iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Judge Richard Posner Questions His Free-Market Faith In "A Failure Of Capitalism"

First Posted: 05/21/09 06:12 AM ET Updated: 05/25/11 02:15 PM ET

Richard Posner

"If you're worried that lions are eating too many zebras, you don't say to the lions, 'You're eating too many zebras.' You have to build a fence around the lions. They're not going to build it."
- Judge Richard A. Posner

One of the most prominent proponents of free-market capitalism is having second thoughts.

Judge Richard A. Posner, a federal appeals court judge who has been called the most cited legal scholar of all time, discussed his doubts and his analysis of the current financial crisis in a wide-ranging interview with the Huffington Post.

A longtime proponent of deregulation, the idea that business works best in a free market without burdensome government regulations, Posner began to change his mind when he realized the enormity of the crisis. This change of heart inspired him to write his upcoming book, "A Failure Of Capitalism."

Though still a believer in the virtues of capitalism, Posner now emphasizes the importance of government regulations; the need to strengthen the regulatory structure by directly funding authorities rather than the current fee-based model; the dangers of excessive executive compensation, and even expressed support for the idea of changing bankruptcy law to make it easier for homeowners who face foreclosure.

"I wouldn't have thought the economy was as vulnerable," he explains. "I wouldn't have thought that banking deregulation was dangerous."

Posner says he grew "complacent" about the risks of deregulation since economists "said they had solved the problem of depression and knew how to control inflation without causing recession." His relaxed attitude was also due to the fact that the economy had been running fairly smoothly since the early 1980s.

Now, he realizes that more regulation of our financial markets is needed, employing a typically entertaining analogy to illustrate his point:

"If you're worried that lions are eating too many zebras, you don't say to the lions, 'You're eating too many zebras.' You have to build a fence around the lions. They're not going to build it."

Posner emphasizes that he doesn't blame the bankers for not sensing earlier the damage that their risky behavior had on the larger economy. "If you say to a banker, 'If all the banks go broke, the economy will take a hit.' They'll say, 'What can I do. If I decide to play it safe, my competitors will take all my business.'

Since our free-market system encourages businessmen to be self-interested profit maximizers, Posner says it doesn't make sense to also ask them to be conscious of their impact on the wider economy.

"You can't expect [an] individual firm to be worrying about what his collapse will do to the rest of economy. That's why you need government regulation of banking... Coal-burning utilities in the Midwest don't worry about acid rain because that's going to be in the east. That's why you need regulation."

Posner is critical of the government bailout because it doesn't seem to have served its purpose: banks are not lending, but rather hoarding the billions they have received of TARP funds.

"What government has been trying to do is give them enough money to feel safer. But it doesn't work too well because if making loans is risky... and there's not much demand for loans... they'll find other things to do with the money. You can lead a bank to money but you can't make it lend."

Posner is careful to emphasize that while the bailout may be wrong, it may have prevented an even greater crisis: "You don't know how much worse things would be if government hadn't done this. Without all those hundreds of billions, maybe the banks would have collapsed."

Overall, he doesn't have much confidence in the government's approach. "What I criticize them for is the failure to have had any contingency plan. So it's now 6 months since the September crash of the banking industry... my sense is that the government is still feeling its way. It improvises, doesn't have any real long-term plan."

And he warns that the crisis's aftershock may be worse. "The danger here is that the Fed is pumping several trillion dollars into the economy, on top of the Bush deficits... the danger is that in a couple of years, we have very severe inflation."

Posner even seems amenable to an idea suggested recently by Yale professors John Geanakoplos and Richard Levin to reduce the mortgage principal and not just the interest rate of homeowners facing foreclosure. That would probably involve a change in bankruptcy law:
"It's not a bad idea... If you reduce the principal, you're going to reduce foreclosures... It might be possible to have a law that does that - that would be really radical... if it could be done legally."

Posner was also critical of the current regulatory structure, in which the numerous federal agencies are funded by fees from the banks and institutions they regulate. That creates a "cozy" relationship which can lead to lax regulation. "There's a kind of shopping involved. Countrywide was originally under the Federal Reserve because it had a bank connected to it... and decided that the Fed was too rough on it, got rid of its bank and as a result was regulated by the Office of Thrift Supervision."

Instead, he suggests, regulatory agencies should be "supported by general tax revenues."

Posner's other non-traditional free market suggestions: Putting a ceiling on credit card interest rates and payday loans and possibly capping the salaries of bank executives (though he prefers disclosing the full compensation of all senior executives and requiring that a substantial share of compensation be tied to a company's future performance) and even increasing the marginal income tax rate of high-income individuals.

