Monday November 23, 2009 2:48 AM ET
SmartMoney
Published February 19, 2009  |  A A A
Tradecraft by Jonathan Hoenig (Author Archive)

Capitalism Works

On Fox News Channel’s "Cashin’ In," I’m often criticized by my fellow panelist (and MASH alum) Wayne Rogers for focusing on “what’s moral” instead of “what’s practical” when it comes to the financial crisis.

Indeed, many Americans want to advocate for capitalism but wonder, given the scope of the economic downturn, if we must allow government to intervene and “do something.” Even former President Bush admitted in a January speech that he “chucked aside” his free market principles once he saw how bad the economic data had become.

Instead, we’ve pursued a “pragmatic” approach, banning short-selling one week, bailing out investment banks, doing anything that works in the moment. Some industries get help, others do not. No cohesive philosophy governs Washington’s response.

But in reality, there’s no difference between what is practical and what is moral. That’s especially true when it comes to economics as the government continues to play a bigger role in every element of finance. It’s no longer the free market but political bureaucrats that decide how assets are allocated, which companies get funding and how their businesses should be run.

That’s immoral -- it’s not the role of government to prop up failing businesses with taxpayer dollars. But it’s clearly impractical as well. All the bailout money in the world won’t keep General Motors (GM) from going bankrupt or deadbeat homeowners from defaulting on their loans. Scarce resources are being used for political purposes rather than economic ones. That isn’t good politics…or economics.

A moral society protects the right of every individual to pursue their own life, liberty and happiness. Yet the collectivism President Obama champions essentially treats productive individuals as a means to an end. The sacrifice he often speaks of suggests that your productive effort isn’t actually yours but property of the state to be directed toward struggling homeowners, solar energy, education -- wherever it can affect the most “public good.”

In capitalism, man is an end to himself not the means to the ends of a politician’s whim. To that end, what’s morally right is to protect individual property rights and let the free market work, which would practically be the quickest way to rebuild the economy. As we’ve been pointing out for almost a year now, the government’s attempts to stem the financial crisis have made it much worse.

Intervening in markets and redistributing tax dollars to either failed companies or downtrodden homeowners is immoral and exactly why it has never worked in history. It won’t work this time either.

Fear ETNs Gain Traction

The VIX ETNs we wrote about in January are off to a quick start with iPath S&P 500 VIX Short-Term Futures ETN (VXX) trading well over 100,000 shares a day. iPath S&P 500 VIX Mid-Term Futures ETN (VXZ), which tracks intermediate-term volatility, is less active but is seeing thousands of trades every day. Essentially, these instruments are designed to track investor fear as measured by the volatility of option prices.

The Fear Factor


iPath VIX Short-Term Futures ETN (VXX), iPath VIX Mid-Term Futures ETN (VXZ) – since inception

It’s no wonder investors are flocking to these products. With even Alan Greenspan suggesting the government should nationalize some banks, there’s plenty to be fearful about.

Obama’s Home Holds Up

Despite all the gloomy news over housing, the fact is that not all real estate markets are crashing. The price of the president’s own South Side Chicago residence is currently estimated at $1,808,500 by Zillow.com, up slightly from the $1.65 million he paid back in June 2005.


Bird’s Eye View of Obama’s Chicago home, located at 5046 South Greenwood Avenue


Zillow.com Price Estimate for Obama Home over 10 years.

1
2
Next

Follow SmartMoney on Facebook, Twitter & More: Facebook Twitter
Bookmark and Share RSS
Order ReprintsOrder Reprints
User Comments
cahdawg

1 Comments
Our founding fathers would NOT be rolling in their graves. They determined that a sound national banking system would be a fine thing and founded a nationalized bank.

This is in no way a criticism of capitalism or an endorsement of the ridiculous plans to bail out the delinquent home owners or car companies. It is only intended to point out a historical inaccuracy that was posted and to emphasize how it is a governmental responsibility to promote a strong banking system.

Posted by: jjvinnie
During these times, not only have I thought about the fact that our Founding Fathers must be rolling in their graves but have thought that of Ayn Rand also. But I think between CNBC's Rick Santelli's proposition yesterday and this wonderful article that she may actually be get some "snippits" of peace!! Wonderful points Jonathan!!
Posted by: oukerself
hoenig will never admit any fault or nuance in his faith in capitalism. Therefore, anything he writes or says has zero credibility and is irrelevent.

Patriotism is great when we're fighting some BS War or as a Velvet Glove for free-market capitalism's Iron Fist... but should it actaully stand for defending the citizens of this country against an economic crisis? Not in hoenig's little ignorant world.
Posted by: parkcorporation
The study of economics needs re thinking. The method of sizing government wouldn't meet accounting standards and regulation in the private sector is mostly ignored. The concept of economic stimulus is retro, ie not in step with capitalist evolution, government should manage its labor as does the private sector, and the emphasis of government should be to expand the labor supply. Ideas, money and entrepreneurs abound, we are only limited by the supply of labor as is displayed each time we reach full employment. Our government should not be expanding in both good and bad times for the exact opposite reasons. The scientificcapitalist
Posted by: johngonole
Drchemy

The problem with Keyes is that he's thinking about his own generation. Our grandchildren will still be alive to pay for all this wealth transfer. Worse those that are receiving the wealth are likely almost certain to squander it just as they have what they worked for.

Great article by the author. Free markets must be protected. That is the central function of a moral government. To purposefully go down a path we know is bad for all of us over the long term to make the short term easy is obviously wrong.
Advertisements

Related Quotes

VXX 41.24 Down -1.12 -2.64%
VXZ 82.08 Down -0.85 -1.02%
IP 24.89 Down -0.07 -0.28%
 

Stock Compare

See how the stocks on this page stack up.