Search blog.co.uk

Buy! Buy! Buy! Sell! Sell! Sell!

by Pick1 @ 2008-09-20 - 13:43:32

All good things must come to an end. In the City this week a 20 year long party was brutally interrupted; the music stopped, the lights were turned on and the bouncers sent the losers back home in disgrace. The City speculators enjoyed the fruits of free markets and light regulations for 20 years but they got greedy and they forgot to respect the rules of the market. The market like Mother Nature cannot be tamed by human kind. Like any badly run business, Lehman Bros et al were exposed by market forces they believed they were invulnerable to. Their bankruptcy was brutal and surprising; Lehman Bros was founded in the 19th Century, but they exposed themselves to toxic debts and they paid the penalty.

The ‘real’ American economy has yet to dip into recession but such is the amount invested in the finance markets by working Americans that a market meltdown could have plunged America, and thus the world, into a severe recession. It seems the rescue package proposed by the US Treasury and the Federal Reserve has managed to pull the financial markets back from the brink; indeed the major stock exchanges finished the week close to where they started it, after Friday’s rally. Yet it seems clear to serious analysts that the financial markets will never be the same again. It is abundantly clear that the regulation of the markets will have to be reviewed following this week’s events. There has never been, nor will there ever be, a 100% pure free-market economy and some form of regulation is not a controversial issue. Regulation of the markets is however, an immensely complicated topic and not something that the layman could realistically comment on. It is clear though, that too much regulation impedes economic growth and it would be unfortunate if populist political leaders now issued counter-productive regulatory measures.

Adam Smith wrote about the ‘invisible-hand’ of free-market economies acting to benefit all those who took part in economic activity. The ‘invisible hand’ theory remains, in my opinion, unassailable, and the best way for ensuring human economic development across the world. Yet you can never have a utopian free market in which every stakeholder is 100% informed and 100% free. In my judgement modern economics is a bit like a child learning to ride a bicycle. Put stabilisers on a bike and the child may be able to peddle but he won’t be able to go very fast or turn very nimbly. There comes a time when the parent has to take the stabilisers off so that the child can learn to ride for himself, pick up speed, gain independence, avoid obstructions and travel far greater distances. Sometimes the child may wobble and the parent is usually on hand to correct his balance. Occasionally the child may crash. The parent will usually be there to pick him up, soothe his wounds and put him back on the saddle, sometimes it may be better if the child picks himself up and gets back on his bike; who knows?

It seems that the action of Hank Paulson may have drawn a line in this particular crisis and sealed the markets of from all that toxic debt. With any luck the markets will continue to recover confidence and the ‘real’ economy won’t be affected by the panic at the stock exchange. Certainly with US house prices starting to stabilise there are hopes that US will indeed avoid a full recession; although many analysts fear there are many more unwelcome and perhaps even worse shocks still to come.

Of course the populists politicians have poured scorn on the ‘spivs’ and the short sellers and the general line has been to blame the greed of Wall Street for this week's crisis. Certainly many speculators and investors were guilty of huge arrogance and greed and they got their comeuppance with a ‘market correction’ in the form of a richly deserved p45. Yet can the workers of the West really wash their hands and absolve themselves of blame when the bubble bursts? I didn’t hear anyone complaining about the huge increase in public spending in health and education made possible by City revenues. I didn’t hear anyone moan about the easy access to credit to allow for that new car or extension to their (suddenly expensive)house. Plenty of people cashed in on the property boom and the increase in house prices. Nor was the any shortage of takers for 100%+ mortgagers or low-interest credit cards or easy finance for consumer goods. One reason why the Government has had to step in to solve this crisis is that so many working people have money invested in stocks and shares, pension schemes and bricks and mortar. Ordinary people in Europe and the US have enjoyed the fruits of the stock market and easy access to credit for the last 20 years. The banks are guilty of proliferating risky credit but consumers wanting to join the party did agree to sign on the dotted line.

