>For me to have 100% freedom of my property, it must be legal for me to bribe government officials, foreign and domestic, in order to gain an advantage.
So for you to have 100% freedom of your property mean to let the government to do whatever it wants with your property if somebody bribed it?
>well before there were strong regulatory regimes.
When, exactly, were times before there were strong regulatory regimes? You know that monarchies of the past were significantly more invasive than the contemporary liberal democracies, right?
>> You know that monarchies of the past were significantly more invasive than the contemporary liberal democracies, right?
"By 1775, the British government was consuming one-fifth of its citizens’ GDP, while New Englanders were only paying between 1 and 2 percent of their income in taxes."
The level of invasion is hard to equate given the centuries, but safe to say that pre-revolution Americans paid far far less in tax. And there weren't police officers like today. I'd say, for the common man in america, the pre-revolution monarchy was much less invasive than our government today.
It was allowed by the Queen, since none busyness could be started without it. It was frequently intervened by the crown, despite the crown had no share.
Back in the days the king had almost ultimate rule over any busyness, and could establish monopolies like this:
>Early copyright privileges were called "monopolies," particularly during the reign of Queen Elizabeth, who frequently gave grants of monopolies in articles of common use, such as salt, leather, coal, soap, cards, beer, and wine. The practice was continued until the Statute of Monopolies was enacted in 1623, ending most monopolies, with certain exceptions, such as patents; after 1623, grants of Letters patent to publishers became common.
So for you to have 100% freedom of your property mean to let the government to do whatever it wants with your property if somebody bribed it?
>well before there were strong regulatory regimes.
When, exactly, were times before there were strong regulatory regimes? You know that monarchies of the past were significantly more invasive than the contemporary liberal democracies, right?