Friday, July 3, 2009, 10:34PM ET - U.S. Markets Closed for Independence Day - Observed.

Charles Wheelan, Ph.D. The Naked Economist

Charles Wheelan, Ph.D., The Naked Economist

You Get the Government You Deserve

by Charles Wheelan, Ph.D.

Very Good (864 Ratings)
3.503476/5
Posted on Tuesday, February 19, 2008, 12:00AM

I have one more item of bad news related to the mortgage meltdown: It'll likely provide lots of ammunition for advocates of more government regulation, in the mortgage industry and everywhere else. I'm afraid we're getting what we deserve.

Three things have become clear as the mortgage/real estate debacle has unfolded: 1) Left to their own devices, millions of people (and some pretty sophisticated lenders and investment banks) will do some profoundly stupid things; 2) The effects of those stupid things spill over to affect everyone else; 3) Lots of Americans expect their government to do something about it. (Let's not pretend that it's just Democrats; the White House was pretty darn quick to roll out its bailout plan.)

Rational Debate

One of the fundamental debates within economics concerns the degree to which individuals make fully rational decisions. Do people always act in their own best interest? Or can government help prevent them from doing things that they'll later regret?

This debate over "rational man" isn't just academic -- it lies at the heart of what government ought to do. Should government treat its citizens as informed adults or semi-rational adolescents?

Milton Friedman was the most articulate and prominent proponent of the belief that individuals always act in their own best interest. Yes, it may be dangerous to ride a motorcycle without a helmet, but rational individuals can and should decide whether the thrill of riding without a helmet outweighs the risk of becoming an organ donor.

You Know Best

Individuals know best, Friedman argued brilliantly, even when their decisions don't always make sense on the surface. A worker who takes out a payday loan at an annualized interest rate of 800 percent presumably doesn't have a better option. The same goes for the sweatshop employee in Bangladesh who's willing to work long hours for a few dollars a day. Who are we to say that's a bad decision? Have any of us ever been a poor Bangladeshi peasant?

Even worse, when government overrides individual decisions, then self-serving bureaucrats carve out power and perquisites for themselves. And the larger the public trough, the more incentive organized interests have to jostle for a spot.

The corollary to that view, of course, is that when individuals or firms do stupid things, we ought to let them wallow in their own mistakes. For Friedman and his acolytes, society is best off with a small government that leaves individuals unconstrained to make their own decisions, for better or worse.

Saving Us from Ourselves

Ah, if it were only that easy. There's an equally compelling argument, with strong supporting evidence, that individuals make systematic errors of judgment, and that we're bad at assessing risk. Thus we obsess about dying in a terrorist attack as we merrily tool around the suburbs in our cars -- the latter of which is far more likely to kill us.

We discount the future too heavily. Thus we eat poorly and exercise too little, only to suffer from Type 2 diabetes later in life. Or we start smoking because we think we can quit -- and we don't.

Investors make portfolio decisions that defy the basic rules of finance and lose a bundle as a result. After the dotcom collapse, the Wall Street Journal ran a series of articles on individuals who had taken their retirement savings as a lump sum and then lost most or all of it chasing Internet stocks. The articles were so depressing that I couldn't read them after a while.

All these examples suggest that government can help save individuals from themselves. Cigarette taxes not only compensate society for smokers' health care costs, they may also deter some potential smokers from taking up the habit in the first place. And limiting the portfolio choices investors can make with their IRAs or 529 college savings accounts might stop them from investing a chunk of money in the Harrah's Roulette Fund.

A Bad-Judgment Pileup

Which brings us to the real estate debacle. We now expect roughly a million mortgages to go into default, despite the fact that there's nothing about the real estate correction that should come as a great shock.

No one could've predicted exactly when or by how much real estate prices were going to fall. In fact, no one could have said with certainty that they would fall at all. But any rational person should've known that it was a realistic possibility.

And given that it was a realistic possibility, homeowners shouldn't have borrowed more than their homes were worth. Banks shouldn't have made adjustable rate loans to anyone who could prove that they were alive. And the greatest minds on Wall Street shouldn't have bundled and sold mortgages without clarifying exactly who would be on the hook if lots of them went into default. But that's what happened, because prices were going up, up, up! This all strikes me as a load of new evidence for the "government for semi-rational adolescents" camp.

Pick a Side

But there's a second reason that we're probably not ready for Friedman's elegant small government: When people who play with matches burn their houses down, we're generally not pleased if our political leaders pull up lawn chairs and watch the flames. We expect them to do something about it. We want a plan.

Have you heard any presidential candidate from either party explain why the appropriate response to the mortgage debacle is to let the culpable parties pay the price for their mistakes? Nothing teaches you about debt like losing your home to foreclosure. I'm still waiting for that speech. (OK, Ron Paul has probably given it -- which is one reason he'll never get more than 10 percent of the vote.)

Everyone loves small government in theory. We're tired of being told that the coffee we're about to enjoy is hot. But then we burn ourselves and expect someone to show up with ice. You can't have it both ways.

Rate This story

Very Good (864 Ratings)
3.5/5
Sign-in to rate!

