PDA

View Full Version : Forbes: Down With Big Business



spursncowboys
12-12-2009, 04:31 PM
Down With Big Business
Paul Ryan, 12.11.09, 10:22 AM ET
In 1979, Robert Bartley's editorial writing at the Wall Street Journal not only garnered a Pulitzer Prize, but also exposed a pernicious threat to free enterprise. In a piece titled "Down With Big Business," which focused on how General Motors was using its muscle and government connections to squeeze out competitors, Bartley concludes we ought not rely on big business to defend free markets. It's up to the American people--innovators and entrepreneurs, small business owners, Bartley's "XYZ Bumperlight Lens Company"--to take a stand.

Thirty years later, this crony capitalism is back with a vengeance, accelerated by an aggressive program by President Obama and the Democratic congressional leadership. It is wreaking havoc on economic recovery and fueling continued resentment among the American people.

The actions taken at the height of the financial panic last fall, with credit markets frozen, succeeded in preventing a systemic--and catastrophic--collapse. Since bringing us back from the precipice however, the Troubled Asset Relief Program [TARP] has morphed into crony capitalism at its worst. Abandoning its original purpose providing targeted assistance to unlock credit markets, TARP has evolved into an ad hoc, opaque slush fund for large institutions that are able to influence the Treasury Department's investment decisions behind-the-scenes. No longer concerned with preserving overall financial market stability, Treasury's walking around money continues to be deployed to reward the market's Goliaths while letting its Davids suffer.

We were told that the financial giants, most prominently Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan, were "too big to fail." We were given the same slippery justifications in diverting TARP funds beyond their original intent--moving into auto companies and heavy-handed neo-industrial policy. Yet in communities across America, bank regulators are busily shutting down banks that were "too small to succeed." The disconnect turns to frustration as bailed-out firms Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan announce record profits, while the community bank closes its doors.

With risk aversion preventing small businesses from accessing capital, job losses continue to mount and the engines of economic growth continue to stall. Small firms have to file for real bankruptcy--not the bailout bankruptcy afforded to AIG, Bank of America, GM, Chrysler and others.

Washington is working hard to nationalize other sectors of our economy too. The House Finance Committee is pushing a massive financial "reform" bill, effectively creating banking utility companies. The Treasury Department has effectively nationalized the housing finance sector, with Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac demonstrating how fast big businesses, through a federally blessed and backed oligopoly, can fall. Now, on both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue, health care and energy lobbyists continue to fall over themselves to cut their deals--knowing that if they aren't at the table, they'll be on the menu.

The problem today has escalated far beyond partisan politics. Big businesses' frenzied political dealings are not driven by party or ideology, but rather by zero-sum thinking in which their gain must come from a competitor's loss. Erecting barriers to competition is a key to maintaining advantage and market share. With Washington leading the way, it makes sense for the big boys to redirect their resources to their lobbying shop and government affairs office. They're far less interested in expanding the economic pie than with making certain that they get their slice.

To be clear, the federal government should not stack the deck against big businesses either. The government does not have a stake in the fight between David and Goliath--our only concern is to make certain that it is a fair fight. The government today is far from an unbiased arbitrator, and it is smothering dreams and stifling growth.

We've been down this road before. There was a time in this country when the airlines, railroads, the energy sector, trucking and bus industry were all firmly under government control. The problem was not only excessive government meddling, but large established firms cooperating to protect their market share and erect barriers to new entrants.

Some initial progress on breaking up these monopolies began during the Carter administration. Then came the Reagan Revolution, whose key underpinnings were empowering small businesses, lowering the hurdles that keep new entrants out, and unleashing the power of competition, innovation, and the American entrepreneurial spirit. President Reagan, aided by leaders such as my mentor, Congressman Jack Kemp, successfully implemented a comprehensive strategy to reduce marginal tax rates, ease government's burdens on entrepreneurial activity, restrain non-defense spending, ease trade barriers and tame the scourge of inflation.

The progress continued after the Reagan administration. The most infamous manifestation of crony capitalism during these days was Ma Bell. One company, the former iteration of AT&T, locked arms with the federal government to create a legalized telephone monopoly. Ma Bell was regulated like a utility, and for decades the industry (consisting of one company) languished in mediocrity. Americans were held hostage to lackluster service and even required to rent their phones from the telephone company. These clunky devices only performed analog voice calls and everyone avoided long distance dialing because of its outrageous expense.

Legal action was taken, ultimately leading to the breakup of AT&T/Ma Bell in 1984. While far from perfect, the passage of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 allowed for competition and innovation to be unleashed. The robust technological and digital revolution that followed brought Americans faster voice, video and Internet services at lower costs. These innovations were the result of the interaction of producers and consumers; the work of innovators and entrepreneurs no longer stifled by monopolistic giants and government control.

For every encroachment into the market by the federal government--under the guise of "reform"--there exist pro-market alternatives that Republicans must articulate and passionately defend. University of Chicago's Luigi Zingales, who has written extensively on the issue of crony capitalism, reminds policymakers that the path forward requires “adopting a pro-market, rather than pro-business, approach.” We must champion an aggressive reform agenda to tackle our outdated financial regulatory structure, the convoluted and anti-competitive tax code, and the looming entitlement crisis, and to fix what's broken in health care, energy, and more. We should focus on removing the hurdles the government has erected, rather than further centralizing power in Washington. The legislative reform must focus on empowering individuals instead of bureaucrats.

We cannot lose our commitment to individual liberty--a commitment we've shed blood to defend in generations past. The American idea cannot be defeated.

This is not a contest for one political party, one sector of our economy, or one segment of the population. We all stand to lose as crony capitalism drains the life from our economy; but we all stand to gain from the fruits that genuine, vigorous, free market competition provides.

