More on Capitalism

Hey guys, I'm still figuring out this blogging thing. Last time I used comment instead of post and it either went out into oblivion, or it was so bad that you guys politely said nothing about it.
Like Karl, I think there's a place for progressive government in business, and like Rob I'm dismayed at the outcome of most of governments' attempts to get involved.
Karl, the problem is, it is immensely difficult to come up with a system as consistently measurable as economic value. I challenge you, for example, to explain how a CEO's and a senator's pay should compare. There's no doubt the invisible hand has often led to economic surplus and steamrolled activities which people don't want aren't willing to spend time and resources on. Capitalism is not good at assigning value to things which are measured by a standard other than economic equity. I have friends who argue with me that a person should be free to sell their own organs (as I did so much blood plasma freshman year) for profit. I believe the invisible hand would lead to a repulsive outcome here.
Beyond enforcement of contracts, recognition of externalities, and planning/maintenance of infrastructure, there are precious few initiatives governments have undertaken which "grow the pie" of wealth. Programs aimed at redistribution have a distressing record of shrinking the pie--for example the policy of using Fannie and Freddy as agents of spreading home ownership. As I said in my lost comment, it is so hard to get policies right that it hardly seems appropriate to keep trying.