Capitalism is the only system that I know of where a coercive govt structure is not really needed. In such a system people trade objects or services to mutual benefit. If people feel a trade is fair... then they do so... if not... then not. Govt coersion is not required. The only pupose of govt in such a system is to prevent dis-honest dealings, and to prevent physical force aquiring things from other people.
Look, our system is one where you can open up a small shop and ply your trade or sell your good, pay a piece to the gov for their services and keep the rest. For the most part, your customers are happy and you are happy. This is a good thing, you can express your art/cooking/selling/craft and get pleasure from it and make a living.
The trouble comes when you grow very large, and thus in quest to grow larger you are in a position to do wide spread damage, as well as good. This is the example of the megabanks and financial houses. They become essential, just like a small grocery is essential to feed the locals, these institutions become essential on a macro level.
So, this is what is happening now, good intentions when out of kilt. Thus, government in an objective way is essential to oversee the system, make sure no monkey wrenches are thrown into it, and sort of nudge it back on track when things start to go out of balance.
Look if when poor underwriting of mortgages started to be in vogue, had there been a mortgage underwriting watchdog put in a few regulations as far as guidelines go, then we would not be in the mess we are in now. Even if the derivatives were written on the packaged goods, the underlying product would have been sound enough to mitigate a disaster.
It was poor underwriting that was the root cause of this calamity.
jug