The party in the markets is over but one night of excess doesn’t stop you from drinking alcohol it just teaches you to enjoy it more responsibly. Free market economics have given the entire world unprecedented increases in living standards. In East Asia, for example, since the 1990s the number of people living in poverty has decreased from 486 million to 275 million and it is still falling. It would be a disaster if the world now started to put the protectionist shutters as it did in 1929. So the rave has been busted but the party can continue with the music turned down, the lights on and mum and dad keeping a beady eye out upstairs.


 
 

Trackback address for this post:

authimage

Comments, Trackbacks: Hide subcomments

SeasideManSeasideMan pro
2008-09-20 @ 13:49

I disagree. Unrestrained greed is what did this and since that's a fairly basic human characteristic, the fertilizer that allows it to grow needs to stop being spread. More regulations, more protection, more rules.

Tom.

Pick1Pick1 [Member]
2008-09-21 @ 11:06

Too much regulation retards economic growth. If people want to live an ascetic life that's entirely their choice. If you want a good pension scheme, low interest rates, and cheap good such as car, computers, electronic goods, mobile phone etc etc. Then free markets and free trade will provide you with these.

SeasideManSeasideMan pro
2008-09-21 @ 11:43

Cheap goods exist because of cheap components, cheap labour and low profit margins; not free market.

Regulation is exactly what is needed, and lots of it.

Tom.

Paulus82 [Visitor]
http://touchingfromadistance.blog.co.uk
2008-09-21 @ 09:47

The whole reason the impeding crisis is happening is because of the lack of regulation.

The vast majority of people in the UK are in favour of more regulation, higher taxes for fat cats, windfall taxes on greedy energy companies. Yes, they may of been guilty of signing the dotted line on bank loans, but people left trusted their government and bank's, some of whom people had been customers for years with, to look after them. Your comment, "Regulation of the markets is however, an immensely complicated topic and not something that the layman could realistically comment on" stinks of snobbery. The economy is at the forefront of what effects the electorates lives themselves, and to say, with opinion polls in Britain consisitently behind more regulation, that their opinion doesn't count, that they can't really understand the workings of the economy and should leave it to the big boys.

Well, with Britain having one of the most liberal economies in Europe, which looks set to be hit hardest by the economic slump, with a growth which saw a cut in benefits for the most in need, the highest gap between rich and poor in Europe, and city bankers clearing up their champagne bottles, and their Swiss Bank Accounts, for an early retirement. The current neo-liberal politics, started with Thatcher and followed with ardor from former Socialists, has created a clique of Gordon Gekkos, with little regard of consequence, gambling peoples life savings, homes and lives for the sake of a quick buck.

And you say the goverment shouldn't intervene? Makes you want to move to a social-democracy who anticipated this, the weather may be cooler in Scandanavia, but at least they won't be feeling the heat of the credit crunch.

Good post though, I hoped you would write about that.

Pick1Pick1 [Member]
2008-09-21 @ 11:01

I don't think that regulation of the financial markets is controversial what is important is the level of regulation. We know that too much regulation retards economic growth but some checks and balances are needed. It is important to get the rght balance.

I wouldn't say it smacks of snobbery to say that the layman can't comment on the financial markets. The stock market is immensley complicated and the precise level of regualtion is something that needs to be worked out by professionals. I certainly wouldn't be qualified on what particular regulations need to be put in place. If I was qualified I'd be a millionaire by now. The bottom line is that too much regulation is bad for economic growth which is bad for everyone.

My point about the role of consumers is that many people, especially in America took out mortgages that were beyond their means and gambled on a rise in house prices. Furthermore consumers have benefited enormously from cheap credit and low interest rates. Furthemore pretty much everyone has pensions funds and shares invested in the stock market and people want want the biggest returns possible. What is clear is that the amount of risk taken needs to be curtailed in the interests of stability. Also regulation of the stock markets is comppletely seperate from regulation of the 'real' economy.

