By never bestowing govt. with the ability to influence the market in any way, thus removing any market incentive to lobby govt.
At that point, wouldn't there be a market incentive to CREATE a government favorable to their means?
Not sure this is a legitimate example, but isn't it in the HMOS' favor to support a program like Obamacare as it gives the govt. power to funnel the money to them instead of supporting true laissez-faire which would open the market to more numerous and diverse competition? Don't Raytheon, Boeing, et al. have a vested interest in supporting a government large enough to need their weaponry?
Also, does a government too weak to influence the economy in any way have the strength to fulfill it's constitutional obligations [speaking specifically about America here]? Just by providing legal tender and creating money, doesn't the government affect the economy?
Article I, Section 8 enumerates the powers delegated to the legislature. Financially, Congress has the power to tax, borrow, pay debt and provide for the common defense and the general welfare; to regulate commerce, bankruptcies, and coin money. To regulate internal affairs, it has the power to regulate and govern military forces and militias, suppress insurrections and repel invasions. It is to provide for naturalization, standards of weights and measures, post offices and roads, and patents; to directly govern the federal district and cessions of land by the states for forts and arsenals.
