All of your examples require a state to take man's flawed aspects and extrapolate them out, putting the force of violence against people who would attempt to do what the benevolent demigods with guns and their "benefactors" impose on them.Disclaimers and every other bit of legalese you see is the result of mind-boggling amounts of regulation imposed on businesses. I deal with this all the time. I can't even put "satisfaction guaranteed" on my signs - the government says that even if I did a hundred thousdand dollars of work for a customer and they subjectively have some issue with what I did, I don't have to be paid, which means neither do my people.You don't understand how insanely companies bend over backwards for their customers. If you are pissed off at almost any product made by a major producer you can call them up and they will send you a damned refund check in the mail. That isn't because of legislation either, that's becuase they want you to be happy. So what you are saying is that if you sold guns legitimately you wouldn't have customers sign a disclaimer? Or if you sold drugs legitimately you wouldn't have them sign a disclaimer of some sort? I'm not making any assumptions in that sentence, because I'm taking a rational, logical cause-effect view of the world. Companies are not rounding up employees with guns. employees go to work because they want to (or have to because they a) don't/can't/won't start a business or b) want to make enough money to maintain the lifestyle they have voluntariliy chosen for themselves). You might hate your boss to shit, but the fact of the matter is you would be pretty choked if he fired you. companies need good employees too, this isn't a "take" game. If I have an excavating company, I need good heavy equipment operators. If I don't have they I can't make money, AND untrained operators might cause more damage than the job is worth in the first place.I think the two major flaws in your thinking are that a) everyone is out to exploit everyone (this is sometimes the case, but most of the time human beings co-operate to attain their own self interests), and b) you don't realize just how systemic the state's stranglehold on the economy is, how intrinsic to most business decisions it must be nowadays to survive the men with guns and the will to exercise their power as often as possible. You are poking at symptoms at best (or things that aren't morally wrong according to the NAP).I don't think it's possible to be a true anarchist and see the entire world as a bunch of extortionists waiting for their chance to sink in the fangs. I think if that's your perspective on voluntary exchange then the state is probably your better option because they at least use the GUISE of "helping" and "looking out for the little guy" to attain their ends.