>Forgive me for giving a slight chuckle that, as a cynic and (somewhat) libertarian, and simply as someone who's been around a while. True, it's far for perfec

>Forgive me for giving a slight chuckle that, as a cynic and (somewhat) libertarian, and simply as someone who's been around a while. True, it's far for perfect. But what you're suggesting is simply delusional. >It's a lot easier because of the nature of government. I assume you're in tech - is the better system the one where you do less or the one where allocate resources because one system got too many so you add more to another to balance them out? It's not a technical issue. There's just no way that's going through parliament and Subsidy of mass transit is happening right now. >This is not true. Even if we take NIMBYism as a perjorative, there's plenty of it about and yet things still get built. There are even NIMBYs in China[0][1]. Are you really going to claim that things don't get built quickly there? I don't see how that proves your point, China is basically the opposite of what you want. If someone doesn't want to sell the government simply sends thugs/the police to deal with them. >When you talk about getting things done via government and steamrollering over the property rights of people, I tend to think of China's government but I could take where I'm from as an example. The difference is that China is not a democracy and does not have separation of powers. Yes, our democracies are far from perfect but it's the best thing we have to protect the poor from the rich. Doing away with it is just going to give the rich even more power over the poor.