In his book, Posner takes aim at the Republican Party, explaining that thoughtful conservatives were "appalled at the intellectual vacuity" of the McCain campaign. Echoing Stephen Colbert's mock-conservative take, he derides how the party flaunted the 'anti-intellectualism of its supporters', concluding that "The economic crisis in which the nation finds itself cannot be solved in the gut." And he makes sure to include the failures of liberalism in his rant, condemning how they are "trapped in fantasies of equality."

FOLLOW HUFFPOST BUSINESS

 
 
  • Comments
  • 288
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (11 total)
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
doneflyin
my micro-bio isn't
09:39 PM on 04/21/2009
In today's Republican party "thoughtful conservative" is an oxymoron.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
06:00 PM on 04/21/2009
another legal scholar living on the public payroll now admits

his entire take on society was wrong. i wonder how many litigants

suffered because of his blind belief in deregulation?
09:45 PM on 04/21/2009
Here here. He owes an open apology to Marx!
photo
BBackSoon
Hello, I must be going.
04:27 PM on 04/21/2009
Posner ‘has been called the most cited legal scholar of all time’?

Maybe we need to start citing some new people then.

Maybe we could also address Trickle Down economics, and a Rising Tide lifts all boats.

While we might actually learn some lessons today, in 50, 80, 100 years everyone that remembers just how disastrous Unfettered Capitalism really is, someone will once again get all of the ‘outdated’ and ‘un-needed’ regulation out of the way and it will all happen again.

And what is it? Wealth Transfer from the bottom to the top by way of steam shovel.
photo
Artos
Down with Tyrants
04:07 PM on 04/21/2009
This guy is a judge. I'll bet he never had that much of a problem assigning guilt to someone from the lower castes of our society. Yet with the Bankers, "Posner emphasizes that he doesn't blame the bankers for not sensing earlier the damage that their risky behavior had on the larger economy." In other words he doesn't make the early assumption that they were guilty of fraud all along as he would with someone off the streets. He instead assumes that their singular fault was that they innocently blundered. How nice. One senses his even handed judging abilities right away. No wonder he is such a perfect man to be a judge.
03:50 PM on 04/21/2009
All governments are a mix of socialism and capitalism, the question is only: how much of each. We've had too much capitalism, so we need to correct course.
photo
vandegrasse
Don't Panic
03:11 PM on 04/21/2009
What Posner's saying is that these corporations are lacking in a moral center that the government has to come and tell them right from wrong. We're in a sad state, not the fact that these companies are greedy, but that the public has tolerated, even encouraged this rampant self-centeredness because somehow we felt WE would be ultimately rewarded. How delusion we've all become. The Romans had a goddess of money-Pecunia. We worship that same goddess only with more devoutness.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
LeftRight
TANSTAAFL
02:47 PM on 04/21/2009
Correction, I meant to say EXCESSIVE greed!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
LeftRight
TANSTAAFL
02:47 PM on 04/21/2009
Wow..... So maybe there IS hope for the rightwingnutjobs who are convinced that the market can solve everything!!! Capitalism is a GREAT economic structure, but it has ONE fatal flaw, greed. However, with proper governmental regulation that fatal flaw is REMOVED from the system!!
02:33 PM on 04/21/2009
Well the pendulum always swings back.

Unfortunately economic activity isn't bound by English case law and behaves in ways that people would prefer it wouldn't.

For example, if the government can just step in and reduce the principle of a mortgage (as he proposes), anyone thinking of investing in mortgages will ask for a much steeper interest rate to cover that risk. If you cap the interest rate on credit cards, fewer people will have access to them (probably a good thing...but perhaps not the intended result).
yappnmutt
humping legs for liberty
03:25 PM on 04/21/2009
exactly. will regulation be blamed for the next cycle? its kinda fun to watch and listen to these people claim to know the solution to ending the business cycle. money flows where money can be made with the least resistance. eventually the flow towards least resistance causes an overflow and the mess has to be sopped up. anrchy probably isn't good but the case against over regulation is clear.
02:18 PM on 04/21/2009
Posner now believes that more regulation of our financial markets is needed. That's a real no-brainer. Posner will be raking in big bucks selling a book that states what is obvious to any one with half a brain, something which he seems to have acquired only recenlty.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
gangwayjan
02:00 PM on 04/21/2009
"Deregulation" was always a misnomer -- a religion to the faithful (the law and ecomonics/ Ayn Rand crowd) and the devil incarnate to other folks ( those lefties about who believe if they can get just one more line of data they will know the "Truth" and can regulate all things).

