Zrk
The problem is, of course, that the financial market is only really a market in the loosest sense of the term. It's certainly not a
free market. It's not nearly as bad as the insurance "market" or the utilities markets, but it can get pretty damn bad.
I think the best sort of government regulation is one that doesn't limit the market, but merely realigns the incentives so as to create a freer, more effective market than would exist without government interference.
Unlike most near-liberterians, I don't see the market as an end in and of itself, or a market left to its own devices as inherently free, efficient, or effective at anything anyone values in a society. And Regulation does not equal a corruption or perversion of the free market. Such perversions can rise on their own where-ever power accumulates and quality information is scarce, or where natural boundaries limit its effectiveness, and regulation, sometimes heavy regulation, can actually serve to smooth those flaws in the market.
Why should people just be given money? To escpae debt? What if they racked up that debt through their own foolishness? Is one obligated to support others if they ruin themselves through their own free will?
Most studies I've seen say that you best line up incentives by simply giving everyone a basic stipend to use as they see fit. This doesn't actually distort the effects of the market at all, you know - it changes the weights, but not the machine, if you understand what I'm trying to say. Everyone takes risks, and right now we only subsidize the wealthy risk-takers, believing we as a society need to support their failures. However, it would be much more efficient to give EVERYONE a base to work to become entrepenuers in their own right, able to risk something without committing themselves and their families to a life of absolute poverty.
Markets require people willing to take risks to function. And by giving everyone a basic guaranteed state to work from, we can create markets that thrive more than they would otherwise.
All I'm gonna say is if I had my medical bills paid for, my housing taken care of and my food provided... I'd do jack shit all day long and screw around. I'd lose all productivity.
Different people are different. There are other ways to structure incentives, too, you know. Culture is far more of a driving force here than anything else, since you CAN live a happy life in the US with no income at all, assuming you go at it with the right mindset. Essentially, your basic needs ARE all met - and will be, even if you stop working. But luckily, those aren't the only incentives in play.