3. The coercive denial of voluntary action by definition reduces choice. Coercion denies people their voluntarily selected choices thus limits the spectrum of possible choice. It is precisely this choice reducing function of state coercion which is sought in calls for state crisis resolution. 4. Limiting the choice spectrum by definition creates rent-generating opportunities. Unlike free markets, where voluntary action allows everyone to freely choose that which best serves their preferences, the limited choice scope arising from coercion means that people are compelled to accept options they would not accept voluntarily. Advocates of statist crisis resolution are indifferent to this fact. 5. Rent-generating opportunities engender rent-seeking action. Economists call rents those arrangements that ensure captive markets. The opportunity to profit without the threat of competition, reducing the customer base or creating downward pressure on prices, thus ensuring the safest maximum return on investment, is an attractive opportunity that few can resist. Advocates of statist crisis resolution are blind to this fact. 6. Rent-seeking practices necessarily distort the best intentions of state public mindedness. Even if we assume the improbable assumption that the state exists to serve the public good, its ability to actually do so is constantly under attack by rent-seekers who recognize the rent-generating opportunities intrinsic to the choice restraining character of the state's defining coercion, and thus use all manner of corrupting practices to generate and capture such rent-seeking opportunities. Advocates of statist crisis resolution recognize this corruption, but, inattentive to the above two facts, blame this on