Edward Gibbon claimed in the 18th century that the Roman Antonines had been the only administration anywhere in all of human history that had put human happiness first and foremost in its goals. Others including Amartya Sen claim that Asoka's Buddhist regime in ancient India had this character. There is no consensus among historians or economists on any particularly virtuous government, though there is considerable agreement that some civilizations, e.g. Easter Island, Soviet Communism, failed a great many tests of civic virtue.

The ability to measure virtue is the central debate in stewsinc at eol.ca" class="wiki wiki_page">monetary policy. Canadian economists William Krehm and William F. Hixson argue (notably in It's Your Money by William F. Hixson ) that the Bank of Canada has resorted to measuring virtue narrowly based on inflation, which favours only the rich. Other criteria such as employment or ecological footprint would favour other factors or sectors of society.

Most anti-debt activists including those affiliated with comer.org argue that central banks have had functions usurped by chartered bank-created money. They argue that pre-1980 Canadian and UK money creation processes and criteria were more virtuous or at least much more flexible.

Guiding intellects in the abandonment of government-measured virtue

Milton Friedman and Friedrich Hayek encouraged the abandonment of all government-created money on grounds that public bankers could not assess the need for money creation as well as the private banking community. They ignored the varying criteria for public and private money creation, and the varying definitions of virtue each applies, which may vary (as Jane Jacobs illustrates and argues Systems of Survival where she claims the Guardian syndrome and Trader syndrome are not compatible).

According to Friedman and Hayek, the more visible and public processes of tax assessment and collection did and should act as a discouragement to hidden taxes in the form of money creation (and inflation that it necessarily causes in their view).

The difficult process of arguing for tax increases and collecting them is the main barriers to government overspending that causes inflation.

[+] counter-argument: the taxes that are resisted are often those that are required

[+] counter-argument: not uniform

Bernard Crick defined politics as the public resolution of ethical issues.

In a democracy definitions of virtue in the form of political party formations can compete directly in the electoral system and the winners can impose tax and other measures that reflect public values. The public can choose one party or another based on what adjustments seem to be currently required: swing voters in particular seem to play this key role.

[+] counter-argument: political party governance is often very corrupt

[+] counter-argument: many barriers exist to forming a new political party

[+] counter-argument: political party internals are often corrupt

[+] counter-argument: Canadian law inhibits attempts to require political entities to actually express the virtues they avow

Not every voter is an ethicist or economist.

When voters choose groups or parties they are partly expressing choices of who to trust, but also choosing based on charisma or loyalty or name recognition, e.g. incumbency.

A deliberative democracy using means like open politics argument and other online deliberation methods allows a parallel "pure" debate on public virtue that isn't tied to politicians or inhibited by their career goals, nor much enabled by their personalities or cliques.

Openpolitics.ca itself is an example of such an effort. The Green Party of Canada's Living Platform shows a non-legislative example of facilitating argument outside the legislative mainstream of a major political party.

Too few people holding power concentrates it and increases conflict of interest between various forms and sources of power. If absolute power corrupts absolutely then lesser degrees of power corrupt to lesser degrees, but still enough to distort public values and make decisions on public virtues all suspect.

If nothing else, too few people involved in measuring virtue cannot defend decisions to all constituencies

Virtue is an attribute of bodies and of decisions regarding bodies. Measurements and methodologies aren't subject to the constraints that bodies are subject to. No group entity can reflect

[+] argument against: this position leads inevitably to cliques, single command hierarchy and one man rule

[+] counter-argument: a constitutional monarchy works very well

[+] argument against: it works now

[+] argument against: failure to participate leads to narrower agreements and thus corruption

[+] argument against: it's inevitable

[+] argument against: it's popular

A global consensus of ecologists, e.g. on global warming, is the only extant or useful example of public virtue agreed on all over the world by competent assessors. Ecological wisdom is objective and an attribute of living as a primate on Earth.

Social justice on the other hand has very many contradictory definitions and can never be the basis of any agreement beyond the borders of one language, nation or otherwise. This is a direct consequence of the difficulty of measuring.

[+] argument: Kyoto proves it

A business process is defined in terms of how measurable it is, whether it has a recognizable start and a measurable end.

[+] argument for: Governments do business