1. No person in control can know enough to centralize decisionmaking effectively. Even at a corporate level. In practical terms...California policies should be different than Texas policies. Houston policies should be different than Austin policies The woodlands' policies should be different than those of the fifth ward.
1.5 Unintended consequences of central decisions dominate intended consequences.
2. There is no "us". "Us" is a fiction ued to centralize power. Each person has preferences...and they're different from person to person...often radically.
3. Government isn't effective at much of anything,
3.5 Except thuggery...which works well to limit competition
4. Nominal systems of government matter very little.
5. Goverments are all coalitions of elites. Effective leaders of any type (absolute dictator to city council speaker) are primarily skilled coalition builders who get a large group together and screw everyone else.
6. Relative position is the whole political game. Absolute position is not on the table.
7. Since the elite coalition runs the government...any proposed law will be twisted to their advantage.
8. GDP growth is not the whole issue...but it's most of it.
9. GDP growth ~= innovation ~= rival property protection + lack of regulation.
10. Regulation is best sold by offering it as a solution to an external threat: AGW / foreigners, depending your persuasion.
Summary: in order to maintain relative position, those elites currently in power in every society everywhen use low danger external threats to increase regulation, which squelches innovation, kills growth and generally sucks.
Solution: less government...or barring that...competition between governments and small political units.
Hayek, Buchanan, Tullock, Kling, Olson, BBdM, Hoffer, Romer.