Anarcho-capitalism is the right form of government

True, unadulterated capitalism has periods of insane growth followed by periods of insane "busts" in an almost saw tooth pattern. These boom and bust cycles are one of the flaws and foundations of pure capitalism. The Great Depression was part of the bust side of the boom before it, and 2008 would have been another depression style bust side of a prior boom had the government safety net and Federal Reserve bailouts. These actions to prevent the bust cycle from destroying a collective economy relied on a central government. The idea of a progressive payment into a centralized fund for protection is nice, but is similar to a tax, but instead of handing the money to a centralized government, the money is handed to a privet entity which isn't bound by laws. How would laws be created? How would the be enforced? Though privet enterprise. There lies the problem of justice. The punishments and trial aren't left to an un-bias public arena, but to privet enterprise. This can lead to a very corrupt society as the defense firms could make it "law" that if someone didn't want them to destroy their property because it was deemed "threatening," this could lead to people having to pay every single group simply to keep their lives and property. While I can understand you retort about environmental preservation, if such a statement is true on a full scale, why aren't these actions taken by every company in the modern world of today? My simple explanation lies in one word: greed. You've also failed to explain what is being used as currency, as without any form of central government, no uniform, standard currency would be issued, thus I'm left to assume that privet banks begin to issue their own notes. Such was the case before the United States began printing it's own paper money, and banks would issue bank notes form their own bank (oft backed by gold). This was fine as long as one did business with other customer of the same bank, Bank A we'll say, and everything was all fine and dandy. The issues arise when one decides to either travel or does business with someone who uses another bank, let us say, Bank B. Bob is a customer with Bank A, he regularly does business with other people who are customers of the same bank so his bank notes are perfectly fine to use as payment. Bob sees a new sushi shop open up down the block form his house and wants to try it out, but when he goes to pay, the owner tells him that he is a customer of Bank B and not Bank A, but because the Banks are within the same town, they've worked out what the exchange rate for their notes are and everything is okayish. Bob then finds out he needs to go to a large city for work and upon arriving wants lunch. Bob goes and orders his lunch and goes to pay, but the cashier won't accept his bank notes as they have never heard of Bank A and use Bank C. The idea of a uniform, standard currency while perhaps possible to be create using a your ideal "governing" body is improbably is the idea is that the market should decide. These market failures are perhaps the reasoning behind Money isn't the only example of what a market could very well fail to do, there are so many more such as roads, clean water, ensuring that food and medicine are safe, people are granted safe working conditions and many more among other things. A completely free market with no centralized government regulation could, and has been disastrous for the majority of the population.