equipment. People specialize in doing a particular skill and they can have many things  they want through trade.

Government and the state was invented mainly to help enforce agreements and contracts among people, to have rule of law. Before people will stab or shoot each other over disputes in contracts, verbal or written, misunderstandings and disputes are settled in peaceful and transparent way and the penalties for violators are also made transparent.

Civil society was invented to help address certain government failures. As government deviates from its basic function of promulgating the, rule of law – the law applies equally to unequal people, no one is exempted and no one can grant an exemption – it creates one government failure after another. Civil society is non-state, non-government entities that help people to have mature, responsible and voluntary assistance to other people. The idea of being shamed among peers and neighbors is sometimes a worse punishment than government prison and incarceration.

It is important that individuals should assert their personal freedom, their right to voluntary exchange, and oppose an ever-widening system of forced exchange and government intervention. This is not a call for zero government. Government has an important but limited function in our lives. Its expansion to so many sectors and facets of our lives however, is not only dangerous, but has already wreaked havoc to our lives. The task of asserting our individual liberty is a continuing challenge for all of us.

----------

Alasan utama mengapa pemerintah (lokal, nasional, regional atau multilateral) di seluruh dunia terus berkembang adalah karena mereka ingin mengoreksi dan memperbaiki "kegagalan pasar", yang secara umum didefinisikan sebagai kegagalan pelaku pasar - perusahaan dan rumah tangga - untuk memasok barang-barang tertentu dan jasa dengan harga dan kuantitas sesuai kebutuhan masyarakat dan permintaan.

Meskipun alasan tidak bekerjanya pasar adalah pembenaran yang berlaku umum untuk intervensi pemerintah, ada juga mengingatkan bahwa “kegagalan pasar" hanya kondisi yang perlu (necessary), tetapi bukan kondisi yang cukup (sufficient) untuk intervensi tersebut. Ada dua alasan untuk ini….

----------

See also: 
Market Failure vs. Government Failure, June 07, 2006 
Market Failure vs. Government Failure, Part 2, March 03, 2008
Market Failure vs. Government Failure, Part 3, June 23, 2010
Market Failure vs. Government Failure, Part 4, March 22, 2014

Market segmentation and pricing, October 09, 2007
Limits to Free Market?, November 16, 2007 
Are Markets Moral?, January 05, 2014

Spontaneous Market 4: Entrepreneurship, Community and Property Rights

Entrepreneurship and free market, in the words of Adam Smith, Friedrich Hayek, and countless other intellectuals, lead to human welfare. People who want to be useful to society and at the same time become rich, invent things and services -- or facilitate the introduction and marketing of those inventions and innovations -- that improve human lives. From new rice varieties that can improve nutrition to new cellphones with cameras that improve communication among people, to new cars that are more fuel efficient, to new medicines that are more effective in fighting diseases.

We can add therefore, that only useful things get the attention of the people, and they buy those things and services, making the inventors and sellers of those things rich. Useless things like nuke bombs and more powerful killing machines are bought mostly by governments and military generals. If you have doubt about this, you can ask the Myanmar generals or Robert Mugabe or Fidel Castro, etc. why they bought hundreds of thousands of assault rifles for their troops.

One example of the fruits of entrepreneurship, is a first ever Oceanarium in the Philippines, that will open up less than 2 months from now. This means that Filipinos who want to see different marine animals and fishes need not go to Singapore or Hong Kong -- and pay thousands of pesos in travel tax, petroleum tax, terminal fee, security fee, to the state -- to see these marine creatures in style.

There is also an ocean park in Subic, about 130 kms. north-east ofManila, but there is corresponding or additional travel costs in going there. This oceanarium will be right in Metro Manila.

When people, children especially, can see live fishes and other marine creatures in front of them, and not just on Discovery or Animal Planet or National Geographic channels, or other documentaries, their appreciation of the marine environment will increase. Because who would want the destruction of marine environment if they will know that those colorful and beautiful, not to mention gentle, marinec reatures, will also be destroyed and killed?

(See the news report here,
http://businessmirror.com.ph/10232007/headlines013.html
First Philippine Oceanarium to open in December
By Louise M. Francisco

MANILA Ocean Park (MOP), the P1.1-billion joint oceanarium project ofChina Oceanis Philippines Inc. (Copi), and Singaporean and Malaysian investors, has set the opening of the first phase of its live aquarium facility on December 15, unveiling plans to exhibit more than 20,000 marine inhabitants of approximately 300 marine species. The oceanarium is divided into six sections named to evoke national pride....
--------

My two related papers in recent months:

(1) Markets, Government and Community

August 22, 2007

A friend defined these 3 concepts as follows:

Market - by competition
Government - by coercion
Community - by cooperation.

