Against Political Capitalism

by Will Wilkinson on March 23, 2009

Somehow I have neglected my duty of blog self-promotion. Here’s my column for The Week, which went online Thursday. Here’s the bit on political markets, which I think looks even better today, with the announcement of the Treasury plan, than it did last week:

Political markets — less enabled by government than made by it — operate according to fundamentally different, and less trustworthy, principles. Propped-up by subsidy, structured by central diktat and created ex nihilo by edict, political markets may arise from noble aspirations but in the end are instruments always of the privileged and powerful. 

Take contemporary financial markets. (Please!) These are not so much regulated by government oversight as they are constituted by the convoluted web of regulation that dictates who may sell what to whom and on what terms. The shape of our financial markets has emerged from the gradual accretion and rare subtraction of political intervention. But it is now brutally clear that financial markets are not stable simply because they are framed by law and watched by bureaucrats. It is not so hard to see why.

In political markets, the battle for competitive advantage is in part a battle over the rules of the game. That, in turn, is a battle for the hearts of minds of regulators, who generally know less, and are far less motivated, than the industry insiders they regulate. It is no surprise when regulators come to confuse the interests of the powerful (for whom they might someday wish to work, after all) with the interests of the public. As we have recently witnessed, the heavily regulated nature of our financial markets did not keep them from going haywire and taking the entire economy down with them. Appointing a better breed of bureaucrat fixes nothing. Even now, in the morning of the Obama era, Washington remains convinced that the country is best served by “rescuing” its self-immolating Wall Street wards.

It is the failure of this capitalism that accounts for the suffering of millions and explains our bitter decline. Yet President Obama asks for more.

I go on to argue that cap and trade markets represent political capitalism on steroids.

  • Rosie
    Um, no?
  • I'd like to see you rigorously distinguish between politically-created property rights and other property rights. The difference can't be the constitutive nature of law or policy: I take it you don't object to land registry systems or the common law of nuisance. So where does it lie?
  • Paul_G_Brown
    While agreeing with the broad thrust of the piece (there's too much politics and not enough market in regulations) I must beg to clarify one point.

    A great deal of the regulation that frames financial markets, and especially that frame markets for complex products like derivatives and so on, are regulations that define property rights. For example, when I buy a AAA tranche of a portfolio of mortgage backed securities, what exactly have I just bought? Regulations here create markets by introducing new kinds of property. The impact of this regulatory framework was to help price assets by providing transparency (what did I buy?), contract law (what was just transacted?), and so on. Governments don't create markets for Frozen Waffles. But they sure created the market for residential mortgage backed securities, and collateralized debt obligations!

    The problem wasn't strictly "heavily regulated nature of our financial markets". The problem was the state of regulations covering the organizations participating in those markets. A healthy, innovative financial market is vital to late capitalism. It is the mechanism whereby savings are recycled into investment, where financial risk is managed. What went wrong was the way the political process designed the regulations on the firms involved in the markets, and thereby diminished my property rights (I owned shares in these suckers).
  • Having police departments in every city doesn't seem to stop crime, so we we should just get rid of them all together?

    Ditto with fire departments?
  • Nathan
    Completely agree.
  • Perhaps you missed this part...

    "Government helps make markets work, and work better. Effective mundane markets exist within the institutions of property, contract, and law -- institutions well-ordered governments support. Prudent regulation helps contain the harmful spillovers of productive activity."
  • Will,

    Do you really believe the government has no regulations regarding the manufacture, distribution and sale of frozen waffles?
  • What makes you think I do?
  • Because you seem to believe that the financial markets are somehow different than the market for waffles.

    And government regulation is the reason for the difference.
  • The differences are enormous, and if you can't grasp it, I can't help you. For one thing, there's the huge extent to which financial markets revolve around politically-invented markets for government money and debt instruments. Second, there's the scale of an intensity of regulatory intervention.

    A waffle market with no regulation would look very much the same. (Think about countries with little regulation of food. You can still get frozen waffles.) A depoliticized, deregulated financial market with look almost totally different.
  • "Think about countries with little regulation of food. You can still get frozen waffles."

    You can also buy bonds and insurance in those countries. They work pretty much the same way they work here.

    I don't see your point.

    And if you don't think frozen waffles made from government-subsidized wheat is "free from regulations," try selling a toxic batch of them to the public and see what happens.
  • Jayson Virissimo
    "You can also buy bonds and insurance in those countries. They work pretty much the same way they work here." -Alphie

    What country do you know of that has a free banking system? Does this country have the same kind of financial booms and busts that we have? The only historical periods I know of that had free banking (Scotland and Sweden) had less severe cyclical problems in their financial systems than modern central banking economies have.

    Frozen waffles are not a fiat government created monopoly that are traded by semi-private companies. This differences are pretty apparent.
  • Will implied that the market for frozen waffles is "mundane market capitalism."

    Wheat, the main ingredient in waffles, is subsidized and regulated by the government. The manufacture of waffles is heavily regulated as is their transportation to market.

    There are plenty of rules and regulations concerning the storage and handling of the waffles once they reach the store, and as I said before, god help you if you're selling tainted waffles.

    I submit that there is no such thing as "mundane market capitalism" anymore.

    The market for waffles is as complicated, if not more complicated, as the market for financial products.
  • John V
    Suberb, Will.

    Too bad you aren't writing this is the context of a Republican Administration. Liberals WOULD BE loving it.
blog comments powered by Disqus

Previous post:

Next post: