Wall Street — VOICES for REASON

Here are my recent comments on the Occupy Wall Street protests:

Some Americans have expressed sympathy with the Occupy Wall Street protesters because they oppose bank bailouts and the incestuous relationship between Washington and Wall Street.

“Americans are understandably upset by what they see as ‘crony capitalism,’” said the Ayn Rand Center’s Don Watkins. “But the real motive of the protesters is not to end ‘crony capitalism’–it’s to attack real capitalism and end whatever is left of it in America.

“For years, Washington has favored certain bankers by intervening in the market. But that has nothing to do with genuine capitalism. Capitalism means that the government does one thing–protects us from force and fraud–leaving us free to conduct our economic affairs as we see fit. A capitalist government doesn’t intervene to pick winners and losers, or to save companies from their mistakes.

“But the Wall Street protests aren’t calling for an end to government intervention in markets–they want to increase it. Most of them, for example, want to increase wealth redistribution in the name of fighting income inequality.

“Contrary to their rhetoric, they do not oppose the banks on the grounds that Wall Street is in bed with Washington. Notice, for instance, the plans to protest outside the home of investor John Paulson, who cannot be accused of getting government favors, and the lack of complaints about taxpayer money being poured into GM, Chrysler, and Solyndra. They chose to protest Wall Street because, whatever its flaws, it symbolizes genuine capitalism.

“What the protesters object to is not government stacking the deck to determine winners and losers. They just want the government to pick different winners and losers. They want to take the ‘capitalism’ out of ‘crony capitalism’–not the other way around.”

Photo: Paul Stein

The day after Bernard Madoff was sentenced to 150 years for committing a massive financial fraud, I saw the following big, bold headline in the Los Angeles Times:

A strong message to Wall Street

Think about what this headline implies. The conviction of one particular financier is regarded as a message to all financiers. That is outrageous.

Imagine if there were a mass-conviction of Mafia members and the LA Times wrote:

A strong message to Italian-Americans

Or, imagine, if, every time a black murderer got convicted, the LA Times wrote:

A strong message to Blacks

Members of those groups would be righteously, justifiably outraged that they were being treated as potential criminals simply because of their ancestry. In fact, we all would be outraged. Being Italian or black, we would say, in no way, shape, or form implies that a person is a would-be criminal. Well, neither does being on Wall Street. Unfortunately, many think it does because they regard the profit motive as immoral and an inducement toward criminal behavior. (See “Why Businessmen Need Philosophy,” “Unlimited Liability,” and “An Open Letter to CEOs” for more on this issue.) Shame on the LA Times for perpetuating this idea by smearing honest, productive financiers with Madoff’s guilt.