We live in a global market and every country feels economic pressures and every European country is facing a slowdon, including in Scandinavia

scandinhttp://www.globalpropertyguide.com/Europe/Swedenavia

It is also worth pointing out that Sweden has a liberal free trade economy and a Conservative Prime Minister,
John Fredrik Reinfeldt

http://www.mckinsey.com/mgi/mginews/businessweek/swedenbalance.asp

I would say it is important to remember that there is no 'utopian' system and you can never have unending growth. As far as we can tell a free market economy is the best way to achieve economic growth and even despite a crisis in the financial markets the 'real' economy remains relatively unaffected. Workng class Britons still own expensive houses, own their own cars, go on 2 or 3 holidays a year and enjoy a consumer lifestyle. At the end of the day the British are free to choose who they want to run the economy and what level of taxation and Government involvement they want and that is the beauty of a democracy.

Incidentally I see Scandinavia as a demonstration of the fact that 'neo-liberal' market economics can be successfully combined with the ideals of a welfare state.

Also see Andrew Sullivans article in the Sunday Times, excellent as always

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/andrew_sullivan/article4793410.ece

MelroseMelrose [Member]
2008-09-21 @ 14:28

Hi Pick1,

Having read today's Sunday Times and had time to mull over Hank Paulson's bail out, I'm having doubts about that. A lot seems to be depending on the willingness of sovereign wealth funds and the like to buy US government treasury bills. even if the Chinese and the oil producers do come up with the finance, the Americans will be yielding a lot of power (over the dollar) to these countries and will have to hope that no serious conflicts of interests between the prosperity of their own citizens and the dollar's value arise.

As for regulation, I think it's more a question of the enforcing than the actual regulations. The balance of opinion seems to be that the Americans have dismantled too much of the basics of the regulatory regime that came in in the depression (the Glass Steagall Act, for instance) and will now have to resurrect it).

Regards.../Melrose

Pick1Pick1 [Member]
2008-09-21 @ 16:41

I think that the need for reform of the regulation governing the stock market is widely agreed upon; its a pretty technical subject and I'll have to take your word about the Glass Stagal Act.

I think America is already beholden to the sovereign wealth funds; it is interesting to note that under clinton the Government had such a big budget surplus that it didn't know what do with it. Under the supposedly Conservative Bush the public debt has soared to astronomical levels in just 8 short years - surely a legacy as potent as that of the Iraq. The Arabs and the Chinese need their best customer to continue buying from them but I think you're right; reducing the public debt should be one of the new president's top priorities.

Leave a comment :

Your email address will not be displayed on this site.
Your URL will be displayed.
Allowed XHTML tags: <!, p, ul, ol, li, dl, dt, dd, address, blockquote, ins, del, a, span, bdo, br, em, strong, dfn, code, samp, kdb, var, cite, abbr, acronym, q, sub, sup, tt, i, b, big, small, img>
URLs, email, AIM and ICQs will be converted automatically.
Options:
 
(Line breaks become <br />)
(Set cookies for name, email & url)
Validation code:
Please enter the above code here:
For protection from spambots (case-sensitive).

Recent Posts

  1. Desert Island Discs
    by Pick1 on 2008-11-30
  2. Justice From Above
    by Pick1 on 2008-11-27
  3. Obama's In-Tray
    by Pick1 on 2008-11-19
  4. The Great War: 1914 - 1945
    by Pick1 on 2008-11-16
  5. Thoughts On The US Elections
    by Pick1 on 2008-11-01
  6. Human Rights And Human Wrongs
    by Pick1 on 2008-10-23
  7. And For My Next Trick . . .
    by Pick1 on 2008-10-20
  8. Talking To The Taliban
    by Pick1 on 2008-10-18
  9. Engineering Consent
    by Pick1 on 2008-10-14
  10. The Price Of Progress
    by Pick1 on 2008-10-12

Footer

The content of this website belongs to a private person, blog.co.uk is not responsible for the content of this website.