Two Simple Guidelines to End All Financial Regulation.
We will soon see the latest attempt to tame the financial markets become reality. There is a better, simplier way to stabilize the economy and create economic freedom at the same time. by Gene DeNardo
(libertarian)
Saturday, June 26, 2010
Some form of financial reform will soon receive congressional approval and become law. The details may vary, but we know that the size of federal government will grow and we also know the status quo entrenched corporatist system will not be only permitted to continue to function, but its position will be strengthened. The two go hand in hand, big government and privilege.
Conservatives will whine that the "free" economy is being restricted and government is taking over our lives. Of course, that is their job. Conservatives conserve. Their primary goal is removing any "new" regulation that might infringe on the guaranteed profits that are based on the "old" regulations. They have no reason to truly remove regulation itself and allow a true free market to prosper. True market freedom is bad for BIG business.
There are two simple but conclusive steps that could be taken that would eliminate the need for any regulation and free up the economic sector in a way unimaginable. They would also eliminate a substantial amount of federal and state government and give individuals more economic freedom than we may ever have witnessed.
Remove all laws, guarantees and regulations regarding any financial transactions in which both parties have taken part in a consensual manner.
Remove all state interference in consensual contracts.
In other words, if an individual or firm consents to an economic transaction and without use or threat of force transfers any form of value or currency to another party, they are on their own and subject to the consequences of their decision to become involved in that transaction.
Point two simply reinforces point one; the state has no part in any transaction in which a party or parties willingly give up their funds or some other form of value in exchange for whatever they have agreed on from the other party or parties in the transaction.
Investment, loans, credits or debits will either pan out or they won't. The market and the parties to the transaction will prevail. It is up to the investor, whether an individual or corporate behemoth to decide where to put their capital and between only the parties involved as to what the future holds.
Complete and total economic freedom to do as one pleases, simple as that; with the resultant duty that one is responsible for one's own actions and decisions.
Any one step on that "slippery slope" of socialism up and away from a state of total economic freedom and privilege is born. Whether that first regulation is imposed to protect us from fraud or to allow "business and industry" to operate more efficiently, it cannot be done without allowing the state to instill "advantage" to one group or another. Eventually, we arrive at where we are today, fighting incessantly to enact legislation to promote our own little [or monstrous] group over some other group and receive our own little [or behemoth] state benefits and welfare.
Are there drawbacks to this complete and total freedom? Yes, of course. We will have no one to blame but ourselves for results of each and every economic decision we make. We will gain the reward when we choose well and suffer the setback when we don't do our research.
But, the benefits are obvious. Nothing will be deferred. All risks, costs and rewards will be immediately evident. They will be no political side to economic choices. No collective state to back up our poor choices and stabilize our inept companies through guarantees, contract enforcement and bailouts. No smoke and mirrors. What is economically will be economically.
A suggestion like this always strikes fear into the hearts of both liberals and conservatives. Who is going to protect the little guy? And what about the poor little big guy? Who or what will promote business and industry?
We only need collective "protection" from one thing and that is "aggressive force". Consensual economic transactions do not fall under that category. There is no reason to grow government to protect us from ourselves; the state always ends up protecting the perpetrator anyway.
Choose freedom. Let the chips fall where they may.
Did you like this article? If you did, Thumb It! 1
thumb so far
The views expressed
in this article are those of Gene DeNardo only and
do not represent the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates.
Gene DeNardo is solely responsible for the contents
of this article and is not an employee or otherwise affiliated
with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.
