4 ms·

I'm curious why you added "limited liability." I think any liability is tied to the power of the State. You are, after all, being found liable through the leg

I'm curious why you added "limited liability." I think any liability is tied to the power of the State. You are, after all, being found liable through the legal process (probably the courts.) On your last point, one natural monopoly that thrived completely independent of any States, is the monopoly of force exerted by Warlords over their domains. Given the choice between Warlords and a State Government, I chose a State Government, even with all its other problems. Hopefully the government is reasonably democratic, and a nation of laws.

pitaj 8y ago
Limited liability refers to the privilege that firms gain when they are sanctioned by the State. This privilege is characterized as the owners (shareholders) of the corporation not being liable for the actions of the corporation. This is a creation of the state. Without LL, destructive corporate actions could result in suits against the shareholders or at least the operators of the company. Shareholders would like to limit the risk they take, so they would be likely to pressure firms to act more carefully. With LL, firms can take whatever risk they want, and the only consequences stockholders see is if the stock price of the company falls.
- VikingCoder 8y ago
  ...and the other point? That yes, there are natural monopolies: Warlords. Curious about your thoughts on that?
  - pitaj 8y ago
    My views on the warlords question mostly follow this article: https://mises.org/library/wouldnt-warlords-take-over https://mises.org/library/wouldnt-warlords-take-over In addition to that, the idea that a state arises to prevent warlords is fantasy. In reality, warlords evolve to become the state as they legitimize their position as rulers.
    - VikingCoder 8y ago
      If you're interested in Dialog, I'd be glad. That article is awful. Truly terrible. But it's not worth my time pulling it apart, if you're not interested in genuine Dialog. Let me know.

pitaj 8y ago

Limited liability refers to the privilege that firms gain when they are sanctioned by the State. This privilege is characterized as the owners (shareholders) of the corporation not being liable for the actions of the corporation. This is a creation of the state. Without LL, destructive corporate actions could result in suits against the shareholders or at least the operators of the company. Shareholders would like to limit the risk they take, so they would be likely to pressure firms to act more carefully. With LL, firms can take whatever risk they want, and the only consequences stockholders see is if the stock price of the company falls.

VikingCoder 8y ago
...and the other point? That yes, there are natural monopolies: Warlords. Curious about your thoughts on that?
- pitaj 8y ago
  My views on the warlords question mostly follow this article: https://mises.org/library/wouldnt-warlords-take-over https://mises.org/library/wouldnt-warlords-take-over In addition to that, the idea that a state arises to prevent warlords is fantasy. In reality, warlords evolve to become the state as they legitimize their position as rulers.
  - VikingCoder 8y ago
    If you're interested in Dialog, I'd be glad. That article is awful. Truly terrible. But it's not worth my time pulling it apart, if you're not interested in genuine Dialog. Let me know.