AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.
Property claims are covered by inheritance laws if a person does not ensure a valid will exists. These vary from state to state.
Medical visitation: "If an incapacitated patient has not completely documented his or her wishes, hospitals follow state laws about who can make health care decisions for the patient. Many states rank potential decision makers and mandate that hospitals follow this priority order. In most states, a domestic partner or close friend is last on the list of potential proxies. In some states, domestic partners and close friends are not on the list at all." Hospital Rights (This includes who gets to visit.)
Parental rights: In most states blood trumps marriage, so that step-children can be claimed by either the natural surviving parent or other close relative.
Things are not as always as clear as you seem to think.
If I stop responding it doesn't mean I've conceded the point or agree with you. It only means I've made my point and I don't mind you having the last word. Please wait a few minutes before "quoting" me. I often correct errors for a minute or two after I post before the final product is ready.
Property claims: If a valid will exists, your property claims argument is bunk. If not, all you would have to do is write in the marriage contract: "upon the death of either spouse, the surviving spouse is to inherit the full estate" or something of the like. The contract would then essentially act as a valid will.
Medical visitation: Your argument only applies if there is no documentation of wishes, as your source points out. The marriage contract would include a documentation of wishes, so hospitals would follow that documentation. State laws that prohibit such wishes from being followed should be removed.
Parental rights: Your argument here does not apply to marriages where both spouses are the natural parents of their children. That blood trumps marriage is irrelevant, because the surviving spouse is often the natural parent, and thus has both blood and marriage. Regardless, the marriage contract would specify that the couple has joint custody, and that in the event of death the surviving parent is to have custody, blood-related or not.
I'm not sure how you thought any of those examples debunked the feasibility of a private marriage contract.
Last edited by Lakryte; 07-30-13 at 02:37 PM.
"Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free."
"When we live authentically we create an opportunity for others to walk out of their dark prisons of pretend into freedom."
Who shall ascend the hill of the Lord? And who shall stand in his holy place? He who has clean hands and a pure heart, who does not lift up his soul to what is false, and does not swear deceitfully. Psalm 24
"True law is right reason in agreement with nature . . . Whoever is disobedient is fleeing from himself and denying his human nature [and] will suffer the worst penalties . . ." - Cicero