Like anything man-made, the free market and government regulation must always be adjusted -- for the system to work, you have to burn incense to 5 gods: law, economics, politics, technology and the zeitgeist. We have been through times when regulation was "THE" answer, whether it was needed or not (like King Canute, politicians will write a law making tides illegal and think the job is finished) or a law putting an "EXPERT" in charge regardless of . Then came the last few decades when Adam Smith's fist magically solved all problems (not).

What's THE answer: Restructuring. We do have a hodge-podge of governmental oversight; a lack of regional and conceptual approach; skewed incentives. But please, let's not go overboard.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
slowtono
01:39 PM on 04/21/2009
BS... It's all in there. The truth. Bailout is wrong,(p.13) designed for the top and only the top. Paid by the middle and bottom. No confidence in the government, they are in cahoots with the top in both free markets and controlled markets. Proof! Paragraph 5 "Directly funding of authorities" What's this the lions share of 3 trillion dollars. What's needed is to start listening to new unattached individuals who have a heart for the country and not their wallet and prosperity. This book needs not be published. It solves nothing, and has nothing to add. Capitalism works, but government officials need to direct it's virtue. Problem #1 crooked government authorities, crooks, no virtue, no honor, no respect.
12:46 PM on 04/21/2009
The most-cited legal scholar of all time finally gets it.

" Posner emphasizes that he doesn't blame the bankers for not sensing earlier the damage that their risky behavior had on the larger economy. "If you say to a banker, 'If all the banks go broke, the economy will take a hit.' They'll say, 'What can I do. If I decide to play it safe, my competitors will take all my business."

This is the attitude described by biologist Garrett Hardin in his 1968 essay "The Tragedy of the Commons", one of the first major statements in the modern environmental movement. The commons in this case amounts to the whole economy. It simply isn't true that a totally unregulated economy will just naturally hum along by itself. We need rules and regulations--or as Hardin called it, "mutual coercion mutually agreed upon." And it only took Posner forty years to catch on.
02:20 PM on 04/21/2009
Hear, hear!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
The Albany Kid
From the 518 to the 651
12:45 PM on 04/21/2009
But will he ever "question" the racism he showed in Wassel vs. Adams?

http://74.125.47.132/search?q=cache:xZ3mA5LxAjIJ:www.scribd.com/doc/2465087/Wassel-v-Adams+posner+%22well+dressed+black+man%22&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
photo
givesflack
shrink GOP small enough to drown in bathtub
12:36 PM on 04/21/2009
With every Libertarian who comes forward to admit their intellectual failure to realize their economic philosophy doesn't work are trying to absolve themselves of the misery they created while lining up to create the next one. Only after they have enriched themselves and a select other few who brought down the economy. Presently their "big banks are good vs. big government is bad" mentality still believes they can influence policy and most likely setting up the next financial scheme in the process while pretending to reject the old. How else do we wind up in one economic crisis after another historically that society pays for and fixes these carnivores replicate over and over. There needs to be an alternative as in a government bank, like government health care, created permanently to compete with the animals on Wall Street in order to keep them honest and society in balance. By the way, their not lions but rats, and hey, rats are real smart. In this way we can make money for our society by investing ourselves where WS only drains money from it and invests in greed.
12:52 PM on 04/21/2009
Do a google search for "excluded middle." We aren't in a free market, never were; it's called a mixed economy for a reason. Government top-down distribution of resources just displaces a capital market with a political market. If you think that the basic failings of capital markets (disparities of bargaining power, third-party effects, wealth effects, imperfect information, free riders, holdouts, and monopolies) are not endemic to political markets, you need to reassess your views of the activities of a government with a rich history of similar failings. Your fatal conceit is that you assume the government will act rationally, fairly, intelligently, honestly, and under the same ethical standards to which you subscribe.
photo
givesflack
shrink GOP small enough to drown in bathtub
01:15 PM on 04/21/2009
I trust the government when corporations aren't meddling in it's affairs as they have been for too long. And what do you know about fairness and equality when it's the same group of Libertarians who were running the banks and government. They had a free time to pursue wealth freely by espousing free market and that our country is about financial freedom. Whatever you are talking about is some obscure topic in order to make yourself seem more informed than everybody else while trying to undermine rational thinking of observed events in my time.