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

[onlyrp]

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"

now? When did humans stop having more rights than corps?

And when did the word person mean corporation?

 

[Cabal]

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

Try reading a book.

 

[ClayTrainor]

Corporation, by definition, is a legal class created by the state, which gets to abdicate responsibility away from the individuals that created the corporation. A corporation is nothing more than a state enforced piece of paper.

A clear distinction needs to be made between a Corporation and a Business. A business is a product of market forces, while a corporation is a product of legal fiction.

Corporations could not exist in the absence of a state, but businesses would.

 

[Seraphim]

This.

Corporation, by definition, is a legal class created by the state, which gets to abdicate responsibility away from the individuals that created the corporation. A corporation is nothing more than a state enforced piece of paper.

A clear distinction needs to be made between a Corporation and a Business. A business is a product of market forces, while a corporation is a product of legal fiction.

Corporations could not exist in the absence of a state, but businesses would.

 

[Sam I am]

A corporation Is defined by partial ownership.

an investor gives money to the founder, in exchange for ownership of the company, and that money goes toward necessary capital for running the company.
This way, the operators of the company have less of a stake in the company's success, instead, that stake is passed onto the investors.

Now, the state regulates some of this, the same way as they regulate a lot of things. There are laws in place to make sure that both the investor and the operator uphold their respective ends of the bargain, but this doesn't make corporations a creation of the state.



So let's say I want to start a business, but I don't have the money to get started. I get 200 different people to contribute $1000 each to my business I use that money to buy necessary equipment and materials for operating my business. My business is now a corporation, and it's worth $200,000 and each of those 200 people owns $1000 worth of it.

If the business succeeds and makes $100,000 in net profit, each of those people now owns $1500 worth of the business.

The problem people have with corporations is if i mismanage my business, make no money, and it becomes worthless. I just caused all of the contributers to lose $1000 each, for a total of $200,000 but I haven't necessarily lost anything.

 

[low preference guy]

Corporation, by definition, is a legal class created by the state, which gets to abdicate responsibility away from the individuals that created the corporation. A corporation is nothing more than a state enforced piece of paper.

A clear distinction needs to be made between a Corporation and a Business. A business is a product of market forces, while a corporation is a product of legal fiction.

Corporations could not exist in the absence of a state, but businesses would.

So you believe an organization like a corporation couldn't exist by using contracts in a free society?

 

[Sam I am]

So you believe an organization like a corporation couldn't exist by using contracts in a free society?

What if someone invests in a company, but afterwords one party doesn't want to honor their side of the contract. How does this get settled?

 

[onlyrp]

So you believe an organization like a corporation couldn't exist by using contracts in a free society?

some actually believe that, yes.

 

[ClayTrainor]

So you believe an organization like a corporation couldn't exist by using contracts in a free society?

Well, since corporate law is a creation of the state, than a corporation certainly wouldn't exist in the way it does today. Sure, something similar may emerge, but without an example of what you mean by an "organization like a corporation", it's tough for me to give a good answer. Care to give an example of what you mean?

 

[RiseAgainst]

Well, since corporate law is a creation of the state, than a corporation certainly wouldn't exist in the way it does today. Sure, something similar may emerge, but without an example of what you mean by an "organization like a corporation", it's tough for me to give a good answer. Care to give an example of what you mean?

I feel like my post from page two has been lost :

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?

 

[heavenlyboy34]

Corporation, by definition, is a legal class created by the state, which gets to abdicate responsibility away from the individuals that created the corporation. A corporation is nothing more than a state enforced piece of paper.

A clear distinction needs to be made between a Corporation and a Business. A business is a product of market forces, while a corporation is a product of legal fiction.

Corporations could not exist in the absence of a state, but businesses would.

We can say the same about LLCs, non-profits, and every other business form I can think of this early. I don't think any existing business structure would disappear in the absence of the State except "GSEs" and other orgs that depend partly or entirely on State funding.

 

[heavenlyboy34]

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"

qft!

 

[ConCap]

What if someone invests in a company, but afterwords one party doesn't want to honor their side of the contract. How does this get settled?

Rule of Law.

 

[low preference guy]

Well, since corporate law is a creation of the state, than a corporation certainly wouldn't exist in the way it does today. Sure, something similar may emerge, but without an example of what you mean by an "organization like a corporation", it's tough for me to give a good answer. Care to give an example of what you mean?

It seems to me that a corporation is essentially a bunch of people hired by shareholders to make money for them, and they have limited liability. The rules of how someone gets to own the corporation could be set in a contract by all the shareholders. If you don't like the idea of someone owning an "abstract entity", you can in practice have the same thing by agreeing that each revenue would be put in a certain place, and the contract among owners specifies who will take which amount. The limited liability feature of the corporation is just a contract between seller and customer. The owner of the corporation by contract agrees to allow a seller to make him legally liable up to a certain amount if something goes wrong with a client, and the client agrees that's the maximum amount he'll collect in money from the owner if something goes wrong.

That seems pretty similar to a corporation to me and can be all done through contracts.