Canada

I don’t understand what you mean about opaqueness being the principle of our civilization. Democratic government has the express opposite goal.

Oh yeah? Without looking it up, what was the name or number of the last motion parliament passed? I'm not sure, and I pay more attention than most.

I know, you said goal, but then why bother with a rigid constitution and giant complex legal system? A lot of vague goals were mentioned on the way, and implemented in sometimes weird ways (peine forte et dure, looking at you), but in 2024 checks and balances are the clear winning design concept. Our system is a system, it's not dependent on the actions or intentions of any one person. It's complex as a result, and therefore opaque to anyone who's not near-omniscient. Ditto for markets.

Why not simply ban trucks over a certain size or weight for personal use?

Well, what about remote areas? I guarantee there's at least one dude on a farm that can't be accessed without a bit of ground clearance. That was the original use-case of SUVs. Funny enough, they became popular generally because of US regulations introduced around 2000 or so, which made small vehicles more expensive to produce, and prompted companies to hard-sell larger models.

How do you define personal, too? I know plenty of people who have a truck that they use for work, but also personally. I don't know how they've structured the ownership of their vehicle, or how you would distinguish between "my tax shelter owns it" and an actual business. You'd have to figure that out, and then enforce it, administrate it, and build in carveouts for whatever exceptions that turns up.

This derisively gets called the "why don't you just" school of public policy. There's a reason actual regulations tend to be many, many pages long, and usually still have tons of gaps.