> Unlimited companies prove my point. They’re rare. And they’re overwhelmingly levered.
if you say so, but your point is hard to grasp because here are examples of people owning capital without a liability shield. And plenty of liability limited companies are also levered.
> The actual counter-example you seek is partnerships.
> people owning capital without a liability shield
Yes, kings and lords. (Today: proprietors.) We reformed the system so more than the rich could be capitalists.
To your links: LLPs are not pure partnerships. They’re an equity-like structure with limited liability. If you are arguing against limited liability, limited-liability partnership obviously doesn’t comport.
And: joint-stock companies are not germane to your argument. They join distributed ownership (first, in the Song dynasty) with limited liability (in the West). Without limited liability, they’re analogous to a bond register.
I don’t know literature I can reference to concisely clarify this. English and Delaware law introductory texts may be good starting points. The histories of joint-stock companies, incorporation and indemnification might follow.
The actual counter-example you seek is partnerships. The difference between stock and partnership is limited liability.