Debate: Which side Government or No government
Side: No government society

In theory, isn't voting for experts once every 4 years in an election basically the same as voting for experts every 5 minutes in a market? No, because to vote in the market, you have to contribute to that market by producing something to trade and the weight of your vote is directly related to the degree to which you contribute. With elections for government, you don't have to contribute, and can even be a net consumer of resources, and you have the same say in how that government conducts itself, as the most prolific producer for society. If you thought of a government as a business, and every 4 years you could "vote" that business out and bring in a new one of your choosing, whats the difference?Government produces nothing. It confiscates and redistributes the production of others. It is not required to give value to those from whom it gets its resources, only to satisfy the demands of a majority of voters, regardless of whether those voters contributed to the pool of resources.One could argue that in a free market, voting every 4 years whether Walmart lives or dies would be even better than micro-voting every 5 minutes. I think Walmart would behave better if they knew all the "information" about Walmart would be concentrated and put forth every few years and that the people concentrated their vote to one day. It's very hard for poor people to consistently vote against Walmart with their pocket book when the pocket book is empty most of the time. What if the consumer could vote Walmart or Target every 4 years?Who would get to vote?Would those who traded more value for value with wal mart get more votes?Would those who never traded get to vote? If so, why? What would happen if they voted wal mart out?This scenario assumes that the system should be set up to force people to care about the things that you believe that they should care about, when doing business.As far as the validity of Keynesian economics, I'm not sure. I don't know enough about economics to truly know myself if one theory is better or not. You can say all the buzz words you want and cite numerous articles but for some reason it seems most experts still think Keynesian is the best philosophy. The "free market" (of economists) has been choosing "the best economist" for ever hasn't it?No, the government actively supports Keynesian economic theory. It allows them to borrow to fund all sorts of programs ("entitlements" and huge "defense" spending) that the present taxpayer would not vote to fund, then "kick the can" of debt down the road, to future generations who have no say in current spending. (I did not read the book so I'm just going on the literal title which could be wrong). The Republic is a description of a society where the wisest men are set up as kings to dictate policy to the populous. I would encourage you to read it, and notice the parallels to "progressive" policies.Our "kings" have to work within a legal framework, can be replaced at any time with some effort and easily every 4 years." What keeps a large group from voting for someone who will transfer the resources of others, to themselves?