Patrick Byrne: Washington vs. Wall Street
September 25, 2008 by Guest Author
Filed under Featured, Guest Articles
‘Is Something Not Worth Doing Worth Doing Well?’ asks Byrne
SALT LAKE CITY, Sept. 24 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ — Overstock.com, Inc. (Nasdaq: OSTK) chairman and CEO Patrick M. Byrne comments on President Bush’s September 24, 2008 speech outlining the President’s market rescue plan.
Dr. Byrne commented: “This bailout is necessary to save the bacchanal that is our US financial system. However, at the core of the administration’s plan is the assumption that Wall Street is worth saving. It is not. For years Wall Street has bossed Washington, DC around like they’re hired flunkies, while preying on Main Street businesses and investors. The federal government should use this opportunity to extract from Wall Street concessions that could never be extracted were Washington in its customary subordinate position.
“If American taxpayers are to bailout the Power Elite, they should attach conditions. Taxpayers should share in any upside, and gaping flaws in the current system should be fixed. Towards that end, I believe that any bailout legislation should include at least the following protections:
1. Taxpayers need to share in the upside if the bailout works, to compensate them for the risk that the administration is forcing them to take. This could be accomplished through warrants on shares in the firms being bailed out, such as those Mr. Buffett extracted from Goldman Sachs.
2. The government should impose a tax on those that benefit most from bailout — Wall Street itself. Perhaps a 0.25% transaction tax on all securities trades is in order? Such a tax would be insignificant to investors, while be largely borne by those that are merely speculators – including those that churn trades in an attempt to manipulate the markets.
3. Bailout or none, the government must fix underlying problems in our capital market. The fixes includes:
a. Reforming our stock settlement system so that trades actually settle promptly, precisely as Congress stipulated in 1934. This can be accomplished by putting in place a market-wide mandatory pre-borrow requirement (like the SEC did in the 30-day July 15, 2008 emergency order that protected the 19 financial institutions);
b. Creating the obligation that if a naked short seller fails to deliver a share, the broker-dealer must force a mandatory buy-in (as is done in civilized countries, such as Canada);
c. Tracking trades cradle-to-grave (rather than net blocks of trades against each other), so that it is obvious who the naked short sellers are and the total amounts they are stealing;
d. Providing regular, timely disclosure of when and how many shares have failed to deliver;
e. Enforcing the rules, including significant monetary penalties and jail time.
“Keynes said that an ocean of productivity can support a bubble of speculation, but an ocean of speculation cannot support a bubble of productivity. Washington has been captured by speculators at the expense of producers. I have long been talking about systemic risk and potential financial crisis (see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SIHw7C73s3E for a three- minute video from as early as October 2005). I am proposing specific steps to fix the system. For those that agree with these fixes which protect Main Street Americans, I ask you to sign the electronic petition at http://mainstreetamericans.info.”
Any government fix to problems caused by government intervention is worse than allowing the market to fix itself. I say let the market fall if that is what the market is going to do. The market is an indicator of what people value and don’t value. Regulation is not going to change that. It will be difficult and a lot of people will get hurt, but trying to regulate a market is the source of these problems and will never be the solution.
Mark Cuban has an interesting solution (link below); a more “privatized” approach. Interesting, tho how do we get the politics out of the way (I think perhaps a complete failure of the system may BE the only way to get politics out of the way; tho there will be vultures lurking for this moment, also).
Here’s Mr. Cuban’s thoughts:
“My BailOut Solution – I’m In For At Least $50mm”
http://blogmaverick.com/2008/09/26/my-bailout-solution-im-in-for-at-least-50mm/
vulture up!
Was anybody else as disappointed as I was that Free-Capitalist endorsed Representative Chris Cannon was the only Utah Representative to vote for the bail-out? I suspect that maybe Chris talks like a capitalist when it suits his purposes and forgets about it the rest of the time.
and just how is this thing supposed to work logically? the taxpayers are forced to loan money to the banks at a low 2% rate and then those same banks turn around and lend us back the money at rates from 5% to 25% in the form of mortgage and credit card loans? so we the taxpayers get to pay extra taxes for the bailout and then also pay extra for the privilege of borrowing back their own money?
