Let us continue where we left off, reviewing our list of principles for good government. We are trying to determine if it is a good list, and if it leads to democracy or something else.

"People, through private enterprise, create wealth; government does not."

Yes. But let's expand on that. Wealth is stuff, and should not be confused with money, which is a measure of the relative worth of the stuff. By stuff, I mean physical things like your house, food, car, computer, and other odds and ends that you collect because you have some use for them, and intangible things such as car repair, good service at a restaurant, the ability to travel wherever, and other services that make your life better. All these are made or provided by people, often organized into large groups to take advantage of specialization and economies of scale.

But historically, government has been one of the worst organizations at making or providing. For if the wealth you create is not wanted by anyone, then you have not really created wealth. Your organization should either change what it does or go out of business so they don't waste resources. This is how a free market economy is supposed to work. But a government can't go out of business. And a government can force the people to take what it provides. This means that the people can't change providers and so bad decisions on wealth creation stick around. Note that this is a problem with monopolies in general.

"Government can give nothing except what it first takes from someone else."

This is generally true of any market transaction. Delta cannot fly me to Hawaii without first taking airplanes from Boeing and fuel from BP. I can't write software without first taking food from a grocer or clothes from a store. This is the basis of trade. Whatever is provided is a change in wealth from whatever was taken (say from food into software). But the exchange is bidirectional, I transfer some of my existing wealth back to whoever I took wealth from (I give money for the food).

Saying that the government can only provide what it takes isn't much of an indictment, since most industrialized people do the same thing. And those who create without taking from someone else are taking from nature, such as a farmer or miner. The problem here is that many people don't think what the government provides is worth what the government takes, and we are not allowed to opt out of the system.

We'll keep this principle, since it drives home the point that a government ought to be held accountable for what it takes and what it provides.