Category Archives: Business

Spitzer Also Edited The Harvard Law Review

Business, Constitution, Democrats, Ethics, Justice, Law, Natural Law

(The title of the post is a tad unfair to Obama, I know. But editing The Harvard Law Review is clearly no litmus test for purity of intellect or ethics.)

One thing is for sure, Spitzer did not forge his political and fiscal fortunes by means of voluntary exchanges on the free market. The Spitzer piranha didn’t give law teeth; but used bad law to bite business to the bone.

Daniel Gross of Slate had this to say back in 2004:

Spitzer made maximum hay out of the “New York State’s Martin Act. The 1921 legislation, as Nicholas Thompson noted in this Legal Affairs piece, gives extraordinary powers and discretion to an attorney general fighting financial fraud. He can ‘subpoena any document he wants from anyone doing business in the state,’ make investigations secret or public at his whim, and ‘choose between filing civil or criminal charges whenever he wants.’ Extraordinarily, Thompson notes, ‘people called in for questioning during Martin Act investigations do not have a right to counsel or a right against self-incrimination. Combined, the act’s powers exceed those given any regulator in any other state.’”

Spitzer embodied abuse of power. As a government goon, he was an extortionist extraordinaire. “He didn’t simply indict. He issued press releases. When Spitzer published a press release detailing a shocking betrayal of trust by” this or the other “of Wall Street’s most trusted names,” the company would lose billions in market value in a matter of days and would quickly settle with the thug.

I know I’ve defended the naturally licit actions of scum such as Scooter Libby against naturally illicit prosecutions. And yes, I support the decriminalization of prostitution (but not its moral elevation). Yes again: I believe Spitzer’s funds are his to move about, and that his transactions were perfectly licit. So call me inconsistent on this count, but this character is so evil, contemptible, and uncontrollable (and nauseatingly hypocritical), I consider it a mitzvah that he has been removed from office and taken DOWN, if by unjust means.

I want to see Spitzer’s name live on in infamy; he ought to ultimately die disgraced, and if we lived under a just legal system, be prosecuted—but for his crimes against innocent members of the business community. Unfortunately—and I guess I’m nothing if not consistent—I’m with Alan Dershowitz on the following count: Spitzer ought not to be prosecuted for his moral failings. Although I’m filled with schadenfreude at the spectacle of Spitzer, there is no case to be made for his prosecution in libertarian law.

More later on Spitzer’s ho—or rather on the manner in which media have infantilized the girl and turned her into a victim.

Updated: The Hildebeest to Level the Lending Industry

Business, Capitalism, Constitution, Economy, Feminism, Free Markets, Hillary Clinton, Socialism

The Hildebeest wants to make it easier for debt-laden borrowers to borrow money they can’t repay. She wants those who don’t spend money they don’t have, to subsidize those who do. The latter are called, euphemistically “at-risk borrowers.” So now we are medicalizing fraud! Defraud the lender and it is not he and his investment that are at risk, but you the defrauder. As for the money lending industry: hey toots, what do you think mortgage companies will do if you force them to throw good money after bad? Go bankrupt!

Tightening credit conditions and foreclosures signal to this silly socialist one and one thing only: the lending industry is not yet egalitarian enough; it has not yet been forced to lend to all equally. The insurance industry already gets sued to bits when it refuses to pay out to the barely insured for homes that were swept away by Katrina, but were never insured against floods. This woman is so dim. Like so many women, Hillary just doesn’t understand money or free markets. Here I include the war harpies. They cheer on the spending in Iraq, which contributes to our economic straits—to the promiscuous money printing and the devaluation of the dollar. As I once said on a libertarian discussion list, I’d give up my vote if that would guarantee that all women were denied the vote.

The worst part of all this is how Hillary audaciously framers her Fabian plank as quintessential Americanism: “We need to secure the marketplace and put reforms in place right now… [do] what America has always done in times of difficulty…,” IT announced.

Practically every initiative Hillary touts as part of her platform is grounded in spending money not hers. Hey toots, you haven’t even been elected yet! Enough already! I’m being unfair. Instead of a slap on the face to calm the cow down, Barak Hussein Obama is matching Hillary word-for-word. He has also promised to curb “abusive practices,” by which he presumably means the mortgage company’s practice of charging a higher interest rate for loans to less credit-worthy borrowers.

This is sick. It’s socialism.

Updated (March 29, 2008): Yesterday Hillary reiterated her intent to level another industry: health insurance. This time her mandate came from the … Constitution. We were all prohibited under the Constitution, said she, from discriminating on the basis of age, sex, race, etc. So why should the insurance industry be exempt? Why should it be permitted to discriminate between people based on health status (largely under the individual’s control)? Hillary wanted to know. Aware as I am that Hillary is such a strict constructionist (sarcasm alert), please enlighten me as to the clause in the Constitution upon which Hillary bases her latest Fabian impetus. It’s obvious that the woman could never fathom what it is that the actuary does.

Nifonged

Business, Capitalism, Conservatism, Crime, Criminal Injustice, English, Free Markets, Ilana Mercer, Law

Capital Flight

Business, Capitalism, Economy, Free Markets, Government

Be afraid when a Democrat-dominated, “influential House committee is set to hear testimony from all five commissioners of the Securities and Exchange Commission today—the first time that has happened in at least 10 years.” Yes, the SEC is making a House call, as the Wall Street Journal put it.

What new havoc the SEC wrecking ball will wreak? That’s too early to tell. So far, according to FreedomWorks, the Republican Party’s Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has had the following effects on American capital markets:

“Between 1996 and 2001, the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) averaged fifty new non U.S. listings annually; in 2005, it gained nineteen.

London’s AIM (Alternative Investment Market) had 335 initial offerings of securities in 2005 – twice the total in 2000, while Nasdaq had 126, down 65 percent.

In 2000, nine of every ten dollars raised by foreign companies were raised in the United States; in 2005, nine of the ten largest offerings were not registered in the United States, and of the largest twenty-five global offerings, only one took place in the U.S.

The government accounting office (GAO) found that the number of public companies going private increased from 143 in 2001 to 245 in 2004.

In 2000, nearly half, 46.8%, of the global IPO equity was raised on U.S. exchanges. However, in 2005, only 5.7% of dollars raised by non U.S. company IPOs was raised through shares listed on U.S. stock markets subject to U.S. regulatory rules and oversight.

The total inflation-adjusted value of securities class-action settlements increased to $9.6 billion in 2005 from $150 million in 1997.

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, which placed extremely costly additional financial burdens, is estimated to have ‘cost in lost market value of U.S. companies at $1.4 trillion.’ In addition, it appears that the requirement for independent-director majorities on corporate boards has reduced the willingness of corporations to take risks, which will have a long run, adverse effect on U.S. economic growth.”