Also, who would form the teams, manage their assembling, the process etc... next thing you know you have bureaucracy, next thing you know a semblance of govt. It's unavoidable, you can call it something else but it's still a governing body.
btw, this is a really nice discussion but my babysitter is pulling in the drive. I'll ponder it more as I sip at my bourbon ;-)
For example, say that someone feels they didn't get a fair trial; they had a complaint against a local business, but because the business was a very large employer in town, few were willing to fault the employer. This person might have good grounds for appeal, but who determines that? What about a minority that feels she was the victim of discrimination in the proceedings?
Edit: I should say, I don't think it's flawless, just less terrible than all other presently proposed systems of government.
- i genuinely think that people would do the right thing in this case.
What, exactly, makes you think that? Ever heard of Love Canal? What about Chernobyl or Three Mile Island? Exxon Valdez? These disasters all prompted new regulations without which they would have been repeated again and again. There used to be horse shit piled door high in the streets of NYC until government helped solve that problem, too. Consumers have spoken again and again. They want low prices; that is the god to which they prey. Besides, groups of citizens banding together to decide which companies can operate where is government. Perhaps you would like a smaller, less powerful government?
It is the nature of government that needs scrutiny, but not government itself.
Taxation is one of the foundations of government, the quote may be just a bit of the path, but I think it's pretty close to the heart of the matter.Taxation is the price which we pay for civilization,
for our social, civil and political institutions,
for the security of life and property,
and without which, we must resort to the law of force.
Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.
You may think that tribalism can only happen in areas that lack a central government and lack education, infrastructure and wealth. But education, infrastructure and wealth result directly from (good) government. Universities, the main keepers and creators of knowledge, even private ones, would instantly fail instantly if their government support dried up. Only governments can aggregate the capital necessary to create infrastructure. The richest men in the world aren't worth a hundredth what the US government spends in single year. Anarchists, communists and libertarians all have lack of government as their central tenet of religion, but each has a different view of what their post-government would look like. Not all can be correct.
There are plenty of other things that are not necessarily public goods, yet are still more equitably or efficiently delivered by government, like health care or law enforcement.
I don't know of an example where fire protection worked well when not organized by a governing body. It was private at one point in the US. That didn't work too well.
Education. You can have parents teaching their children but that creates an endless cycle were those born into poverty can never escape except by incredibly luck. Minimum wage and work place safety. Before the gov't stepped in during the industrial revolution children were mining in dangerous coal mines for barely enough money to survive.
Fair enough but what you call the institution that built the schools and determines minimum wage? Even if you consider them to be established by some non gov't entity it is still the authoritarianism gov't that enforces these rules. It is by authority you pay taxes thus funding education. It is by authority employers must obey to work place regulations. A little authority is needed to keep order, although to much and you have a police state. Moderation is the key.
Actually unions are the main reason those even exist in the first place, government had to have their hands forced by the people to make those laws, if it were up to the government and authoritarian business leaders we wouldn't even have a minimum wage, government has historically drug their heels on any kind of progressive reform in the US and only changed things when they had no other alternative. Looks to me they are just a barrier for progress that takes credit after the fact.