The USSR: history of law and history of philosophy of law

[Boojatta]

Specifically, I'm wondering about whether or to what extent it was legal for an individual to become a sole proprietor with no employees.

If concern about the possible exploitation of employees motivated a law against establishing private business enterprises, then a business that had no employees would not be a problem.

Perhaps there was concern about possible exploitation of individuals other than employees/workers/laborers.

For example, perhaps there was concern:

#1. that venture capitalists would have been exploited by sole proprietors; or
#2. that suppliers would have been exploited by sole proprietors; or
#3. that customers would have been exploited by sole proprietors.

Consider #3 for example. Customers would have the choice of purchasing from stores owned by the government of the USSR. Although the government of the USSR might have been controlled by people who were very concerned about the possibility that there could be exploitation of people who avoided doing business with the government of the USSR and who preferred to instead do business with privately owned businesses, some questions arise.

First, why would small claims courts and other courts not be able to determine the facts and help customers who had been exploited?

Second, was it not considered beneficial for people to develop some ability to help themselves when it came to preventing others from exploiting them? Didn't many citizens of the USSR have co-workers, relatives, neighbors, and friends who might have tried to exploit them? Didn't some citizens of the USSR want to select a spouse rather than stay single or accept an arranged marriage? Didn't some citizens of the USSR want to specifically find spouses who would not exploit them?

[Boojatta]

1. Kick