FREE MARKETS:Trend of nationalization and government
intervention in free markets is eroding consumer confidence.
Commies in Washington?
END OF FREE MARKETS
By Saad Sarwar Muhammad
Monday, September 22, 2008
When Pakistan’s central bank blocked foreign currency
accounts to control the flight of capital to foreign banks in the
aftermath of nuclear tests that it conducted, it was considered as
interventionist and the measures were considered anti-economy and opposed
to what free markets were all about. A similar thing happened again early
this year when Pakistan’s main stock market shed more than $36 billion
dollar of market capital in a very short span, the Securities and Exchange
Commission of Pakistan put a floor on the points to curtail flight of
money. Pakistani rupee also suffered at the hands of the flight of capital
and the exchange rate fell from roughly Rs. 60 to a dollar to Rs. 78 to a
dollar within a span of a few months. All these measures were criticized
around the world because of the interventionist policies of Pakistani
institutions who wanted to keep the economy in check.
The collapse of the investment banks like Lehman
brothers and Meryl Lynch and firms like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac along
with the imminent fall of the US insurance giant AIG put the global
markets in a tailspin. UK responded with a ban on short selling of stocks
to arrest the fall of FTSE its main index. The US followed suit with the
ban on short selling of stocks for a month. Short selling is speculative
in nature with investors betting on a company’s stock to fall driving the
whole market down. Even profitable investment banks like Morgan Stanley
were feeling the pinch because of the short sale. The measures worked and
the stock markets around the world recovered within a day with a long and
wayward week coming to an end. In the process, the Fed also ended up
bailing out the insurance company AIG for a big sum of $85 billion dollars
and it is estimated the cost of the Fed’s intervention to the US taxpayer
might amount to $700 billion dollars overall driving the domestic debt
even higher to upwards of $11 trillion dollars. All these measures, with
no clear and definitive answer to whether they will work or would be
enough to save the ailing US economy.
All this brings to question an interesting debate of
special interest to most Americans, that is, the clash of communism vs.
capitalism. With the virtual nationalization of AIG and the mortgage
market and the interventionist policies followed by the Fed one cannot
help but feel whether the cold war ended with the fall of Soviet Union
(collapse of communism/socialism by proxy) or caught on to the same
country (the US, champion of capitalism and free markets) which brought
about the collapse of the Soviet Union.
Economists have long argued in favor of free markets
and held that intervention of the government in economy should be kept to
an optimal minimum. I for one, also believe in the same thing with one
exception. That is, the speculative use of instruments with techniques
like short selling along with liberal credit lending can have a disastrous
effect on any economy. Any use of an instrument which is speculative and
where the investor has no real interest in the health of the actual
company should be banned. The purpose of holding stocks is to have a share
in the company’s profits and a say in its operations. The long term share
holders are the only ones who really care about the future of the company.
Gamblers and speculators have always bode ill for the economy and any such
use of instruments which encourage these practices should be reviewed for
the benefit of underlying corporations and the populace at large. Liberal
credit lending comes with its own problems which become exacerbated in
tough economic times of high oil prices and job losses with the result
that common people start defaulting on obligations. This eventually goes
up to corporation level and the companies also become prone to
bankruptcy.
The security commissions of
different nations have an important job in regulating use of instruments,
especially the curtailment of techniques like short selling which are
highly speculative. But these measures have to be pre-meditated and should
not come as an afterthought in tough economic times. Exchange authorities
should be able to foresee the destructive nature of certain types of sale
of securities well in advance and make them illegal. It is high time that
all types of sales and uses of securities are reviewed to determine their
efficacy for economy. If such measures come as an afterthought after these
speculative selling techniques among others have done their damage, then
these commissions risk being labeled as interventionists. Markets should
be free to function in the construct of rules predetermined to work in an
efficient manner. Only in this way can they be left alone in tough
economic times i.e. without intervention and interference resulting in
increased consumer confidence in the markets. Current trend of increased
regulation and interference and nationalization (AIG) seems like the US
government is run by commies in Washington.
Saad Sarwar Muhammad has a BS in Computer Science from
the University of Central Oklahoma, USA and an MBA (Finance) from the
Indiana University of Pennsylvania, USA. He writes on issues related to
the world economy with special emphasis on Pakistan, US and China. Other
areas of interest include information technology, politics and religion.
He is currently working as an Assistant Professor in Information
Technology and E-commerce as a Cluster Head at NUST Business School(NBS),
Rawalpindi, Pakistan.