3 ms·
If liability does not exist outside of government then there is nothing for the government to limit, it would just be called liability, not limited liability.
by syshum 6y ago
If liability does not exist outside of government then there is nothing for the government to limit, it would just be called liability, not limited liability.
Why would government create something then proceed to limit the very thing they created, that make no sense
It is limited liability because liability existed before the government, then the government came in to limit it
- dragonwriter 6y ago> If liability does not exist outside of government then there is nothing for the government to limit, it would just be called liability, not limited liability. No,the premise is wrong. Government existed, and created liability, before government also created liability, so when government created limited liability, liability did exist to limit, even though that existence was not independent of government. > It is limited liability because liability existed before the government No, it 's called limited liability because liability existed before the limitation, not because liability existed before government. Just like the FISA limits on government surveillance are called limits on government surveillance because government surveillance existed before FISA, but not because government surveillance existed before government.
- syshum 6y agoOf course government surveillance did not exist before government, however surveillance certainly did, and rules put in place to limit government surveillance highlight this state, so that is a poor example