Sign In / Register
Make This My Home Page | Feedback |RSS
You are here: IE »   Story

Can banks be defended?

  • Print
  • Mail This Article
  • Comments
  • Add to favorites
  • Intertwined with bad monetary policy has been an atmosphere of crony capitalism. If LTCM (Long Term Capital Management) had not been saved, there would have been a small financial crisis, possibly a recession and most importantly financial market participants would have realised that there is a price to be paid for being on the wrong side of a risky gambit. By bailing out LTCM (ostensibly to help the system), Greenspan and his friends gave a dangerous signal to all participants in financial markets — that they could ignore counter-party trading risks.

    There have been other worrisome happenings. As treasury secretary, Robert Rubin backed the deregulation necessary for Citicorp and Travellers to merge. After he retired as treasury secretary, Rubin became a highly paid director of the merged company which has had none too stellar a performance. Henry Paulson, the ex-CEO of Goldman, being treasury secretary has also been a matter of concern. Years ago, the Nobel laureate George Stigler published his empirical findings that senior managers in railway companies became railway regulators and vice versa. Guess what — rail fares went up to higher levels after regulations were introduced to control them. Stigler’s prescient warning that it is dangerous to let the economic actors who are being regulated enter regulatory office needs to be re-emphasised. Walter Wriston, who was one of the greatest American bankers of the 20th century, neither sought nor accepted office involving government oversight. His is the example bankers need to go back to.

    Ads by Google

    Banks face justified criticism for providing their managers with bad incentives that encourage them to focus on short-term gains and indulge in excessive risk-taking. But let it not be forgotten that bad monetary policy and regulatory confusion were the root causes. Defenders of free and well-functioning financial markets are on the defensive today because we have acquiesced in lax monetary policy and incipient crony capitalism. Let us remember that bad money (remember Gresham?) and crony capitalism are greater enemies of free markets than leftwing critics can ever be.

    ... contd.

    PreviousNext1234
    Financial whiz kidsBy: Dinesh | 06-Jun-2009 Reply | Forward Dear Sir, Innovativeness in the Financial industry is hot air and we had 2 types of scam. (A) The big shots have simply helped themselves with the money which the people had lent to them for safe keeping.(B) Junk bonds were created and offloaded to the gullible public.All that the media has to say regarding the banking community is:If you wish to draw a high salary - create wealth or add value in some way. Nobody likes middlemen who take their cut (sometimes outrageously high) without adding value to the society. Don't use fraud to cheat the gullible public of their hard earned saving. The law must be tightened and if the public was not given full information - when the 'junk' bonds were sold to them - the customer who was misled into buying junk bonds has a right to get his money back or alternatively sue you to jail you.
    Bank FraudBy: Pavan | 05-Mar-2009 Reply | Forward You are right that financial innovation has led to overall gain. But contrary to computers and pharma where the innovation actually has to work (value for money) to be bought in the market, these whiz kids created vaporware out of nothing. I am talking about CDO and CDS. The short term gains of trading and making billions out of something I am sure they knew did not actually have the inherent value they fooled the entire investment community and laughed all the way to the bank. Till date what I can't get is that a mortgage which has a fixed return of 3 to 4% interest can be sold bundled with other things such as auto loans etc and ultimately the investor has no idea on what his return would be, and this was sold and changed hands multiple times by very smart people ( fraudsters). They did this only to show large commissions and hence pocket the huge bonuses.
    Well saidBy: Avinash Mulye | 28-Feb-2009 Reply | Forward Awesome. Thank you so much for putting the entire matter in the right context. And yes ! Even Stiglitz misquoted Fridman. Milton Friedman wanted the Fed's actions to be "person (chairman) indepenent". I agree that in the last 2 decades finance and Computers have been equally innovative.
    deserving do not getBy: am | 28-Feb-2009 Reply | Forward One thing to be added that real persons who had the interest and were able to pay the loans were not selected due to documentations problems. Even today a person can get all facility on a pay slip, but a self employed shall not get loans without so may documentation
    Post a Comment
    Name:
    Email:
    Title:
    Maximum characters allowed     
    Comment:
    TERMS OF USE:
    The views, opinions and comments posted are your, and are not endorsed by this website. You shall be solely responsible for the comment posted here. The website reserves the right to delete, reject, or otherwise remove any views, opinions and comments posted or part thereof. You shall ensure that the comment is not inflammatory, abusive, derogatory, defamatory &/or obscene, or contain pornographic matter and/or does not constitute hate mail, or violate privacy of any person (s) or breach confidentiality or otherwise is illegal, immoral or contrary to public policy. Nor should it contain anything infringing copyright &/or intellectual property rights of any person(s).
    I agree to the terms of use.