286 Comments

Showing comments 1-5 of 286Next >>
Sort: first to last
  • Joel L - Friday, September 19, 2008, 1:13AM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 5/5

    Excellent article! I never ever comment but feel compelled when noticing so many bitter idiots responding so negatively. Sure there are many that got ripped off by mortgage companies. People get robbed every day. That's nobody fault but the suckers who wanted that cash out so bad they did not care about the consequences. The fact is many people who mortgaged their homes at 1% option ARMs at 100% LTV or other risky loan programs spent the money on 50' plasma TVs, BMWs and other toys outside their means to keep up with their neighbors and friends... without any consideration that the rates could rise sharply and property values could fall, pre-pays etc. Now the people who did not make these mistakes are going to pay for it though tax dollars. Same goes with the bank bail outs. These CEO have been running around in private jets making 10s of millions for decades. Now the companies are finally going under and the tax payers are flipping the bill. That's the truth. JL

  • Greg - Tuesday, April 22, 2008, 7:17PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 1/5

    So you are an "expert" and you say that all us stupid individuals sometimes make behavioral errors in judgment, so we need a little government to help correct the errors... Where exactly do you think government bureaucrats come from if not from the error prone population? The most overly idealistic and/or unmotivated people in society are going to make better decisions than society as a whole? Come on YHOO, if these people are the best experts you have, you are in bigger trouble than MSFT lets on.

  • Mature - Thursday, April 17, 2008, 3:56PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 1/5

    Socialist dribble.

  • norm - Saturday, April 12, 2008, 10:20PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 3/5

    People may be as rational as they can be, which is not much, given that they lack the information, knowledge, experience, skill, and intelligence they need to be optimally or fully rational. I have no problem with people losing the house that they could not afford. I do have a problem with mortgage disclosures so limited they border on the fraudulent, banking and financial industry execs misleading everyone about the quality of their assets, the Fed producing liquidity bubbles every few years, and me losing some money as a result of all of this. Should regulations and regulators have prevented the subprime problem and the resulting liquidity problem? You bet. Because some people's greed and stupidity have hurt many more than just themselves.

  • Richard - Friday, April 4, 2008, 7:45PM ET  Report Abuse

    • Overall: 2/5

    you know, besides the imbecile who wants to legalize pot, the continued desire of people to have a government regulation to protect themselves from stupidity is just absurd. when are people ever going to learn to THINK. it is just plain embarrassing to think there are that many stupid, financially uneducated people who live in this country. bail them out? hell no, why should i, as a responsible homeowner and tax payer, who lives under my means, cover these jerks when they fail to act financially responsible? i will take my home devaluation over bailing these jerks out and wait out the market to correct. we only invite a greater socialist structure when we whine and ask the government to assume responsibility for our stupidity. more government and more regulation means less and less freedom. wake the hell up people!

Showing comments 1-5 of 286Next >>
The columns, articles, message board posts and any other features provided on Yahoo! Finance are provided for personal finance and investment information and are not to be construed as investment advice. Under no circumstances does the information in this content represent a recommendation to buy, sell or hold any security. The views and opinions expressed in an article or column are the author's own and not necessarily those of Yahoo! and there is no implied endorsement by Yahoo! of any advice or trading strategy.

An accessible and entertaining introduction to economics for lay readers, now available in paperback.

View more about Charles Wheelan.

The Chicago Tribune described Naked Economics as "clear, concise, informative and (gasp) witty."

Order Naked Economics today. Average customer review on Amazon.com: 4.7 out of 5 stars.

More from Yahoo! Sources

  • CNN Money
  • Consumer Reports
  • Kiplinger
  • The Motley Fool
  • Business Week
  • Wall Street Journal

Sponsored Links

Trade Stocks? Try Currency Trading
Trade in a highly trending market 24-hrs a day, 5.5 days a week. GFT.
www.GFTforex.com
Earn From 2.35% to 2.65%
With GE Capital Corporation. Not An Offer Of Securities For Sale.
www.geinterestplus.com
Buy Stocks for $4
No account or investment minimums. No inactivity fees. Start Today.
www.sharebuilder.com
Financing - Bank of America®
Take Advantage Of Low Refi Rates For Home Loans Up To $3 Million.
www.bankofamerica.com
What's Your Credit Score?
724 Is an Excellent Score- Get Your Instant Credit Score For $0 Today.
TriFreeCreditReports.com/free
I Got Fired- and It's Been Great
In One Year I Went From Fired to Making $6K+ Every Month- Here's How.
MyGoogleMoneySecret.com

Historical chart data and daily updates provided by Commodity Systems, Inc. (CSI). International historical chart data and daily updates provided by Morningstar, Inc. Fundamental company data provided by Capital IQ. Quotes and other information supplied by independent providers identified on the Yahoo! Finance partner page. Quotes are updated automatically, but will be turned off after 25 minutes of inactivity. Quotes are delayed at least 15 minutes. Real-Time continuous streaming quotes are available through our premium service. You may turn streaming quotes on or off. All information provided "as is" for informational purposes only, not intended for trading purposes or advice. Neither Yahoo! nor any of independent providers is liable for any informational errors, incompleteness, or delays, or for any actions taken in reliance on information contained herein. By accessing the Yahoo! site, you agree not to redistribute the information found therein.

Yahoo! Answers is provided for informational purposes only, and no Q&A is intended for trading or investing purposes. Yahoo! shall not be responsible or liable for the accuracy, usefulness or availability of any Q&A information, and shall not be responsible or liable for any trading or investment decisions based on such information. View Complete Answers Disclaimer.