I’m not sure how I feel about this article. I firmly agree with Ammon that the market should be allowed to correct itself without government intervention. From what I get out of this, Patrick is saying that it is wrong for government to bail out Wall Street…but…if they are absolutely going to do it anyway, let’s at least make the terms a little better. I agree with this argument on a practical stand, but on a moral stand, is agreeing to such a compromise a subtle acceptance of the bailout in general? Is such a compromise defensible morally?
Yes, I was disappointed as well, Lynn. We armchair politicians find it easy to be critical, that’s for sure. I am disappointed by most of the politicians of our day. Few of them seem grounded in principle and tend to be swept along with the overflowing scourge that has become our legislative process. One more reason why it begins with us, the people of this nation. I find it funny how hardly anyone squawked several years ago when this mess was created. Unfortunately, we are reaping the whirlwind sown by those who came before us and many find it too difficult perhaps to throw the doors open and ride out the storm in principled decision-making at this time.
Further, I’d love to say that those who voted against the bailout actually did it for the right reason, but somehow I doubt that. Call me cynical or cantankerous, but doing the right thing for the wrong reason does not fix the matter any more than doing the wrong thing. So, we’re just going to have to weather this storm and pick up the pieces later, which, by the way, I believe is by teaching individuals one-by-one how to live a principled life. When a statistically significant number of us are doing that, we’ll be able to effect a change in the government. Until then, time to get started by joining a civic service organization, such as the FreeCapitalist Project, that teaches principled living.
The only thing that makes sense to me is to begin keeping government involvment within its proper role. If there is deception taking place, pass laws to help identify it, use the executive to execute justice, and use the court system with a jury to sort out the facts. Otherwise, let the bubble pop the rest of the way and let the market work itself out. Whatever you do– don’t freek out. Just have faith in principle.
Rob
Introducing a progressive tax is not the answer in my opinion. It doesn’t matter how small the tax is, it will be significant to investors now and more so in the future if the tax gets increased.
Canada is equally or less civilized than the U.S. and should not be used as a model to shape the future for America. I lived in Canada all my life and it is very socialized.
As far as I know there are enough laws to throw any business man in jail and I wonder Mr. Byrne follows these rules exactly.
Lets not forget out own government that has in my opinion got us into this mess. Wait aren’t we the people the government? So we have no one to blame but ourselves. The solution becomes that of each individual, you and I becoming self reliant.
I have a lot of respect for Patrick. My firm has done a lot with Patrick and where some would call him a “Maverick” I would call Patrick a “Capitalist.” Whether you are a Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Constitutionalist, Independent, Etc. the only way that we can get through this mess that we the people got ourselves into is to turn our lives and country into a Capitalist State.
I love the quote by Ayn Rand in Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal – “Capitalism is the only system geared to the life of a rational being and the only moral politico-economic system in history.” By us a citizens of the United States becoming self reliant, providing value creation and exchange for one another and promoting free market and trade, then we’re free.
Calling for individual responsibility is and ought to be first and foremost; however, I do not believe this to be enough, unless such individual responsibility includes holding our government officials accountable for their actions. And yet, the majority of our fellow citizens are either too complacent or apathetic to do so. I can’t help wonder, though, if the reason for this is that we as a people have ceded so much power to our government officials that they no longer fear the displeasure of the people. When the servants of government cease to fear the people, they ceases to serve the people and begin to rule over them.
It is far past time that the servants of government come to fear the displeasure of the people they serve, rather than the current status quo where the people fear the government that is meant to serve them. I cannot help but wonder whether the time will eventually come, if it has not already, when our government officials must actually fear for their own freedom, if not their lives, and not merely lack of reelection in order to live up to their oath of office. If an oath is never taken seriously by those to whom it is sworn, how can we expect it to be taken seriously by those who swear it?
Wow! Very profound. Thank you John. I think all people, not just US citizens would do well to read your comment and apply it in their lives.