In my book though, I define them as:

Market = voluntary exchange
Government = forced exchange
Community = voluntary co-habitation.

Examples:
1) Market: I can only have your money if you like my hair-cut services, then you come back, you tell other people that i'm a good barber. The moment I become a lousy barber, or my barbershop stinks like a dumpsite, there's no way I can have you and your money.

2) Government: I will have your money even if you think policeman X is the most extortionist law enforcer, even if Congressman Y is the most corrupt politician, even if Mayor Z is the most arrogant mayor around. They are your public servants, so give me your taxes.

3) Community: I will live in this community (or village or condo building or barangay) only if it gives me peace of mind for me and my family, at a price that I can afford. The moment the peace and order deteriorates, or the cost of staying in this community becomes unaffordable for me, I and my family will be out of here, and we'll look for another community.

Market competition is only a means, not an end. The end-goal is choice. With choice, comes freedom. More choices, more freedom. In the process of voluntary exchange, some guys will lose out to fellow sellers as the buyers and consumers become choosy. So sellers are forced, even coerced, by circumstances, to be competitive, to produce goods and/or services that will be wanted and bought by the public. So in the process of giving consumers more choices, competition was born.

Government coercion is also a means to pursue a purported goal of public welfare. Oftentimes, the result, in the perspective of consumers, is lesser choice. Lesser choice means lesser freedom. When you have less take-home pay because of high income taxes, then you have less freedom to buy or consume certain goods and/or services that you deem important for you and your family.

Community cooperation is part of voluntary exchange. That is why builders and leaders of private villages and communities incorporate lots of amenities like good peace and order, garbage collection, street lighting, etc. to entice more residents and locators in their communities. More residents, more profit for them. Less residents and less buyers of their residential units, less profit, even losses for them.

Choice through voluntary exchange is a sacred goal to be pursued if one is to ensure individual and community freedom.

(2) Property Rights = Freedom

JUNE 12, 2007

A friend from Sri Lanka, Ms. Mala Gunasekera, wrote a short essay, "The conversion of bad title into good title by acquisition and vesting. This process has empowered governments and impoverished the poor."

In her paper, she observed:
"In Sri Lanka we had legislation called Waste Lands Ordinance to take over their lands. Successive governments fluctuated in their opinions whether the lands should be government owned or privately owned. From time to time cultivated lands were taken over and controlled by government, land laws were randomly altered thus creating many doubts in the minds of people. This created a political cultural ethos where entrepreneurs looked to their respective governments to obtain land for their industrial establishments. They never looked to willing sellers to purchase land for their projects."

What Mala wrote is so true. Property rights means Freedom. And zero property rights means zero freedom. If you can't say that you own your tv or refrigerator 100%, that is, somebody can always come in and he says that he also owns your tv or refrigerator and takes it away from you, then your life is a mess.

If you extend that analogy to lack of property rights to your agricultural land, or the lot that your house is sitting on, then you have 24 hours of absence of peace of mind. You come home from work and somebody else has already fenced your agri land, or your house has already been demolished and someone else is putting up a new house or shop in your lot.

I think that the absence of secure, well defined property rights among citizens is the single biggest GOVERNMENT FAILURE ever created. But if you look at the literature of those who always cry "market failure" to anything and everything around society, the concept of "government failure" never comes to their minds.

Governments around the world have many tools in their disposal to discourage private property rights. Among them are multiple and high taxes, multiple titles and requirements (and signatures and regulations) to secure, unstable and unpredictable legal and judicial system, and so on. A combination of all these and life can be chaotic. I think people in Zimbabwe, Congo, and many other African countries fully understand this.

The big challenge for free marketers, is how to remind governments to focus on that very important function - to ensure property rights, whether intellectual property or goods/lands property, of the people. By extension, governments should be discouraged from dipping their dirty fingers on endless regulations of business and entrepreneurship, on providing endless subsidies to things that are better relegated and administered as personal and parental responsibilities.

--------

See also:
Spontaneous Market 1: Profit, Trade and Personal Responsibility, May 22, 2006
Spontaneous Market 2: Market Failure vs. Government Failure, June 07, 2006
Spontaneous Market 3: No Nurses' Brain Drain, June 21, 2006

Spontaneous Market 2: Market Failure vs. Government Failure

"Market failure", or the failure of the market (the individuals, households and firms who supply and demand certain goods and services) to allocate resources to provide certain human needs and wants, is the single biggest reason why government intervention is justified. And government here ranges from local to national/central government to the UN and foreign aid institutions.

