>Most people don't have enough skin in the game to be willing to accept that cost.

This reminds me somewhat of the argument over voting rights during the founding of the Constitution, ultimately being left up to the States. The argument for restriction was that those dependent on the wills of others are not independent or privileged enough to act in a way other than securing their own interests; the argument against this idea is fairly obvious.

From William Blackstone's Commentaries of the law of England is the most concise summary of the pro I'm aware of.

http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/a1_2_1s3.h...

http://www.vindicatingthefounders.com/library/property-requi...