4 thoughts on “Hayek – much more than money”

  1. Posted 25/09/2012 at 13:21 | Permalink

    It is unfair to call ’86 de-regulation it was just a movemnt in regulation. And though there were flaws it did open up competition in a lot of the markets. Though this theme was not continued to ensure competition continued to increase.

  2. Posted 25/09/2012 at 14:20 | Permalink

    In a programme emphasising money so much, in the context of ‘the state versus the market’, I was hoping (I won’t say ‘expecting’) to see Ricardo quoted: “Experience shows that neither a state nor a bank ever had the unrestricted power of issuing paper money without abusing that power.” Flanders failed to explore the likely ultimate result of Quantitative Easing [QE]. And Flanders again referred to Roosevelt’s activities in the Great Depression without this time pointing out that his attempts to bring it to an end did not work… It may be that Keynes versus Hayek has been amply discussed over the past two or three years (though in a programme starring each of them it would have seemed relevant), but I could have done with a bit more on Hayek versus Friedman. The programme could have been a lot worse; but it could also have been a lot better. Maybe radio would have done a better job than television.

  3. Posted 27/09/2012 at 14:46 | Permalink

    “Anyone could set up a competing exchange” and “dealing off-exchange was perfectly possible” – this is important.

    And is the understanding that a cartel (or a guild) is only bad if it is COMPULSORY.

    Governments (funedmentally mislead by the absurd “perfect competition” concept) simply do not understand what a market is and should be.

  4. Posted 29/09/2012 at 08:35 | Permalink

    Yes, I remember asking somebody setting up all the SROs about this at a dinner in 1987 (it was the day after the stock market crash as it happens). I said words to the effect that, even if I am a qualified person and have a big sign up saying “I am unregulated, take this advice at your own risk/deal at your own risk” you cannot advise or deal and that this monopoly approach to regulation was, in itself, a problem. He replied by saying that you could, in fact, still invest in property in an unregulated environment (which is still true). The person next to me turned and said “if it is okay for property, why not for securities?”.

Comments are closed.