There are two main sources of market failure. First, "public goods" character of a commodity or service. Public goods are those that once provided, it is difficult or impossible to exclude non-paying people from enjoying and free-riding the benefits of such good or service; or the cost of excluding the free-riders is very high. Examples are traffic lights, peace and order, justice administration and rule of law, and national defense for countries with dangerous neighbors. Second are "externalities", positive or negative. Examples of negative externalities are air, water and noise pollution; examples of positive externalities are clean air and cool climate because of the presence of a huge forest or national park, good peace and order condition.

After identifying one "market failure" after another, governments began intervening in many sectors of society. And many people who demand more government intervention forget that it also means new or more taxes, fees and charges; new or more regulations, inspections, registrations, accreditations, other forms of requirements and clearances from the bureaucracy. With valid or invalid reasons to intervene, governments are into infrastructure, utilities, social services, pension, credit and banking, tourism and entertainment, media, and so on.

In fact, it is now difficult or impossible to identify any sector or industry (or sub-industries) of our social and economic lives where there is no government intervention and registration. Even those in the "informal" or "underground" economy do not exactly escape 100 percent of all those government intervention. It's more like out of 10 or 20 registrations, taxes and fees required by government, they only managed to escape 70-90 percent of them.

In public finance theory, the presence of "market failure" is only a necessary but not sufficient condition for government intervention. Because it is highly possible that government will only introduce its own inefficiencies and wastes that will only exacerbate the initial market failure that it wants or purports to correct.

The littany of reports and complaints of government corruption, bribery, plunder, other forms of waste, especially in poorer countries, indeed confirm that government intervention often results in a worse market situation than it wanted to correct. These are now called "government failure", a failure in correcting the initial market failure, a failure in providing genuine public service, which is the only valid and accepted reason for government intervention and taxation.

But instead of government withrawing from those sectors and services where abuses, red tape and corruption are repeatedly noted and reported, "government failure" is addressed by another set of government intervention, by instituting plenty of anti-corruption bodies and counter-check mechanisms and procedures. These moves are essentially pouring more public money to determine how much public money have been stolen and wasted already. The key word being sold to the public is "good governance", meaning more transparency and accountability of public institutions and government officials and personnel. But implied in this formulation is the retention of a big, expansive, and interventionist bureaucracy; only to expect them to behave more transparently.

An option to go "back to the market" and "less government intervention" is far out among the minds and demands of many groups and people, even from those very vocal sectors and individuals that regularly note government failure, like those in media, the academe, NGOs and civil society groups.

There will always be market failure in all spheres of our lives as individuals and communities become more specialized, as tastes and preferences constantly change and evolve. But market failures also create market solutions. An initial lack of supply of a certain food or clothing design that caught the attention of a big section of the public results in entrance of new players and producers of such goods and services where demand is big. Pretty soon, the problem is no longer lack of supply but over-supply. Over-supply sends a signal to various producers and suppliers in the form of declining prices. This signal will force them to innovate, to introduce new designs and formulations, or improve on existing ones, to escape bankruptcy. The market's self-correcting mechanisms guide societies, producers and consumers alike, to allocate resources where they are needed, and stop supplying resources where they are not needed.

Government failures on the other hand, almost always result in more government checks and balances, more bureaucracy, and hence, more taxes and fees to finance the expansion of the bureaucracy. Government failure is more insiduous, more damaging and more disastrous to the lives of people, of private taxpayers especially.

Related topic to government failure is “rent-seeking”. Chapter 4 of the book, "Government Failure: A Primer in Public Choice" written by Tullock, Seldon and Brady (2002, published by Cato Institute, Washington DC), is entitled “The cost of rent-seeking”, written by Prof. Gordon Tullock. Examples of rent-seeking are (a) trade protectionism, where the protected local industry benefits but the local consumers are worse off; (b) private monopolies, and (c) direct income transfers by government where A is taxed and B receives the money.

I would say that around 90 percent of all forms of government restrictions, from erecting rigid labor laws like “expensive to hire, difficult to fire” policies, to expensive welfarism financed by high and complicated taxes, are rent-seeking in nature. They are tying productive people's hands, siphoning off if not outrightly confiscating, their income and savings, and transferred to people often driven by envy and too lazy to accept personal responsibilities on things that ought to be their private domain. The huge government bureaucracy and long layers of politicians that stand in between the people whose incomes are confiscated and the beneficiaries who wait for such wealth transfer eat up precious social resources.

