Replies

"Do they have anything like a national system of property recordation and naturalization of persons such as corporations?"

I'm not quite sure what you mean, my english isn't perfect although I guess you could label it "decent".

In a thoroughly bureaucratic society like Sweden, you could rely on everything being recorded and registred. This particular aspect of the swedish society has in fact got more to do with lutheranism and civil "Prussian drill" (although we've never been a part of Prussia) than socialism. But ok, now I'm probably getting off-topic.

The right of property isn't a part of the swedish constitution. Many people feel it ought to be, but no government we've had that I know of have bothered to deal with this matter.
One reason is probably that it would be more costly to carry out major infrastructural projects (like building new highways, railroads, airports etc) if private property was deemed a constitutional right.

Private property, properly recorded in a national system, is the basis of the American system, which extends also to naturalized persons such as corporations. While it exists in Central and South America, those two lack a national system of recordation, which gives rise to shantytown development. Shantytown property is also private property but ownership is known only within the neighborhood. This system is common in third world and emerging (former communist) countries. The failing of the shantytown ownership system is that private property cannot be used as bank collateral.

When all property is available for use as collateral then capitalism moves to a second order development, which makes funding available through ownership of property as well as whatever cash a person may have in his pocket. Note that massive wealth exists in third world cities, but that the wealth is tied up and unavailable as collateral. An example in Cairo: 80% of the wealth is so tied up. Egypt should be immensely productive but it is operating on 20% of its capital potential.

The constant failure of aid programs to developing countries in Africa is linked directly to this type of situation. Zimbabwe might be a perfect example of doing it exactly wrong.