commentComment (21) | emailEmail | printPrint | del.icio.usdel.icio.us | technoratiTechnorati | Share
Alistair Nicholas | Sunday, 12 October 2008

Is capitalism dead or just flat-lining?

The world financial crisis shows that a system built on greed cannot work. 

It is 79 years since the Great Depression. Some fear that this week's chaos in the financial world means that the curtains are rising on Great Depression II. I don’t have a crystal ball, but I’m sure the immediate future is grim. At the very least we are in for a long and deep recession and our medicine will be very bitter indeed.

Clearly the style of capitalism which has dominated world markets for the last 20 years or so is flatlining. The question now is whether it is worth resuscitating. The answer must be Yes – but only if we jettison the “greed is good” ideology made famous by the slimy character Gordon Gekko in the 1987 film Wall Street. That was a movie. In real life it was the philosophy of Nobel Prize-winning economist Milton Friedman.

Friedman was probably the greatest economist of the 20th century. He influenced Ronald Reagan in the US, Margaret Thatcher in the UK, Brian Mulroney in Canada, and Paul Keating in Australia and his ideas led to critical economic reform in each of their countries. These economies were made stronger by following much of Friedman’s economic rationalism.

But at the heart of Friedman’s thought was the idea that greed is good, that greed works because it drives people to succeed. The reality, as we can now see, is that greed, in its truest sense, does not work.

A deadly sin

I have no doubt that greed is the cause of the current crisis. It was the greed of those who took easy money to buy houses beyond their means and the greed of bankers who lent to people borrowing beyond their means. The depth of this depravity can be seen in the Wall Street bankers who were collecting salaries over US$100 million per year even as their banks were collapsing.

Right now, even as the dominoes fall, disciples of Friedman are still contending that the culprit is not capitalist greed but excessive government regulation. However, while poor legislation and regulation may have contributed to the subprime mortgage market crisis that sparked the conflagration, it is absurd to suggest that the solution is merely a less regulated market.

Friedmanistas claim that the US subprime mortgage crisis didn't happen in markets like Australia and the EU because their consumers are more sophisticated. Nothing could be further from the truth. Australians and Europeans are not smarter; they were protected by more stringent regulatory frameworks. If foreign banks have been dragged into the American crisis, it was mainly because they had joined the orgy on Wall Street.

Less regulation may be a good thing; but good regulation trumps it any day. How many ordinary Americans have to lose their jobs and homes before the ideology of laissez-faire capitalism is finally debunked?

Greed needs to be kept in check. Governments the world over should take the matter of bank regulation more seriously. The US’s subprime mortgage mess was created by politicians pandering to the not-unreasonable desire of Americans to own their own homes. But Congressmen who are currently skewering greedy Wall Street bankers should have protected ordinary consumers aspiring to home ownership. Their negligence points to a failure of leadership that reaches to the very top of the American political totem pole.

Tough choices

So, should governments be putting together rescue packages like the US Federal Reserve’s US$800 billion one to save the banks? Aren't these rescue packages throwing good money after bad? After all, it was bad, even unethical, business decisions that have sunk the biggest financial institutions. If only that money were available now to help the people who are losing their homes, who face unemployment and who need to feed and educate their children.

But leaving the financial institutions that created the mess to stew in their folly is not a solution.

The viability of the world’s banking system needs to be ensured. If the banking crisis gets worse and more banks go under, it will be harder for businesses, big and small, to expand. Markets -- which ultimately thrive on confidence -- will shrink. That will mean more job losses and more pain. It could bring the world to Great Depression II, complete with soup kitchens and Hoovervilles. Right now, not bailing out the banks and other financial institutions is unthinkable.

Modern day capitalism may well be wanting. But – to paraphrase Winston Churchill’s description of democracy – it is the worst economic system except for all the others. The Great Depression played a part in the rise of communism, socialism, fascism and Nazism in the 1930s. That is, I am sure, not an outcome many would want from this crisis.

Saving the financial institutions that caused this crisis is the only way to keep the world from sliding into worse turmoil. But we have to learn from this calamity. Greed is not good. We need to inoculate our children against idolising Gordon Gekko. And we need to demand that governments regulate the markets more tightly . Capitalism works; but not when it is based on every man for himself. We need to find our way to a capitalism based on values and virtue.

