Category: too much government

Categories
free trade & free markets too much government

Designing a Cartel

Interior design: Most homeowners wing it, but a few call in the professionals.

Regulation of interior design: Most states just let our nation’s Graces freely contract with willing Wills. But a significant number of states, including Oklahoma and Connecticut, regulate these designing women and men.

Why? Have you heard a horrified outcry of Upton Sinclairesque proportions? I sure haven’t. I’m sure old Upton would have cooked up some story, if it had crossed his mind. He believed in regulating everything. He hated free enterprise, enough to lie for his cause.

So, who hates freedom of contract enough to regulate the industry?

Why, the industry itself!

A study released last year by the Institute for Justice shows that one group of interior designers, the American Society of Interior Designers, has been pushing regulation for years. Why? For one clear reason: to clear out the competition.

On the bright — or at least pastel — side, the group hasn’t been all that successful recently. So the group has raised its membership fees, redoubled lobbying efforts.

In response, a competing group, the Interior Design Protection Council, joined with the Institute for Justice to declare the month just passed, September, as Interior Design Freedom Month.

It’s too late to celebrate. But — wait a second — shouldn’t every month be Interior Design Freedom Month?

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
term limits too much government

A Barney Frank Appraisal

Guess what: The disastrous policies that spawned our recent mortgage crisis prove that congressional term limits would be a very bad idea.

Not my opinion, I hasten to add. It’s the view of one Edward Tucker, writing a letter to the Wilmington [DE] News-​Journal. Sorry, Ed, about how this Internet thing keeps your communiqué from dropping immediately into the ash heap of history.

Tucker’s view is typical of those who claim term limits would disastrously eject “experience” from the halls of power. He has nothing but praise for the expertise and gab gift of Representative Barney Frank, who has clung to his seat since 1981.

“The ability of only a few elected officials, such as … Barney Frank of Massachusetts, to speak intelligently about financial issues…has been impressive and reminds us that elected officials can grow expertise in office.”

Sorry, Mr. Tucker. But Barney was not one of the few congressmen who had been trying to curb the reckless lending policies of the Federal Reserve and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. (The three Big Fat F’s that each deserve a Big Fat F.) Frank was, frankly, one of the chief enablers of federal policies that pushed easy credit and shaky mortgage loans.

Long-​time incumbents may become expert indeed at spewing plausible-​sounding nonsense in front of the cameras. But expertise in con-​artistry isn’t quite the cure-​all it’s cracked up to be.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
free trade & free markets national politics & policies too much government

Don’t Bank On It

It’s not a chorus.

If you’ve been watching the “debate” over how best to con American voters into giving troubled banks $700 billion for bad loans, you might think it’s a chorus in the financial industry, especially from bank presidents.

You might assume they’re all shouting: GIVE US THE BAILOUT MONEY! NOW!

Not so. At least one banker dissents. John Allison, president of BB&T — with $136 billion in assets and 1500 branches — sent an open letter to Congress protesting the bad economics behind the bailout. He notes that his own company, though affected by the downturn, is in a much stronger position than many of BB&T’s competitors.

Why? Well, his bank did not join the orgy of bad lending, despite the enticement of the Federal Reserve’s easy credit policies and government pressure to give loans to bad-​risk borrowers.

So why should the government reward the bad economic conduct of institutions that played along with the bad government policies? Why make it harder for the economy to recover by punishing sound and productive economic conduct with burdensome new government taxes?

Allison thinks the debate has suffered from domination, as he says, by those “financial institutions [that] made very poor decisions.”

Perhaps it’s because politicians have a whole lot more in common with foolish decision-​makers than wise ones.…

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
free trade & free markets national politics & policies too much government

$700 Billion Bad Bet

The administration’s proposed $700 billion bank bailout has finally passed the Congress — in large part because of fear that the economy would crumble if “something” wasn’t done.

But the magic men in Washington don’t have any guaranteed fixes in their bag of tricks. Certainly robbing the taxpayers of $700 billion — that’s a billion, 700 times — won’t cure the economy.

It will, long run, hurt the economy. How? By hampering realistic adjustment to current market conditions. It means taking $700 billion from productive economic activities to buy up debt at prices nobody in the private market is willing to pay. As economist Arnold Kling points out, “If [Bernanke and Paulson] were taking their plan to a venture capital firm to seek funding, they would be laughed out of the office.”

How did we get here? In previous years, the federal government compelled banks to give mortgages to persons who really couldn’t afford them. Meanwhile, the easy credit policies of the Federal Reserve made it easy for banks to obey these irresponsible demands.

Hence the housing bubble. Which popped.

The only long-​term solution is to get the government out of the market. Stop trying to paper over the horrendous consequences of past government interventions with even worse government interventions. The free market ought to be free. Otherwise, we’ll one day end up with no market at all.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
free trade & free markets government transparency national politics & policies too much government

A Question Worth Asking?

The presidential candidates talk about leadership and change. What’s the one question that combines both, but is not asked? Simple: What happens if it all comes crashing down?

After the worst stock market drop since 9/​11, the question doesn’t seem so out of place. Our federal government’s debt is rising fast. Even if we balanced the budget tomorrow, the government would have a deep, multi-​trillion dollar debt. Trillions and trillions, you might say.

So, Mr. Obama; so, Mr. McCain — what do you do when the Treasury can’t find anyone to invest in all the debt we have created, and must maintain? What do we do when the compounding of interest and increased deficits make monthly maintenance impossible?

Neither of you have even suggested a balanced budget early in your first term. So what do you do when our credit goes crunch?

Add to this the federal government’s obligations to the citizenry, in the form of Social Security retirements and Medicare and pensions and such, and what can you do?

How do you stave off — or, if not, survive — a worldwide depression?

The scenario is not fantastic. Just look at current figures and crunch the numbers.

So, what would Senators Obama and McCain say? I’d be curious what Bob Barr and Ralph Nader would say, too. Have they thought of the possibility?

This is one question that sure would make the upcoming debates interesting.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
general freedom too much government

Ideas Semi-​Move the World

Ideas move the world. Want a better world, spread good ideas as widely as possible.

If you can expose enough people to the right ideas, everything will work out for the best, with an ever-​wider vista of freedom and achievement as the inevitable consequence. Right?

Well … not quite. Ideas and values don’t have any kind of independent existence. Individuals must accept and apply them. Hillary Clinton once admitted to being inspired by Atlas Shrugged, Ayn Rand’s mammoth novel celebrating freedom and entrepreneurship and attacking socialism. Yet Hillary still ended up trying to ram socialist health care down our throats. And she ain’t done yet.

Or take Vladimir Putin, the repressive semi-​post-​Communist Russian leader whose government just invaded the former satellite country of Georgia. The autocratic Putin is no Stalin, but he’s no Jefferson either … even if he did attend a Cato seminar on the values of a free society.

It’s true! I recently stumbled across a 2004 issue of Cato Policy Report, published by the libertarian Cato Institute. Ed Crane, Cato’s president, reported that during a long meeting with Putin, Crane and others discussed the benefits of a free press and concerns that the Russian government was repressing the media. Putin seemed open to a more across-​the-​board freedom. He even said he wanted to “make Moscow the center of liberal debate in Europe.”

Really? Try a little harder, Vlad.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.