The United States is a collaborative brand which will remain profitable to maintain as a corporate identity if it can create the most favorable business and legal environment to do business digitally (5-10 years). It occurs to me that the power of a government rests in its ability to enforce the execution of contracts. With the internet, the power of the United States government to enforce contracts made outside of its jurisdiction is limited. Maybe what the world needs - in a sense - is to make sure that diversity of business-law environments is maintained, in order to facilitate the survival and resilience of various ways of thinking, acting and problem-solving. A more small-scale solution is that various intermediary companies will step up to regulate contract enforcement: see eBay and Craigslist for the most obvious example of a corporate entity acting as an intermediary for the negotiation of human contracts.

Also see:

Smart contracts are computer protocols that facilitate, verify, or enforce the negotiation or performance of a contract, or that obviate the need for a contractual clause. Smart contracts usually also have a user interface and often emulate the logic of contractual clauses. Proponents of smart contracts claim that many kinds contractual clauses may thus be made partially or fully self-executing, self-enforcing, or both. Smart contracts aim to provide security superior to traditional contract law and to reduce other transaction costs associated with contracting.