I'd still need to be convinced these are ethical rather than economic questions. Anyway, what if the answer is: scaling? Often seemingly-good ad hoc solutions accumulate until in toto they no longer make sense. Humans tend toward systems for a reason, though I remember you disagree with that line of argument.Good for us. So, what stops me from feeding the homeless or hiring a foreigner? What stops the poor from finding affordable housing or making money braiding hair?
All four examples appear to be both economic and ethical disasters. On being the right size: maybe these examples could be excused if they were the exceptional blemishes of large programs which are on balance beneficial. Is that your argument? I think people revere authority figures for the same reason they fear foreigners. These instincts gave better results among bands of a few dozen members whose interaction with other bands was mostly violent.
Is it better for human systems to exist than not? Probably, maybe. But asking whether they're beneficial is a sidestep from the question 'are they necessary', which is just a silly way of saying 'will they exist no matter what we do'. It seems so. We should figure out why, at minimum, before we undo a millennia-old pattern.