Wednesday, July 2, 2014

Why It's Important for My Generation to Understand the Financial Crisis

Since reading John A. Allison's incredible perspective of the Financial Crisis, I have learned just how important it is for not just me to know the causes, but for my whole generation.

I plead with you to take the time to find out exactly what happened, by doing some research on the Internet (other than Wikipedia) and/or reading at least a part of John Allison, President and CEO of the Cato Institute, and retired Chairman and CEO of BB&T's excellent book The Financial Crisis and the Free Market Cure. You will not only discover what happened and why, but discover a whole new outlook on the problems of our world today, and discover the possible solutions that is ultimately: less government and more freedom. If Americans can understand that, then we have hope to not make these mistakes that caused the Financial Crisis in the future.


To me, this is the most powerful part of the book, and when I say powerful, I mean that it struck me as the root of many of the problems that exist today in the world. The following is an excerpt from the chapter entitled "The Deepest Cause is Philosophical."


"The deepest cause of the Financial Crisis is not economic policy. The fundamental cause is philosophical. The financial crisis is a result of the philosophical ideas that have been taught in the liberal arts departments of the most prestigious universities in America for more than 50 years.


The fundamental cause of the financial crisis is a combination of altruism and pragmatism. Altruism does not mean kindness toward others; it literally means 'other-ism.' Altruism is defined as selflessness, that is, believing that everyone else is more important than you are. The good of the individual is irrelevant. It is only the good of 'others' that matters, and this is interpreted by liberals as being the good of 'society.' This assumes that society is a living entity and that the effect on actual individuals does not matter. In reality, however, there are only individuals. There is no entity as society.


The 'common good' (or the 'public interest') is an indefinable concept. There is no such thing as the public. The public is only a number of individual people. When the common good of a society is regarded as something apart from and superior to the individual good of its members, the good of some people takes precedence over the good of other people, with those others consigned to the status of sacrificed animals.


Altruism should not be confused with benevolence. Altruism means that other people (society or the tribe) are more important than you are. Altruism is an unquestioning duty to others. It is not about being nice to people. It is self-sacrifice.


A classic economic error made by liberals is to assume that good intentions produce good outcomes. Economic theory unquestionably demonstrates that so-called good intentions often produce very bad outcomes. This is the 'law of unintended consequences' that is so relevant to policy makers and others who not only fail to achieve their aims, but also cause results that are directly opposed to their aims – as when central banks and regulators seek to ensure 'safe and sound' banking, but instead make banks and the system more dangerous and precarious. However, if you are an altruist, moral good is defined by your intentions to help others, not by the actual outcome. In fact, altruism often serves as an excuse for bad behavior (and bad intentions)."


To summarize, Allison goes on to make the point that by being an altruist, you could make the claim that everyone has the right to health care, a home, etc. etc... all free. And because of those "rights" then you then must also have the "right" to steal a house away from someone just because everyone should have a house, even though that person may have worked very hard for it. This logic is opposite to what the Founding Fathers believed, that we have a right to what we work for, not for something someone else worked for.


Altruism suggests that we should all try our hardest to make sure everyone is equal – if you're productive you need to give away your wealth even to those who are nonproductive. Allison sums it ups further "In fact, it implies that no one has a right to her own life. Everyone is everyone else's property. This is a rejection of the concepts of rights."


Business people cannot be altruistic if they want to maintain successful businesses. But what if business people instead were pragmatists? Pragmatists argue that nothing is for sure. You must always act for short-term, never consider the long-term consequences. Some business people of today were/are altruists, or pragmatists, and because of their erroneous philosophies, contributed to the fall of their companies and the decline of our economy. 


"The combination of altruism and pragmatism leads to the 'free lunch' mentality... that leads to a lack of personal responsibility, which is ultimately the death of democracies." 

No comments:

Post a Comment