Maastricht Treaty revisions needed?

[kandrathe]

Some sectors, like the military, or the courts, cost less (all things considered) in the hands of the government. This has not always been true, but in the modern state, it almost certainly is.

Mostly, because the State has the power to implement the "force" necessary for a military, or for imposing justice. I would point to a practice in California that seems to work well; To offload the burden on the courts, the litigants first go through a process of arbitration conducted my an administrative third party. The third party has no power to impose a solution, and for all intents and purposes might be a private service. The costs for the service are born by the litigants.

Economies of scale and sovereign power are simply too important to revert to some other private model of law and order. Safety regulation might also be possible in a totally market model, but the informational costs would likely be crippling. (Or not, some disagree.)

Safety regulations have a few components, first the setting of the standards, second the policing of those standards, and third the punishment of the violators. The limited imposition of force is best left to the state, however inspection (policing) might very well be a purchased service (by the regulated firms themselves).

We've debated education and health care, but I think those are also sectors where the unique powers of government allow for lower costs. Governments can overcome coordination problems by force of law, which may open up equilibria that are unreachable in purely private affairs.

I would disagree with you here 180 degrees. I believe the government lends itself to entrenchment and mismanagement of administrative affairs. Government thinks in a "one size fits all" mentality, whereas the consumer desires the flexibility to customize their consumption to what they need. For example, insurance extending coverage for maladies to which we would never succumb merely because they need to be 'blind' with regard to the 10th amendment (equal justice).

Finding a sensible division of labour between government and private industry is very much a matter of finding out which creates fewer costs, all things considered.

We agree here. My thinking is that when government provides a service, it automatically costs more as the government not only needs to provide the same activity in outlay, but they must also expend activity in generating the funding to pay for the activity. The third party payer system in the US contributes greatly to the inefficiency and additional costs to health care. The solution is to repeal the HMO laws enacted in the 1980's forcing patients to deal with third parties, rather than with health providers directly. Both health care, and education suffer from a similiar malady when funded by government, which is a lack of accountability to the consumer. You've heard that old adage, "You can't fight city hall". Well, that is the reality when you have an issue with your health care, or the education of children as well. If you disagree with something, good luck getting it changed.