≡ Menu

A Libertarian Theory of Contract: Title Transfer, Binding Promises, and Inalienability

Note: Updated and revised version included as chap. 9 of Legal Foundations of a Free Society (Houston: Papinian Press, 2023).

***

A Libertarian Theory of Contract: Title Transfer, Binding Promises, and Inalienability,” J. Libertarian Stud. 17, no. 2 (Spring 2003): 11-37, based on paper presented at Law and Economics panel, Austrian Scholars Conference, Auburn, Alabama (April 17, 1999).

Related:

Share
{ 3 comments… add one }
  • Matheus Cabral February 3, 2024, 10:06 am

    I have a question about the title-transfer theory of contract:

    Imagine that a man writes on a contract: “I hereby transfer the titles to all the non-essential¹ property I acquire from the day X onwards to Robinson Crusoé IF he gives me $10,000 today”.

    ¹Consider as “non-essential” all property that is not require for the man’s subsistence.

    Assuming that Robinson fulfilled the conditional part by giving the man $10,000, could he claim all “non-essential” property titles from the man from day X onwards? If so, wouldn’t this be a kind of voluntary slavery?

    The man can still work on the market in whatever job he pleases, but all income would be redirected to Robinson.

    The difference from slavery per se, I think, is that the man can choose where, how and when to work, as well as to choose to not produce anything more than what is required for his own survival. If there isn’t “non-essential” property to be alianeted from the man to Robinson, then force cannot be used to force him to work more. Still, for the man, this would be a very precarious position to be in.

    This contract deals with a conditional title-transfer of alianable property that doesn’t exist yet. In some way, I believe this would be analogous to a loan with an infinite interest rate.

    I wish to hear your opinion on this!
    Thanks in advance for your time.

  • kronohc February 3, 2024, 10:12 am

    I have a question about the title-transfer theory of contract:

    Imagine that a man writes on a contract: “I hereby transfer the titles to all the non-essential property I acquire from the day X onwards to Robinson Crusoé IF he gives me $10,000 today”.

    ¹Consider as “non-essential” all property that is not require for the man’s subsistence.

    Assuming that Robinson fulfilled the conditional part by giving the man $10,000, could he claim all “non-essential” property titles from the man from day X onwards? If so, wouldn’t this be a kind of voluntary slavery?

    The man can still work on the market in whatever job he pleases, but all income would be redirected to Robinson.

    The difference from slavery per se, I think, is that the man can choose where, how and when to work, as well as to choose to not produce anything more than what is required for his own survival. If there isn’t “non-essential” property to be alianeted from the man to Robinson, then force cannot be used to force him to work more. Still, for the man, this would be a very precarious position to be in.

    This contract deals with a conditional title-transfer of alianable property that doesn’t exist yet. In some way, I believe this would be analogous to a loan with an infinite interest rate.

    I wish to hear your opinion on this!

    Thanks in advance for your time.

    • Stephan Kinsella February 3, 2024, 11:53 am

      Probably. But it could be complicated. but yes, I think so, if the contract is specific and formalized sufficiently.

Leave a Reply

© 2012-2024 StephanKinsella.com CC0 To the extent possible under law, Stephan Kinsella has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to material on this Site, unless indicated otherwise. In the event the CC0 license is unenforceable a  Creative Commons License Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License is hereby granted.

-- Copyright notice by Blog Copyright