[AnotherUnixGeek]

There are, in fact, disadvantages in a free society. Very often, a democratically elected government will reflect the irrational and illiberal impulses of an emotional populace.

This was my point as well. However, I believe cinives is talking about free societies in a theoretical sense - there are no completely free societies in the real world, since all interfere with the market and the workings of private business to some extent, though some are freer than others.

[cinives]

You are correct. However, hugoball posits that a totalitarian political system such as China may be safer for investors because they are supposedly not as subject to irrational majorities as are democracies. I disagree entirely; which is harder to move, an irrational majority or an absolute dictator ? I believe the democratic society, altho always ready to give up freedom for so-called governmentally-assured security, will take longer to act to revoke ownership or pass laws restricting the use of an asset than a totalitarian regime, which necessarily is composed of fewer decisionmakers. In that extra time, there is hope and the option of action.

The Framers wrestled with this same question - if you give government any powers, it is likely to take more as best it can.