From: Lee Daniel Crocker (lcrocker@mercury.colossus.net)
Date: Fri Jan 22 1999 - 14:32:17 MST
> Well, let's point out that the benefits of the corporate form are benefits
> confered by governments, so in effect, the government has already provided
> certain protections to orgainzations operating under the corporate form.
While corporate structure in the US at present is government-defined
and supported, limited liability corporations /can/ exist without
such support. So long as a trading firm in a free market openly
identifies itself as a limited liability corporation and specifies
in all its contracts that parties agree to limit the liability of
the firm to the assets of the firm independent of those of its
shareholders/directors, then no one is being coerced. Of course, in
the US, all that's required is that you have "Inc." in your name and
all those contract terms follow automatically, but those same terms
could also be negotiated in a free market.
It is often argued that limited liability encourages investment
and enterprise, and that's probably true. But that's /not/ a good
argument for government-fiat corporations; it's a good argument
for freely contracted limited liability corporations.
-- Lee Daniel Crocker <lee@piclab.com> <http://www.piclab.com/lcrocker.html> "All inventions or works of authorship original to me, herein and past, are placed irrevocably in the public domain, and may be used or modified for any purpose, without permission, attribution, or notification."--LDC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:02:54 MST