History

Re: Statism, Obsolescence, Waste, and the Modern Corporation

Wheylous — Sun, 04 Dec 2011 04:28:57 GMT

Clayton - LLC protections can be established in the free market through contracts:

http://blog.mises.org/4269/in-defense-of-the-corporation/

http://blog.mises.org/9084/corporations-and-limited-liability-for-torts/

Re: Statism, Obsolescence, Waste, and the Modern Corporation

Clayton — Sun, 04 Dec 2011 03:22:44 GMT

Corporate personhood permits key decision-makers in corporations - CEO, board members, etc. - to shed legal liability for certain kinds of decisions. Basically, as long as they were "following the rules" when they made the decision, they are not liable as individuals, only "the corporation" can be held liable.

I believe "limited liability" as used in LLC specifically refers to limiting liability of shareholders in stock-share corporations. If MegaDyn Corp spreads toxic fumes and sickens people, is only MegaDyn and its management liable, or can the shareholders be sued as a class? While I think it doesn't make sense for shareholders in most instances to be held liable (due to the necessity of causality in liability), I also don't think it makes sense for liability to be statutorily limited. It should be decided by case law.

Clayton -

Re: Statism, Obsolescence, Waste, and the Modern Corporation

Clayton — Sun, 04 Dec 2011 03:18:09 GMT

@Wheylous: The better term is "firm" - my understanding is that corporation is a largely statutory creature. Of course, there will be firms (even very large firms) in a free market. Stock-shares are a natural way to spread risk for insurance and investing by shifting the risk burden off the businessmen and onto the speculators, freeing businessmen to focus on what they know: their business. The stock-exchanges serve to limit and contain speculation. As we can see from the headlines since 2008, the ultimate aim of the central planning megalomaniacs is to strangle the speculation market en masse.

Clayton -

Re: Statism, Obsolescence, Waste, and the Modern Corporation

Jackson LaRose — Mon, 28 Nov 2011 19:06:11 GMT

JJ,

I meant legal status as a "person". The "corpus" in "Corpo-ration". Wow, what are the odds I'd be using that word with you again, huh?

Re: Statism, Obsolescence, Waste, and the Modern Corporation

Jargon — Sat, 26 Nov 2011 07:49:43 GMT

From the time period of 1890-1905, the big box firms of heavy industry were losing their market share to small businesses, y'know before the wave of 20st Century federal market intervention. This is well documented in Gabriel Kolko's Triumph of Conservatism.

In a free society I don't think that this personhood would exist in the legal sense. Chances are there would be firms which would recognize an offense committed between an individual within a corporate body and somebody else (you, likely). Private Law society would much more likely be an individualized process. State Law is built up by artifices of collectivism. When you strip it away, there's only a person/people who are responsible for committing a crime.

As for limited liability I think I heard someone mention on here that there would be a market for liability insurance. This sounds, of all the answers I've heard, closest to reality. So there would be a certain limited liability but not like our current state solution. Risky businesses would pay higher rates, thus offensive business practice would become less profitable. Consistent with free market ideas, being a dick would have a high pricetag.

Re: Statism, Obsolescence, Waste, and the Modern Corporation

John James — Sat, 26 Nov 2011 07:19:48 GMT

In what sense? Legally, existentially, etc.

You tell me. It's your word. What did you mean by it?

Re: Statism, Obsolescence, Waste, and the Modern Corporation

Stephen — Sat, 26 Nov 2011 05:48:37 GMT

A legal person is an entity which owns (has legal title to) something. It can be a real entity, such as a human being, or an artificial entity such as a business. All artificial entities are owned ultimately by real entities. They cannot be self-owners. For example, some plot of land may be owned by XYZ Ltd. which is in turn owned exclusively by Smith. In this case, the land is artificially owned by the legal person XYZ Ltd., and therefore indirectly, but really, owned by Smith.

How is artificial legal personhood incompatible with the free market exactly. It fits within the Libertarian legal framework so far as I can tell.

And limited liability means limited liability in the repayment of debt obligations which the lender agrees to in the first place. It is not a carte blanche to freely commit torts.

Re: Statism, Obsolescence, Waste, and the Modern Corporation

Stephen — Sat, 26 Nov 2011 05:34:04 GMT

Government interventions impose costs on both larger and smaller businesses. The effect is quantitatively and qualitatively indeterminate. Pieces like this just cherry pick the facts so that they seem to support their core thesis. In this case, that smaller businesses are more natural.

Re: Statism, Obsolescence, Waste, and the Modern Corporation

Jackson LaRose — Wed, 23 Nov 2011 16:12:30 GMT

In what sense? Legally, existentially, etc.

Re: Statism, Obsolescence, Waste, and the Modern Corporation

John James — Wed, 23 Nov 2011 16:00:04 GMT

What is "personhood"?

Re: Statism, Obsolescence, Waste, and the Modern Corporation

Jackson LaRose — Wed, 23 Nov 2011 14:33:40 GMT

I can't speak for the rest of the posters, but I can't envision such an egregious distortion of "personhood" surviving if it were not foisted upon us at gunpoint.

Re: Statism, Obsolescence, Waste, and the Modern Corporation

NonAntiAnarchist — Wed, 23 Nov 2011 04:58:32 GMT

including mass production, the suposed savings from which is often more than offset by huge overhead and marketing costs

Can this be substantiated?

Re: Statism, Obsolescence, Waste, and the Modern Corporation

Wheylous — Wed, 23 Nov 2011 04:53:56 GMT

I thought you guys weren't anti-corporation and thought that contractual LLC could exist in the free market.

Re: Statism, Obsolescence, Waste, and the Modern Corporation

Clayton — Mon, 21 Nov 2011 21:29:21 GMT

It is a myth promulgated by the left that "capitalism" is synonymous with "bigger is better" and "economy of scale."

Clayton -

Re: Statism, Obsolescence, Waste, and the Modern Corporation

Jackson LaRose — Mon, 21 Nov 2011 15:12:51 GMT

I completely agree, although I work from the folly of "limited liability" as it has been treated in courts. Union Carbide kills like 5,00 people, and nobody gets strung up? What if I killed 5,000 people? Yet we are both "people" to the court? Well, that ain't justice, and a free market would not bear it.