[analog31]

If not for the relative regularization of commerce provided by corporate law, and relative stability achieved through economic policy, I think there would be no investment in great ventures of the scale needed to build the electric grid, semiconductor manufacturing, telecommunications, etc.

The limitation of liability granted to the shareholders of corporations is the granddaddy of all entitlements, because it enables relatively hands off investment. Without those things, a "big business" would be on the scale of a corner grocery store, or a family owned factory.

[notch656a]

Those achievements are through cooperative contracts and agreements. That can happen without US government. They can even happen without any government at all. Government after all is just a body with a monopoly on violence.

[analog31]

I don't think contracts can replace law. Imagine having to read and understand a unique 3000 page contract in order to buy a share of stock, or a house, or to get married. Imagine trying to do something like loan money if you have no way of knowing what someone's existing financial obligations are. I think the volume of economic activity would plummet.

"Monopoly on violence" is something I've heard about before. Is this theory supported by evidence? Actually I think that a monopoly on violence might be a good thing. The number of bodies that can engage in violence is either 0 or 1, or many.

I read a translation of Njal's Saga which takes place in pre-literate Iceland. The erstwhile "government" had no monopoly on violence, except to assign cash damages in lawsuits. What the saga describes is basically a continuous blood feud.

[kaba0]

Also, people doesn’t seem to know about the separation of power. The US is definitely not the best example from the point of view of a totally democratic state, but a financial system does need some kind of “admin account” to actually dispute/enforce the agreed upon law. This is not solved by cryptos at all.

[notch656a]

Contract is just 'law' between consenting parties. When a third party gets involved in a way considered 'legitimate' without the consent of the first two (or N number of consenting parties), you have government.