creators.com opinion web
Liberal Opinion Conservative Opinion
Walter Williams
Walter E. Williams
15 Feb 2012
Rising Black Social Pathology

The Philadelphia Inquirer's big story Feb. 4 was about how a budget crunch at the Philadelphia School … Read More.

8 Feb 2012
Economic Chaos Ahead

Let's think about the kind of mess that we're in. Federal 2010 Medicare and Medicaid expenditures totaled $… Read More.

1 Feb 2012
Obama's Racial Politics

There's been a heap of criticism placed upon President Barack Obama's domestic policies that have promoted … Read More.

Capitalism and the Financial Crisis

Share Comment

There has always been contempt for economic liberty. Historically, our nation was an important, not complete, exception. It took the calamity of the Great Depression to bring about today's level of restrictions on economic liberty. Now we have another government-created calamity that has the prospect of moving us even further away from economic liberty with the news media and pundits creating the perception that the current crisis can be blamed on capitalism. We see comments such as those in the New York Times: "The United States has a culture that celebrates laissez-faire capitalism as the economic ideal. Or, "For 30 years, the nation's political system has been tilted in favor of business deregulation and against new rules." Another says, "Since 1997, Mr. Brown (the British Prime Minister) has been a powerful voice behind the Labor Party's embrace of an American-style economic philosophy that was light on regulation."

First, let's establish what laissez-faire capitalism is. Broadly defined, it is an economic system based on private ownership and control over of the means of production. Under laissez-faire capitalism, government activity is restricted to the protection of the individual's rights against fraud, theft and the initiation of physical force.

Professor George Reisman has written a very insightful article on his blog titled "The Myth that Laissez Faire Is Responsible for Our Financial Crisis." (http://georgereisman.com/blog/2008/10/myth-that-laissez-faire-is-responsible.html) You can decide whether we have in an unregulated laissez-faire economy. There are 15 cabinet departments, nine of which control various aspects of the U.S. economy. They are the Departments of: Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, Health and Human Services, Education, Energy, Labor, Agriculture, Commerce, and Interior. In addition, there is the alphabet soup cluster of federal agencies such as: the IRS, the FRB and FDIC, the EPA, FDA, SEC, CFTC, NLRB, FTC, FCC, FERC, FEMA, FAA, CAA, INS, OHSA, CPSC, NHTSA, EEOC, BATF, DEA, NIH, and NASA.

Here's my question to you: Can one be sane and at the same time hold that ours is an unregulated laissez-faire economy? Better yet, tell me what a businessman, or for that matter you, can do that does not involve some kind of government regulation.

A businessman must seek government approval for the minutest detail of his operation or face the wrath of some government agency, whether it's at the federal, state or local level. Just about everything we buy or use has some kind of government dictate involved whether it's package labeling, how many gallons of water to flush toilets or what pharmaceuticals can be prescribed. You say, "Williams, there's a reason for this government control." Yes, there's a reason for everything but that does not change the fact that there is massive government control over our economy.

It is incorrect to say that laissez-faire or free markets are unregulated. There is ruthless regulation, but it's not by government. Take the mortgage industry. In the absence of government interference, it is unlikely that a lender would extend a mortgage to a person with a poor credit history, making no down payment, and providing no verifiable employment history. But under the pressure of the government's Community Reinvestment Act and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac buying up or guaranteeing such mortgages, a lender will.

When businesses make unwise decisions that lead to bankruptcy, their assets are sold off to someone else who might be able to put them to wiser use. Government bailouts give businesses a reprieve that the market wouldn't give them. Bailouts have at least two effects. They permit continued unwise use of resources and it creates what economists call moral hazard, the expectation of future bailouts and others hopping on the bailout wagon.

The blame for our current financial mess rests with government, with the major player being the Federal Reserve Board keeping interest rates artificially low and the congressional and White House market interference in the name of more home ownership. In the clamor for more regulation over our financial institutions, has anybody bothered to ask whether people in government know what they're doing?

Walter E. Williams is a professor of economics at George Mason University. To find out more about Walter E. Williams and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate Web page at www.creators.com.

COPYRIGHT 2008 CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC.


Comments

2 Comments | Post Comment
Walter Williams:
I loved your analysis of the economy. I was gratified that you mentioned the huge effect that the Federal Reserve Board has and does regulate the economy. I believe this private entity has the greatest effect on the economy from the standpoint of a free economy. I don't believe it is healthy for the overall economy & skewed it towards the big players and banks too big to fail. Greenspan has admitted he made a huge mistake in impacting the economy with his regulation forsaking agency regulation.
Can you devote an article on what if any effect this new pres. Elect will exert on the economy and the way of life in the U.S.? After all he is the Union's first black pres.
Comment: #1
Posted by: Roy Dahlin
Thu Nov 6, 2008 1:36 PM
Excellent review of the staggering burdens on the free markets.

The other half of the equation, however, is the Rube Goldberg devices that pass for regulation of financial markets.

Congress delegates to SEC, which delegates to PCAOB/FASB to set rules for accountants, who force GAAP and SarbOx reporting to shareholders, in the vain hope that they will force directors to rein in managements.

Meanwhile SEC also allows SROs and exchanges to set rules. As does CFTC.

Then Labor, by way of ERISA, tries to define prudent investing, which means delegating authority (but not responsibility!) to rating agencies.

Beyond corporate oversight, there is special banking oversight, including the Fed, OCC, FDIC, and OTS. On top of state banking regulators. All ignoring that the sole proper role of the Fed is to ensure the Treasury does NOT inflate the dollar and rob investors by closet inflationary default.

When so many bureaucrats are involved, no one gets blamed for any failure.

This Rube Goldberg system is far worse than nothing at all, for it deludes us into thinking that Someone, Somewhere, is ressponsible.
Comment: #2
Posted by: Robert Arvanitis
Mon Nov 10, 2008 6:27 PM
Already have an account? Log in.
New Account  
Your Name:
Your E-mail:
Your Password:
Confirm Your Password:

Please allow a few minutes for your comment to be posted.

Enter the numbers to the right:  
Creators.com comments policy
More
Walter E. Williams
Feb. `12
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
29 30 31 1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 1 2 3
About the author About the author
Write the author Write the author
Printer friendly format Printer friendly format
Email to friend Email to friend
View by Month
Author’s Podcast
Judge Napolitano
Judge Andrew P. NapolitanoUpdated 16 Feb 2012
Austin Bay
Austin BayUpdated 15 Feb 2012
Michelle Malkin
Michelle MalkinUpdated 15 Feb 2012

27 Feb 2008 Africa: A Tragic Continent

30 Nov 2011 Ending Income Inequality?

24 Jan 2007 Fearmongering