Least possible infringement

A friend commented about how, in some matters, State intervention was a requirement as the only way to fix a prior State intervention. My response:
"As to your fight fire w fire point - you may be right but you should be horrified by the implication. The phrase 'throwing good money after bad' comes to mind. As to insurance company influence over legislation - it is a given that businesses, given their money, the skin they have in the game, and their time to develop the capability/capacity to influence legislation will bend the laws to their benefits. That's a prima facia argument for minimizing the role of govt in any arena to the least posible intervention. The govt is rapidly made into the weapon of choice against the competition. This was part and parcel of the Bill of Rights - the founders had seen the damage that resulted from mercantilism.

Liberty has a value, conceptual and practical. The govt seems at this point in time necessary to defend the liberty of each individual. In some cases, a infringement on liberty seems necessary in the defense of liberty. What is the least possible infringement? "What is the least possible infringement of liberty in cases where some infringement is necessary"

-Apply this framework to social security; how long would it take you to come up with
an alternative that would be far superior to the present system, but require significantly less coercion?
-Apply this framework to medicine; how long would it take you to come up with a better option to accomplish what medicare and medicaid are supposed to be doing?

This is what the libertarians bring to the plate. I find a lot of irony in the President's 'hope and change' mantra, given that his entire agenda is recycled Statism from the 1920s or before. There are solutions out there which ARE change. Most of what he represents has already been tested and proven to be untenable.

Have you read Hayek's opus "The Fatal Conceit"? It might make our positions boring to you, but you would be able to better focus your anti-liberty pro-State arguments. Then again, perhaps you would see the libertarian side with a completely new lens.

"What is the least possible infringement of liberty in cases where some infringement is necessary" should be the first and most important question.