Are corporations a free market entity, or a creation of the state?

[Cutlerzzz]

What are your thoughts?

I don't plan on getting into this. I'm just hoping I can cause quite the storm.

 

[donnay]

The Corporations are running the state.

 

[acptulsa]

Yes.

Are liberals classical liberals or socialists? What year?

Yes.

 

[FreeTraveler]

Would you willingly buy products from a company that said "If we screw up, you eat the loss?"

Or do you buy products from companies like that because you have no other choice, due to the coercive force of law?

 

[otherone]

Are corporations a free market entity, or a creation of the state?

Only in so much as the State is the creator and arbitrator of contract law.

 

[osan]

What are your thoughts?

I don't plan on getting into this. I'm just hoping I can cause quite the storm.

It depends on how one defines "corporation". Given the commonly taken, albeit tacit definition, a corporation is nothing other than a legal fiction whereby some group of people are able to function in concert according to a set of rules promulgated, codified, and formalized into law by... <drum roll>... the "state", yet another legal fiction, but let us not digress.

A corporation is a creation of the state at the very least, which is to say that in our world a corporation is never not that. A corporation may, however, be more than that, though it is not required to be.

That there are no free markets of any significance to be found on the planet and given that most of the few that exist are black markets, it must therefore be impossible for a corporation to such an entity.

 

[Cabal]

Several free market economists have made a case that corporations as we know them today would not be able to exist in a libertarian society/free market.

 

[thoughtomator]

The entire purpose of the existence of incorporation is to put the state's stamp of approval on an enterprise.

In a free market system the privileges of a corporation (e.g. shield its owners from personal liability for its debts) don't exist, and the amount of business anyone would choose to do with such an entity would be minimal.

 

[onlyrp]

the good ones we approve of are free market creations, the bad ones we hate, the ones that are immoral, and the ones that don't share profits with us, those are bad guys who were created by the state. the same is true about "monopoly" we don't care how much market share a company has, or how they were created, we just say the good ones are free market results, the bad ones are state created monopolies. Sound easy enough?

 

[onlyrp]

It depends on how one defines "corporation". Given the commonly taken, albeit tacit definition, a corporation is nothing other than a legal fiction whereby some group of people are able to function in concert according to a set of rules promulgated, codified, and formalized into law by... <drum roll>... the "state", yet another legal fiction, but let us not digress.

A corporation is a creation of the state at the very least, which is to say that in our world a corporation is never not that. A corporation may, however, be more than that, though it is not required to be.

That there are no free markets of any significance to be found on the planet and given that most of the few that exist are black markets, it must therefore be impossible for a corporation to such an entity.

that's why you go by my definition, if you like them, they're good and free market results, but if you don't, they can only be creations of the state, because obviously, free markets never do wrong and everything the state does is evil. So if you use my definition, you'll never go wrong.

 

[RiseAgainst]

The entire purpose of the existence of incorporation is to put the state's stamp of approval on an enterprise.

In a free market system the privileges of a corporation (e.g. shield its owners from personal liability for its debts) don't exist, and the amount of business anyone would choose to do with such an entity would be minimal.

Originally I felt the same, though have re-thought the issue as of late. I think it's important that we first solidify the definition of that which we are discussing. The features of a corporation include: 1. a pooling of private resources to create one company, 2. limiting the liability of the owners/investors of this company, and 3. state legitimization.

I see no reason why 1. would either be impossible, nor even undesirable in a free market. For free people to associate and intermingle funds is a completely force-free endeavor, one to which I can raise no objection.

I used to think that 2. and 3. were inextricably linked, and thus both impossible in a free market. However, while it is clear that 3. is right out in a free market, I am less inclined to state factually the same about 2. Limited liability coupled with state legitimization (read monopoly of force) is disgusting and wrong, however it may yet have it's place in a free market.

Let's say in the market for good 'A' there are two competing firms (of many others). Firm 1 offers good 'A' with a full liability package for price=X. Firm 2 offers good 'A' with a limited liability package for price=0.5X. I can hardly find fault with an open and free exchange on the market, yet in this scenario have not the definitions of 1. and 2. been met?

It's clear that corporations and the govenmental monopoly they enjoy today would not exits, but I am starting to believe that at least in some sense the posibility for corporations to exist in some form is still there.

Thoughts?

 

[onlyrp]

Originally I felt the same, though have re-thought the issue as of late. I think it's important that we first solidify the definition of that which we are discussing.

No we shouldn't, then we'll lose too many arguments. It's better to have a fluid argument so you can always change them last minute and win. Oh, I forgot, you don't play politics

 

[RiseAgainst]

No we shouldn't, then we'll lose too many arguments. It's better to have a fluid argument so you can always change them last minute and win. Oh, I forgot, you don't play politics

No, I don't play politics. I am interested in truth, peace and freedom. If you are interested in power at any cost, I'm not sure what we have to discuss.

 

[Cabal]

that's why you go by my definition, if you like them, they're good and free market results, but if you don't, they can only be creations of the state, because obviously, free markets never do wrong and everything the state does is evil. So if you use my definition, you'll never go wrong.

Your definition is shit; put it in a pooper-scooper and get it off my lawn.

Understanding and comprehension are paramount to discussing and grasping economics. If you don't know why you're supporting something, then the fact that you support it makes you and what you support look foolish. We're already fighting an uphill battle as it is; we really don't need this kind of garbage helping the opposing team.

"Free market good. State bad."--if you can't elaborate and reason beyond this, just don't talk about economics at all, for all of our sakes.

 

[low preference guy]

corportations are created by contracts (in a proper society)

 

[onlyrp]

"Free market good. State bad."--if you can't elaborate and reason beyond this, just don't talk about economics at all, for all of our sakes.

do you disagree that free market is always good and state is always bad? what more do I need to elaborate beyond that? Do I need an economics degree?

 

[gunnysmith]

Corporations are a state legal protective entity.
It protects personal wealth, legally, as different entity from corporate wealth.

 

[Cabal]

do you disagree that free market is always good and state is always bad? what more do I need to elaborate beyond that? Do I need an economics degree?

If you can't explain your reasoning behind the positions you take, then the positions you take and advocate become disregarded.

Saying you think free markets are always good doesn't illustrate anything to anyone other than perhaps you aren't worth engaging.

 

[onlyrp]

If you can't explain your reasoning behind the positions you take, then the positions you take and advocate become disregarded.

Saying you think free markets are always good doesn't illustrate anything to anyone other than perhaps you aren't worth engaging.

I can't, so maybe you can, and tell me about it.

 

[DamianTV]

Via Capitis Diminuto Maxima, the human being now has only the legal righs of a Corporation. We are all considered Corporate Entities by law, not Corporations being treated as Human Beings. The very word "Person" now literally means "Corporation".

John Smith -> Human Being
JOHN SMITH -> Corporation and "Person"