The same politicians who cannot remember the names of major corporations pretend to understand accounting while they are preening before the television cameras, writes James Sheehan. If these solons really knew how misleading corporate accounting was, surely they would have acted to correct the problem before now.
The combination of collapsed pensions and accounting scandal is operating like the collapse of a dam, unleashing a torrent, not of water, but of hatred--hatred of capitalism and its most visible and valuable representatives: big businessmen. George Reisman counters propaganda with analysis.
There is a way out of the current economic mess, writes William Anderson: Stop the government merry-go-round. Malinvested resources must be permitted to be liquidated, government spending must be cut back, and the central bank must not try to "reflate" the currency or the stock market.
Contrary to popular thinking, the stock market does not have causative powers as far as economic activity is concerned. The prices of stocks only reflect individuals' assessments of economic reality. And while individuals can change their evaluations of economic facts, writes Frank Shostak, they cannot alter the facts themselves.
Last week, headlines around the world were screaming out the sad tale of WorldCom and its $4 billion or so misstatement of earnings. But should we really be surprised that another poster child of the boom--especially one whose growth has come through rapid-fire acquisitions led by a rock star CEO--has been revealed to be a hotbed of malpractice?
Insider trading laws, writes Dale Steinreich, have empowered the SEC to undertake a mission in information egalitarianism that favors certain classes of investors and strategies, and not others. Martha Stewart and ImClone have the book thrown at them, while the stock sales of Apple Computer's executives are ignored.
Poor Martha Stewart and Samuel Waksal, snared by arbitrary insider-trading laws that require information to be socialized. If one party knows more than others about a particular firm or industry, the SEC is perfectly able to rule that possessing--and acting upon--that knowledge is a crime.
Popular thinking about economic growth is still strongly influenced by the productivity theory of capital, which presumes that capital engenders a yield like the fruits from a tree, writes Antony P. Mueller. If it were merely aggregate investment that mattered, economic development and continuous wealth creation would be child's play.
Fannie Mae's monopoly privileges have given it an ever-increasing share of the secondary conforming mortgage market, writes Robert Blumen, and it currently is seeking to expand into other parts of the mortgage market. The net result has been a nightmare of resource misallocation and massive systemic risk.
The quirky nature of credit is that it is not necessarily better in abundance, writes Christopher Mayer. It's not like beer, butter, and bananas--where more means cheaper and cheaper is good. Credit is like money; it represents buying power. More credit means more buying power, which means a bidding up of assets and a spark for an unsustainable boom.
