I think the answer is so highly complex that none of us here - ok, maybe one or two, but I doubt it - can actually give a proper respone. That's not to denigrate everyone who has posted a reply, because I suspect there's more than a grain of truth to all of them. Even the ones I disagree with.

I know I don't have the answers, but I do want to focus on one thing, and that's size: size matters, until it gets too big! All over the world there are now companies whose turnover exceeds the GDP of small countries. The banks, the airlines, the motor manufacturers. The computer companies and the oil companies. They are huge and they can change government policy much faster and more profoundly than the electorate can. Recent events prove that: governments have swallowed their principles and bowed to the will of the multi-nationals. In this kind of democracy, it's one dollar, one vote. I'm not saying it's corruption, although there's plenty of scope for that, but countries can find themselves ruled by one or two wealthy companies - and larger, richer and more politically developed countries find themselves ruled by "markets".

I think it's time for a change, and, to draw upon Tomasi again, if we want things to stay as they are, things will have to change. Looking at the events on Wall Street, the City of London and even Reykjavik, it is clear that the multinationals have run away with themselves, taking the wealth of the nations concerned with them. So, for me, the first candidate for change are these huge conglomerates. Let them be restricted in their operations - either by size, or by field of operations, or by some other criterion. But let them be controlable. GM should be split into smaller independent companies, each able to stand on its own feet, but not so powerful that it can exert undue influence on its government, either because it employs half a city's workforce, or it produces most of the city's income. HSBC should not be allowed to operate in so many different places. A branch or two is OK, but not a branch network in every major country. There should be appropriate limits which each country should impose according to its own criteria, but following some internationally accepted principles. That way, if any of them gets into trouble, the nation can swallow it with a hiccough, instead of, as is the problem today, finding it too big a morsel to even bite into.