I'm not the GP, but I mostly agree. The principles that I suspect we both share are that concentration of power will always result in harms, and the only way to

I'm not the GP, but I mostly agree. The principles that I suspect we both share are that concentration of power will always result in harms, and the only way to get ourselves out of the mud is diffusion of power. 1. Up until 1913 the Senators were elected by the Representatives. In 1910 the law changed for Representatives to be per 30,000 population, to be static count of Reps. There is now is now 750,000 people per Representative. Because a Representative can not possibly talk to all 750,000, they can not represent them. The supply of their time is limited and that pushes up the supply/demand curve. They lobby for donors and only talk to the richest of the set. If there were 131 Representatives in CA and only they could vote in Senators, the Senators would be beholden to them, and would be required to act on the average behalf. As the distribution is currently to large, this does not happen, and the poorer of the population are ignored and harmed. 2. The only tax that is non-distortionary is a Land Value Tax. All other taxes create distortions and should be eliminted. A Land Value Tax, if implemented, would be sufficient to handle all government spending. The only other tax that should be able to be implemented are Pigovian taxes on negative externalities. 3. The core mandate that the Federal Reserve handles is the management of the money supply. Austrian economic principles state that this is a waste of time, and you can do the same job, perfectly, and with less economic cycles and harm caused, by simply mandating a static monetary velocity. So you can see in both the Taxes and the Federal Reserve example you can work out the exact algorithmic rule that should always be applied, and remove the need for individuals within the government from mucking up the system with their corruptions.