The myth of the government cure-all

myths.gifSometimes it’s hard to keep up with all the muddled thinking that is passed off as keen economic insight in much of the mainstream media.
My thoughts along these lines started last week with this David Ignatius/Washington Post op-ed in which Ignatius extols the virtues of undertaking a “fundamental national mission, equivalent to President John F. Kennedyís call to put a man on the moon” to solve everything from General Motors’ current problems to dependence on foreign oil, Americansí high living, and the decline of manufacturing in America. Ignatius’ enthusiasm is fueled by Amory Lovins recent book, Winning the Oil Endgame: Innovation for Profits, Jobs and Security (RM Institute 2004), which calls for a big government plan of higher taxes and government subsidies to facilitate fundamental change in the materials used to build such big things as automobiles and buildings. Although Ignatius admits that he knows nothing about the financial viability of Lovins’ big plan, that doesn’t stop him from endorsing it enthusiastically:

I’m no technologist, so I can’t evaluate the technical details of Lovins’s proposal. What I like is that it’s big, bold and visionary. It would shake an America that is sitting on its duff as foreign competitors clobber our industrial giants, and it would send a new message: Get moving, start innovating, turn this ship around before it really hits the rocks.

Of course, Ignatius ignores the little detail of what happens if those carbon-fiber composite automobiles that are created as a result of the government money don’t sell all that well. I guess we’ll just have to work around that later.

Continue reading

Cashing in on criminalizing business

handcuffs.jpgEliot Spitzer makes no bones about using his position as New York attorney general to promote his campaign for governor, but he certainly isn’t the only lawyer cashing in on the trend of criminalizing business to further one’s career.
This Wall Street Journal ($) article from over the weekend reports that David Anders, the assistant U.S. Attorney who was the lead prosecutor in the recent cases against former WorldCom Chief Executive Bernard Ebbers and investment banker Frank Quattrone, plans to leave the Manhattan U.S. Attorney’s office at the end of this year for a cushy job with the venerable New York law firm, Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz.
Now, Anders appears to be a competent lawyer who worked for a couple of big New York firms before going to the U.S. Attorney’s office, so maybe he would have ended up at a big New York firm after working as an assistant U.S. Attorney, anyway. Moreover, he is certainly not the first lawyer to take advantage of the opportunity to move from government work to a more lucrative position in private practice. However, the willingness of Wachtell, Lipton — one of the most profitable law firms in the U.S. — to pay a high price to purchase the services of a lawyer whose claim to fame is obtaining a highly questionable conviction of Quattrone and an over-the-top life sentence for Ebbers is a rather sad reflection of the value that the market places on the ability to appeal to the public’s envy and resentment while pursuing questionable prosecutions of the unpopular businessmen of the moment. So it goes in the wacky world of criminalizing corporate agency costs.