Comment: corporations are not consistent with individual rights

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: If I have time, I will go (see in situ)

corporations are not consistent with individual rights

Why not have all people automatically be corporations whenever they do business? Why are trusts and corporations special cases? I am pretty sure the answer is because they are inconsistent with equal rights and individual rights. I havent done the proof, because I havent researched the contrary case but from what I see they are the last remnant of feudalism and make sense only from a historical mindframe where the state endows some people (nobility) with more legal rights than others. If they were a stable foundation for free market capitalism, the benefits of incorporation would already be among your individual rights. People say the stock market would be harmed if distributed owners had distributed liability but debt holders are insulated from business liability and the equivalent of a stock market could be had by the buying and selling business debt. I believe inequality and economies of scale result mainly from the ability of people to use companies and trusts to protect their personal wealth from business risk. The individual rights alternative to limit your liability is to literally give your money to your friends and family members. But then you need to spend time maintaining family trust or signing contracts with your family. In sum, I havent done the research but I would bet that the nobility of Europe has preserved its privileges using these structures-- the old families retain their unequal rights through trusts and corporations so that commoners cannot lay claim to their personal wealth in common law courts.