Hermit on Nostr: You are presupposing your argument on the assumption that collective action is always ...

You are presupposing your argument on the assumption that collective action is always ethical, far from it, and that government is always ethical, again, FAR FROM IT.

Just by the nature of a democracy, it becomes a tyranny of the majority on the minority and just that allows the people in power to violate the capital stock of that region for the time they are in power. Since they are in power for a limited period of time (unlike a monarchy) they only have incentive to exploit the capital stock for however much they can, in the least amount of time and often resulting in the tragedy of commons.

However if private ownership of property and the capital stock is possible, without it being diluted through the moral relativism of taxation and the welfare state, the result is abundance in everything, because if you are not competitive enough, then you would not survive. Which is not the case when there exists people in power, where favors can be traded instead of money, thereby diluting the purpose of money and thus punishing those that cannot offer favors.