One might ask, "How much government?" Maslow would start at the bottom, giving the physiological and safety needs prepotence. And, based on his ideas in "Eupsychian Management," he would start at the local community level. At the lower levels, one would expect a good government to make sure that community citizens were at least fed and protected from predators (both executives and thieves).

If there are burglars plundering neighborhoods, government should estiblish security networks such that citizens could easily alert the police (they are government, no?) of a break-in. And what is Meals on Wheels but good community government acting for the citizenry. Should good government ignore the old lady with an infirm husband, or should it help her with difficult chores? After all, she now has responsibility for herself and her husband. If good neigbors are bound together by the government (which is assumed to be efficient), there will be a helper handy.

There is also the story of Teddy Yellowfly, a Siksika Chief in Alberta. Teddy was a wealthy chief and acquired many possessions. But according to tradition, his possessions belonged to everyone, so he was motivated to achieve because he would thereby be revered and respected by everyone.

So it goes with capitalism. It's not the system swindling us, it's the people therein. One must learn to promote the healthy people into positions of power, not the sociopaths and executives with no virtue.

Also, there is the notion of dichotomy transcendence. If we are polarized, one against another, on issues of proper government, then we need a third opinion. The third opinion, or Third Way involves seeing our problems "from above" or "under the aspect of eternity." Healthy people can do that. Mechanomorphs, sociopaths and bastards are more challenged in this regard.