Government inefficiency leads to economic problems

The government's failure to fulfill its primary responsibility of prosecuting those who try to control others' life, liberty and property by force or fraud has led to a need for more institutions like regulators that have in turn created more problems, according to a renowned libertarian.
Countries with a strong banking regulation have eight times more chances of facing a banking crisis than in countries where there are less regulations, according to associate professor of Economics and Political Science at Hawaii Pacific University Ken Schoolland, who is on Nepal visit currently.
"Regulatory authorities — that are also government agencies — have created more room for market players to exercise monopoly," he said, adding that monopoly has created inefficiency leading them not to do their duty faithfully and efficiently.
The writer of the world famous book, The Adventures of Jonathan Gullible - A Free Market Odyssey, opined that governments around the world are inefficient because they enjoy monopoly.
Similarly, companies also try to destroy competition and create a monopoly in the market by doing some favour to the government, the free market guru said, adding that there is no better investment than to invest on a politician and the companies in return get some kind of favour like regulations.
"Regulation is an instrument for monopolists promoting crony capitalism in the name of free market giving more room for cartels," he added. "With more regulations, governments make cartel possible forcing consumers to suffer. When the government has no skin in the game, it's more secure and the companies ensure that they remain competent."
In a free market, players always worry about new entrants and remain competitive, the associate professor opined, adding that a free market provides choices to people leading to competition, innovation and choice. "However, one's choice should not injure another's."
Similarly, ethics is a key for market players as a free market does not mean robbing consumers with the help of politicians, Schoolland clarified.

The Philosophy of Liberty
My philosophy is based on the principle of self-ownership. You own your life. To deny this is to imply that another person has a higher claim on your life than you do. No other person, or group of persons, owns your life nor do you own the lives of others. You exist in time: future, present, and past. This is manifest in life, liberty, and the product of your life and liberty. The exercise of choices over life and liberty is your prosperity. To lose your life is to lose your future. To lose your liberty is to lose your present. And to lose the product of your life and liberty is to lose the portion of your past that produced it.
A product of your life and liberty is your property. Property is the fruit of your labour, the product of your time, energy, and talents. It is that part of nature that you turn to valuable use. And it is the property of others that is given to you by voluntary exchange and mutual consent. Two people who exchange property voluntarily are both better off or they wouldn't do it. Only they may rightfully make that decision for themselves.
At times some people use force or fraud to take from others without willful, voluntary consent. Normally, the initiation of force to take life is murder, to take liberty is slavery, and to take property is theft. It is the same whether these actions are done by one person acting alone, by the many acting against a few, or even by officials with fine hats and fancy titles.
You have the right to protect your own life, liberty, and justly acquired property from the forceful aggression of others. So you may rightfully ask others to help protect you. But you do not have a right to initiate force against the life, liberty, or property of others. Thus, you have no right to designate some person to initiate force against others on your behalf. — Ken Schoolland