So, there is one other good reason to keep gov't around. Gov't functions as the emotional arm of the system. This point shouldn't take much to sell to anyone as elections are emotional things which have real results on how gov't operates and what it attempts to do.

For instance, the FRA's decision to move to PTC (positive train control) systems for rail in America was driven almost entirely as an over reaction to a couple of bad accidents in quick succession. PTC is very complicated, expensive, and overkill considering the fail-safe design philosophy inherent in train control systems.

Anywho, that point alone is a little pleasing to me that any system we create doesn't run away from us to its own ends - we possess some level of a check, whether or not we consistently abuse it.

But beyond that, two of the great driving forces in history have been the investment on behalf of gov't into industry and science and it's this second one that is of particular importance. The old Medici's in Italy used to support the arts and sciences for the sole purpose of bolstering their own political power. America's scientific tradition is a direct result of elite European universities and not any aspect of innate American drive. It sounds to me like a fully blown free market would be exceedingly capable at solving problems but Science is a process that doesn't care what the results are or where the questions lead. How would a free market support an aimless practice whose only goal is to enrich our human understanding? I don't believe it would.