Wall Street Journal commentator: Greed is not good.
Princeton economist Alan S. Blinder recently wrote a notable op-ed at the Wall Street Journal. It was notable because Blinder’s theme runs counter to the mantra of the many free market fundamentalists who got us into the big mess we are in. In his hard-hitting piece, Blinder argues that greed is not necessarily good:
When economists first heard Gekko’s now-famous dictum, “Greed is good,” they thought it a crude expression of Adam Smith’s “Invisible Hand”—which is one of history’s great ideas. But in Smith’s vision, greed is socially beneficial only when properly harnessed and channeled. The necessary conditions include, among other things: appropriate incentives (for risk taking, etc.), effective competition, safeguards against exploitation of what economists call “asymmetric information” (as when a deceitful seller unloads junk on an unsuspecting buyer), regulators to enforce the rules and keep participants honest, and—when relevant—protection of taxpayers against pilferage or malfeasance by others. When these conditions fail to hold, greed is not good.
Blinder’s article is not optimistic that we will be able to seize the moment by “slamming the door on the lobbyists” and enacting strong financial reform.
- Why is Big Money (The Wall Street Journal) so interested in smearing little people?
- Denialist Wall Street Journal admits Peak Oil has arrived
- “We’re losing Afghanistan” writes John Kerry in the Wall Street Journal
- What the Wall Street Occupation is about.
- How do Wall Street banks make their money?
Category: Economy
Subscribe
If you enjoyed this article, subscribe to receive more just like it.
About the Author (Author Profile)
Erich Vieth is an attorney focusing on consumer law litigation and appellate practice. He is also a working musician and a writer, having founded Dangerous Intersection in 2006. Erich and his wife, Anne Jay, live in the Shaw Neighborhood of St. Louis, Missouri, where they are raising their two extraordinary daughters.
I am thoroughly impressed that the Wall Street Journal would actually run something like this. Of course it was probably just a mistake by an editor.