Citizens and taxpayers should assert their their personal liberty, to be freed from various forms of coercions exerted by big governments and their various instrumentalities, by demanding not just "good governance" but more importantly, "less government". After all, less government means less taxes, less bureaucracy, more economic growth and individual freedom.


Voluntary Exchange vs. Forced Exchange

In voluntary exchange, a person comes to another person to offer or sell his/her services like hair cut, massage, tutorial, taxi, cell phone repair, speech writing, and so on; or goods like fruits, vegetables, fish, hammer, nails, hamburger, needle, book, tv, car, bus, boat, and so on. The other guys choose from among those who offer those various goods and services, and pick the ones who offer them good value for their money. Here, no one is coerced to surrender his/her money to someone else, unless there is a corresponding exchange of a satisfying service or commodity given.

Those who offer good quality services and commodities at an affordable and competitive price naturally attracts more clients and customers; through time, those producers and suppliers become bigger, so long as they maintain the quality of their services and the competitiveness of their prices. While those who offer lousy services and bad quality commodities will lose their customers and clients; pretty soon, they will become bankrupt and be forced out of the competition, at least temporarily. Suppliers and sellers know this, so they are compelled by the circumstances, by their environment, not to become complacent producers. In this competitive and non-distorted situation, public and social welfare is served. Those who sell food are forced to sell good quality food. Those who sell their labor are forced to render good quality work. Those engaged in trading and marketing are forced not to over-price their products and services. Those who lend money are forced not to impose very high interest rates.

In forced exchange, people are coerced to surrender their money to a big and armed body or institution. Their salaries are automatically deducted of a certain percentage; their interest earnings in their bank deposits, their gains or profit from selling their house or land or other resources are automatically withheld of a certain percentage. When they consume something like medical and dental check-up, or buy something like soft drinks or gasoline, the price they pay is much higher because of surcharges imposed on the original price of those services and commodities.

Also in forced exchange, even if you do not believe that this and that services should be provided by the big institution, or you believe it should be provided but you do not like the quality of the services given to you, funded by the money that was forcibly taken away from you, you have to bear with them. Even if you do not like the personnel and people assigned to help you because they are corrupt or arrogant or lazy or whatever traits that you do not like, you have to bear with them.

Now, who are engaged in voluntary exchange? And who are engaged in forced exchange? Are they the angels and missionaries for the former, and the aliens and terminators for the latter?

The market -- private individuals, households, firms, voluntary organizations -- are engaged in the former. And government -- national and local government units; executive, legislative and judicial bodies -- are engaged in forced exchange.In the market system of voluntary exchange, the system of rewards and punishment are fast and spontaneous. Those who keep on producing good quality services and commodities at a good price continue expanding, and those who keep on producing bad services and/or selling at unreasonable prices will soon be out of business. No paper work, no bureaucracy, no litigations needed. The incentives and disincentives are very clear and transparent.

In the government system of forced exchange, the system of rewards and punishment are long, managed and bureaucratic. The corrupt and robbers can be rewarded with material wealth and undeserved attention, their shenanigans to be determined in long court proceedings, assuming there will be enough witnesses who will pin them down. Some industrious and efficient ones can be left poor and unrecognized, stuck in fixed incomes and covered by the bureaucratic maze where the ego-trippers get the media attention.

Also in forced exchange, even if you do not need certain services and government personnel assigned in your community or workplace because you think they are unnecessary and costly bureaucracies, you have to bear with them. Their offices and positions have been created already by the higher bureaucrats and politicians, and their annual operating budget have been allocated already, courtesy of the various taxes, charges and fees that were forcibly taken from you. And assuming that you need certain services from government, but you do not like the personnel assigned to perform them because they are arrogant and possibly corrupt, you have to bear with them. They are accountable to the higher officials who recruited and appointed them in their posts, not to "the people", an amorphous and anonymous body who cannot even successfully fight the forcible deduction of their incomes and savings.

Lazy and arrogant government personnel can be kicked out of office, but you have to set aside substantial time and effort, and money of course, to take short leaves from your work and stand up as witness to usually long court procedures.It is therefore important that individuals should assert their personal freedom, their right to voluntary exchange, and to oppose an ever-widening system of forced exchange. Not that people should call for zero government. We need government after all, say to punish the guys who killed your cousin, or raped your daughter, or burned your car, or stole your cellphone, or grabbed your land. Government has an important but limited function in our lives. Its expansion to so many sectors and facets of our lives however, is not only dangerous, but has already wreaked havoc to our lives. The task of asserting our individual liberty is a continuing challenge for us all.

* See also Spontaneous Market 1: Profit, Trade and Personal Responsibility, May 22, 2006