Alistair Nicholas lives in Beijing where he runs a consultancy firm. He has been an economic researcher, political adviser, and Australian diplomat. In his consultancy he advises international corporations on business ethics and communications in China. He is the co-author of a study on the privatisation of welfare in Australia.


commentComment (21) | emailEmail | printPrint | del.icio.usdel.icio.us | technoratiTechnorati | Share
Comments to Is capitalism dead or just flat-lining? have been closed. Thanks to everyone who contributed to the discussion.
Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.
mtm said... United States | Sun, 12 Oct 2008 at 4:01 pm

Good question, Dwight.

Also, while greed is a factor (and Freidman meant in part self-interest, which is not the same as greed), we should not forget that it was political ideology coupled with greed that made this the disaster that it is.  If (liberal) social engineering of the banking system had not led to congressionally mandated risky investment in the underclass.  The market is never the sole culprit.  Here is a quote from Wall Street Journal today that sums it up niceley:

**"In the 1990s interstate banking was finally allowed, creating nationwide banks of unprecedented size. But Congress’s attempt to force banks to make home loans to people who had limited creditworthiness, while encouraging Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to take these dubious loans off their hands so that the banks could make still more of them, created another crisis in the banking system that is now playing out."**


Liberal Warrior said... -- | Sun, 12 Oct 2008 at 3:48 pm

“Right now, not bailing out the banks and other financial institutions is unthinkable.”

Hardly the case.  We need to regroup with an environmentally sustainable economy of self limiting scale.... Cottage Industry.  It’s the only viable future.  Free Enterprise is not Capitalism and doesn’t need the same over weight, unsupportable structural means.


Dwight Lindley said... United States | Sun, 12 Oct 2008 at 2:35 pm

Agreed: Greed is the problem. But must we skip so lightly over the presupposition that the eternal expansion of markets is a desirable good? “If the banking crisis gets worse and more banks go under, it will be harder for businesses, big and small, to expand. Markets—which ultimately thrive on confidence—will shrink.” We take it for granted that it will be worse for us if the markets shrink, but don’t we thus beg the question of whether or not a life ensconced in the market, a life based on profit rather than subsistence, is the economic way of life most conducive to human flourishing, most in accord with human dignity?


Amy Lynch, Western Australia said... Australia | Sun, 12 Oct 2008 at 11:49 am

Hi, I want to say to anyone who’s listening, I TOLD YOU SO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I am a single mother living on a shoestring. I struggle already so I am prepared for the worse. Sure, I have been pinched by obvious price rises in.. everything, but generally, I have learned to live simply by many life decisions.

However, I have been looked down upon by many others who say I am indeed not prepared for the future.

Being of a simple mind and modest means has meant that I have been watching for years, the global economic situation from the outside, with a disinterested and objective view. Sure, a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, but having almost no knowledge has led me to suspect that wanton risk and speculation is nothing short of gambling.

What goes up must come down. It’s a universal law.


Thierry P WERSINGER said... United States | Sun, 12 Oct 2008 at 10:49 am

During the 1930’s, when the Times sollicited comments on the then problems of the world they received probably the shortest letter to the editor ever. It read, ‘Dear Sir, I am, Yours faithfully....’ G. K. Chesterton.

Wall Street diserves its share of blame but so do most of us with our mortgages, credit cards and lust for stuff.

All political systems would be perfect if we were all saints. Since we can not be because we are sinners, we need a system that ensures a balance of power and accountability.

Ultimately in the words of St Josemaria Esscriva The Way
A secret, an open secret: these world crises are crises of saints. St Josemaria Esscriva The Way 301


Dan Hoffman said... -- | Sun, 12 Oct 2008 at 8:06 am

Mr. Nicolas:

Thank you for this very thoughtful article.  I rarely see the distinction made between good and bad regulation.  It appears to be an an either/or debate; regulation versus de-regulation with little discussion as to the purpose and quality of the regulatory mechanisms we choose to put into place.

For those who are financial neophytes (like me) I thought Larry Kudlow recently wrote a very strong and encouraging piece that seems to work well alongside Mr Nicolas’ article.  Mr. Kudlow - a very robust free marketeer - is also of the opinion that it is difficult for men to operate freely without a stable financial system to aid them.

On a personal note, this crisis is good for us Americans who have not really struggled like our forefathers.  It shows us what is really important.  While wealth can be a blessing, it can also dull our wits and make us less willing to love our freedom.  I hope we all use this to re-orient our national priorities and stop wringing our hands over our investments and portfolios.  Gathering with my wife and children is a pleasure be it in the study of a mansion or the balcony of a tiny apartment.

Dan Hoffman


Page 2 of 2 :  <  1 2