> a regulated free market economy with a Basic Income. While I wholeheartedly agree that that's a good idea, I think the government should probably be a smidge

> a regulated free market economy with a Basic Income. While I wholeheartedly agree that that's a good idea, I think the government should probably be a smidge more involved in some areas. I feel like letting people make up the rules as they please is just asking for mini-dictatorships popping up like you see these days with HOAs. Freedom of setting your own rules, but I think it's more important to limit the cases where your only freedom is to get out. Natural monopolies are another instance where the government should probably step in to avoid a small group of people curtailing the freedoms of large groups. A good current example is the way ISPs currently face no competition. Of course even in these instances a light touch is preferred, In the case of ISPs you might imagine the government owning the fiber, but the ISPs providing the service. This should prevent one ISP in a regio dominating and keeping the competition out. Another example of this is public transit: Railways ought to be shared infrastructure, instead of being owned by a single company. I'm all for maximising freedom, but what often gets lost in the discussion is how and when to limit freedoms to prevent the freedom of one person encroaching on that of another.