I didn't see al the earlier posts, and so don't intend this to do anything
more than address the items cited:

----------
> From: Don Brayton <[log in to unmask]>
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [CHOMSKY] socialist unions (fwd)
> Date: Sunday, May 25, 1997 10:02 PM
>
> Mason,
>
> A neat twist,  thanks.
>
> ... Microsoft as a pseudo-principality,  maybe.  Prince William of Gates
> does have a bit of a ring to it.
>
> Did Bill Gates build Microsoft without using the overarching coercive
> power of the state?

I wonder how much of our tax money was sent through military R&D,
University grants, gov't contract support of the companies that were MS's
original  source of income (IBM, etc.)

>
> Does a state allow a citizen to leave as easily as an employee might quit
> Microsoft?

I've never read a MS employment contract...

>
> Does Microsoft have a plan to handle those employees who refuse to do
> useful work or who create acts that harm the company other than
> termination (termination being at least awkward for a state to
> contemplate)?

Probably...the word "litigation" comes to mind.

- Don DeBar

> Don
>
> On Mon, 19 May 1997 05:44:31 -0400 "Mason A. Clark"
> <[log in to unmask]> writes:
>
> >   Microsoft.
> >
> >   All of its business are owned by the government (Gates et al).
> >   Most of the governors (controlling interest) are working or
> >   retired citizens of the state (Microsoft).
> >
> >   The economic and social systems seems to be working very well.
> >   There is little or sign of citizen unrest: no riots, little
> >   crime.  The unemployment rate is zero.  The standard of living
> >   is high.
> >
> >       Mason
> >