Paul Ryan represents Wisconsin's First Congressional District. He serves as ranking member of the House Budget Committee and senior member of the House Ways and Means Committee.

http://www.forbes.com/2009/12/11/business-government-politics-reform-opinions-contributors-paul-ryan_print.html

ChumpDumper
12-12-2009, 04:33 PM
No comment again. :tu

ChumpDumper
12-12-2009, 04:37 PM
For every encroachment into the market by the federal government--under the guise of "reform"--there exist pro-market alternatives that Republicans must articulate and passionately defend.I can't help but notice Ryan failed to articulate or passionately defend any alternatives.

The plan is no plan.

spursncowboys
12-12-2009, 04:48 PM
The actions taken at the height of the financial panic last fall, with credit markets frozen, succeeded in preventing a systemic--and catastrophic--collapse. Since bringing us back from the precipice however, the Troubled Asset Relief Program [TARP] has morphed into crony capitalism at its worst. Abandoning its original purpose providing targeted assistance to unlock credit markets, TARP has evolved into an ad hoc, opaque slush fund for large institutions that are able to influence the Treasury Department's investment decisions behind-the-scenes. No longer concerned with preserving overall financial market stability, Treasury's walking around money continues to be deployed to reward the market's Goliaths while letting its Davids suffer. This is always how it happens. They intervene with the idea of helping out the little guy. Then they help only the big co.'s and help create monopolies. Then when the corp.'s start price gouging, they'll be back to "help" the little guy again. Politicians are going to save the people from the monopolies.

ChumpDumper
12-12-2009, 04:52 PM
To where is the TARP money being deployed now?

I read that many financial institutions are paying the money back as quickly as possible to get out from under the conditions of the loan.

boutons_deux
12-12-2009, 10:20 PM
But the business-friendly righties here: "The corps are our friends, don't do anybody any harm, etc"

angrydude
12-13-2009, 01:31 AM
I don't think true monopolies could exist without the government's blessing.

boutons_deux
12-13-2009, 05:18 AM
"I don't think true monopolies could exist"

agreed, you righties make up shit every day and "think" they're true.

spursncowboys
12-13-2009, 12:13 PM
For every encroachment into the market by the federal government--under the guise of "reform"--there exist pro-market alternatives that Republicans must articulate and passionately defend. University of Chicago's Luigi Zingales, who has written extensively on the issue of crony capitalism, reminds policymakers that the path forward requires “adopting a pro-market, rather than pro-business, approach.” We must champion an aggressive reform agenda to tackle our outdated financial regulatory structure, the convoluted and anti-competitive tax code, and the looming entitlement crisis, and to fix what's broken in health care, energy, and more. We should focus on removing the hurdles the government has erected, rather than further centralizing power in Washington. The legislative reform must focus on empowering individuals instead of bureaucrats.

spursncowboys
12-13-2009, 12:13 PM
For every encroachment into the market by the federal government--under the guise of "reform"--there exist pro-market alternatives that Republicans must articulate and passionately defend. University of Chicago's Luigi Zingales, who has written extensively on the issue of crony capitalism, reminds policymakers that the path forward requires “adopting a pro-market, rather than pro-business, approach.” We must champion an aggressive reform agenda to tackle our outdated financial regulatory structure, the convoluted and anti-competitive tax code, and the looming entitlement crisis, and to fix what's broken in health care, energy, and more. We should focus on removing the hurdles the government has erected, rather than further centralizing power in Washington. The legislative reform must focus on empowering individuals instead of bureaucrats.

ChumpDumper
12-13-2009, 12:54 PM
Please answer the question.
To where is the TARP money being deployed now?

I read that many financial institutions are paying the money back as quickly as possible to get out from under the conditions of the loan.

mogrovejo
12-13-2009, 01:03 PM
Yeps, the pro-free market vs. pro-business distinction is a very important one.


I don't think true monopolies could exist without the government's blessing.

They can exist and there's nothing wrong with that. What they can't do without the government is to harm consumers due to their monopolistic stature and to perpetuate themselves.

ChumpDumper
12-13-2009, 01:06 PM
What monopolies are we talking about?

boutons_deux
12-13-2009, 05:15 PM
Monopolies (and cartels) have enormous (abusive) power.

The safe, reliable assumption is that any power that exists will be used.

Another safe, reliable assumption is that self-regulation ALWAYS fails, is an outright joke.

A monopoly, and cartels should be assumed guilty until proven innocent.

spursncowboys
12-13-2009, 05:32 PM
Please answer the question.

http://bailout.propublica.org/main/map/index

I want to know where the tarp money is going after it is repaid. Also what are the plans for the unused tarp?

Aggie Hoopsfan
12-13-2009, 05:47 PM
But the business-friendly righties here: "The corps are our friends, don't do anybody any harm, etc"

You do realize that your liberal leaders in D.C. are doing more to consolidate power and wealth for big business than Bush could even think about, right?

ChumpDumper
12-13-2009, 07:25 PM
http://bailout.propublica.org/main/map/indexThat didn't answer my question.

boutons_deux
12-13-2009, 08:08 PM
"liberal leaders in D.C. are doing more to consolidate power and wealth for big business"

I don't consider the Dem asshole whores who gutted the public option, killed competition in the anti-trust-exempthealth insurance market to be liberal.

The progressives are quite pissed off how the health reform is screwed up and neutered.

Winehole23
12-14-2009, 01:19 AM
"liberal leaders in D.C. are doing more to consolidate power and wealth for big business"The loyal opposition did much the same, before handing off the torch to Obama. But in fairness, even though consolidation received a big assist from the government, it is a normal effect of the debt-deflation scenario our epochal keynesian move sought to remedy, and the Cassandras of October 2008 foretold.

greyforest
12-14-2009, 04:56 AM
b..but forbes = big business