|
Harry Browne, the former Libertarian Party candidate for president, used to
say: "the government is great at breaking your leg, handing you a crutch, and
saying 'You see, without me you couldn't walk.'" That maxim is clearly illustrated
by the financial industry regulatory reforms proposed this week by the Obama
Administration.
In seeking to undo the damage inflicted over the past decade by misguided
government policies, the new regulatory regime would ensure that the problems
underlying our financial system will only get worse. As was the case with the
deeply flawed Sarbanes-Oxley legislation of 2002, or the misguided provisions
of the Patriot Act of 2001, such as the torturous anti-money laundering requirements,
the move will further burden the financial services industry with unnecessary
regulation that will drive up costs, lower quality, and shelter the biggest
and least innovative companies. Ultimately, the structure will put the entire
U.S. financial industry at a global competitive disadvantage.
The underlying problem is that the excessive risk taking which brought about
the crisis was not market-driven, but a direct consequence of government interference
with risk-inhibiting market forces. Rather than learning from its mistakes
and allowing market forces to once again control risks and efficiently allocate
resources, the government is merely repeating its mistakes on a grander scale
- thereby sowing the seeds for an even greater crisis in the future.
As is typical of government attempts to control economic outcomes, Obama's
plans focuses on the symptoms of the disease and not the cause. The American
financial system imploded for two reasons: cheap money and moral hazard - both
of which were supplied by the government. Under the proposed new regulatory
structures, these toxic ingredients will be combined in ever-increasing quantities.
The proposals most notably involve extra regulatory oversight of financial
entities that the government deems "too big to fail." This implies that it
is desirable to have such entities in the first place, and that the government
will continue to back those large organizations that fall under its protection.
These "too big to fail" firms will enjoy a competitive advantage over smaller
firms in attracting capital, as lenders will perceive zero risk in extending
them credit. This will cause these firms to grow even larger, producing even
greater systemic risks and larger losses when the next round of bailouts arrives.
Meanwhile, smaller firms which seek to expand, and which propose no systemic
risks, will face greater challenges as higher capital costs render them less
competitive.
If the government did not provide these bailouts or guarantees, then the market
itself would ensure organizations did not grow beyond their ability to attract
capital. It is only when market discipline is overcome by government guarantees
that systemic risks arise.
Obama proposes to entrust the critical job of "systemic risk regulator" to
the Federal Reserve, the very organization that has proven most adept at creating
systemic risk. This is like making Keith Richards the head of the DEA.
Given the Federal Reserve's disastrous monetary policy over the past decade,
any attempt to expand the Fed's role should be vigorously opposed. Through
decades of short-sighted interest rate decisions, the Fed has proven time and
again that it is only able to close the barn door after the entire herd has
escaped. If setting interest rates had been left to the free market, none of
the excesses we have seen in the credit market would have been remotely possible.
The perverse result will be that our government and the Fed gain more power
as a direct result of their own incompetence. Such was also the case with Freddie
and Fannie, which should have been allowed to fail, but were nationalized instead,
leaving them in a position to do even more damage. The new round of regulations
ignores them completely. Along those lines, ratings agencies such as Standard
and Poor's and Moody's that completely missed the mark were also spared. Perhaps
this special treatment is a way of ensuring that Treasury debt maintains its
bogus AAA rating.
Unfortunately, despite their intent, my guess is that the new regulations
will most severely impact smaller firms, like my own, that never engaged in
reckless behavior. This will further reward those "too big to fail" firms,
whose economies of scale and cozy relationships with regulators leave them
better positioned than their smaller rivals to absorb the costs of the added
red tape.
With the transition now fully under way, I propose we end the pretense and
rename our country: "The United Socialist States of America." In fact, given
all the czars already in Washington, we might as well go with the Russian theme
completely: appoint a Politburo, move into dilapidated housing blocks, and
parade our missiles in the streets. On the bright side, there's always the
borscht.
For a more in depth analysis of our financial problems and the inherent dangers
they pose for the U.S. economy and U.S. dollar, read my just released book "The
Little Book of Bull Moves in Bear Markets." Click here to
order your copy now.
For a look back at how I predicted our current problems read my 2007 bestseller "Crash
Proof: How to Profit from the Coming Economic Collapse." Click here to
order a copy today.
More importantly, don't wait for reality to set in. Protect your wealth and
preserve your purchasing power before it's too late. Discover the best way
to buy gold at www.goldyoucanfold.com.
Download Euro Pacific's free Special Report, "Peter Schiff's Five Favorite
Investment Choices for the Next Five Years", at http://www.europac.net/reports.asp.
Subscribe to our free, on-line investment newsletter, "The Global Investor" at http://www.europac.net/newsletter/newsletter.asp.
And now watch the latest episode of Peter's new video blog, The Schiff Report,
at http://www.europac.net/videoblog.asp.
|