Bank Nationalization Jeopardizes Innovation

My first computer was an Apple IIe purchased by my parents back in 1985. It came with no hard drive, no monitor, no software -- and a cost of approximately $1,300. That's about $2,500 in today's dollars.

Since then, the cost of computers has plummeted, even when adjusted for inflation, while at the same time their usefulness has exploded. In productivity, power and ease of use, a $1,300 computer today (which just happens to be the cost of Apple's (AAPL) gorgeous MacBook) is superior to my old Apple II in every way. Once a luxury, extremely powerful computers are owned and used by Americans of every age, race and socioeconomic level.

What's prompted the huge advancement wasn't strong regulation or even investment from Uncle Sam, but relentless innovation from profit-hungry entrepreneurs and the investors who've backed them.

Success was never guaranteed. Over time, companies like Digital Equipment, NeXT and Compaq have come and gone. Products like the Apple Newton have flopped, while others like the iMac have met great success. Some investors have become rich, others have gone bust, but we've all benefited from their competitive efforts.

Would a government-owned computer company -- one in which bureaucrats instead of engineers decided the "right" amount of circuits to develop or microprocessors to design -- have been anywhere as successful as Hewlett-Packard (HPQ) or Dell (DELL)? Hardly.

This same logic applies to today's banking and finance sectors. As I've discussed over the last few weeks, the nationalization of America's financial institutions is underway. From an investor's perspective, my expectation is that those companies in which the government owns a piece will underperform those in which it does not.

It's been 10 weeks since a company has held an initial public offering in the U.S., the longest dry spell on record since at least the 1980s, reported Monday's Wall Street Journal. Eventually, companies will start coming public again. But what kind of regulatory environment will they encounter when they do?

Rep. Barney Frank, (D., Mass.), chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, told the San Francisco Chronicle that "This is the end of the era of extreme laissez-faire, of 'Don't tax it, don't regulate it…". [T]hat has now been totally evaporated."

Sarbanes-Oxley caused the number of companies de-registering from public stock exchanges to triple and increased the cost of being a publicly held company by 130%. Think Congressman Frank's efforts to further tax and regulate will improve the American economy? Don't count on it.

Terrible news from the Chicago futures markets: A 20-year trading veteran was found dead of an apparent suicide on Thursday morning.

Joseph Luizzi, 44 years old and a Chicago Mercantile Exchange member since 1982, was reportedly despondent over millions of dollars of losses racked up in the S&P 500 futures pit during Wednesday's extremely volatile market. Police officers found trading cards recording substantial losses in Luizzi's jacket pocket.

Stress, depression and suicide are factors in every professional work environment, including finance. Such tragedies, however, remind us that the markets are more than electronic blips on a computer screen and it's not simply people's portfolios that are affected. This has been a market that has left even old-timers speechless -- and scared.

My deepest condolences to his family, colleagues and friends.