Gabriel
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jun 14, 2010
- Messages
- 1,019
- Reaction score
- 118
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Other
John Bogle: The Free Market's Moral Crisis
Columbia Business School
[video]http://fora.tv/2009/04/01/John_Bogle_The_Free_Markets_Moral_Crisis#chapter_0 1[/video]
Resolving to reinstitute fiduciary duty as being a legally binding contract with serious implications may be a means of circumventing government regulatory policy. One could argue that indeed enforcing moral obligatory legality is in itself a regulatory instrument. This would be arguably an acceptable libertarian ideal as opposed to outright deregulation to the degree of making derivatives legal again.
When Bogle asks the questions regarding massive management market conflicts overlooked he implies these money managers were acting in the interest of personal gain over the interest of fund share holders. Clear disregard for their obligatory fiduciary position of trust. Because these money managers are supposed to be acting for a large collective group it is expected they behave as they are expected to with moral regard for the people they are entrusted with. Considering the integration of public funds that are collectively derived and privately invested these institutions should be working for the benefit of society under obligatory fiduciary duty. This would be a true conservative argument that runs contrary to libertarian deregulatory free marketing. There should be a huge disconnect between libertarians individual greed accumulation and collective morality inherent in the market via the ideal of fiduciary duty.
I feel conservatives have become lazy and lean on their right wing counterpart libertarian economic anarchy for fiscal policy with regards to the economic sharing self regulation as an axiom. However they only worry about self preservation of their religious convictions and abortion, traditional family, divorce, propagation of their religious convictions .. etc. These are particular issues an economic libertarian disregards. Here we have another disconnect between social libertarians and economic libertarians.
Social libertarians have a large degree of anarchist compassion. However they must include individual liberty to be included in collective social contracts to insure political protection for that said liberty. As such I suppose there is a divide between republican social conservatives and republican economic libertarians. There must be serious cognitive dissonance for social conservatives while considering matters of moral economic relativistic policy results. Even I, being a morally social relativist, find myself concerned for the shared results of economic relativism in the financial markets. How the economic libertarians square that circle and simultaneously rationalise wide spread economic inequality is incomprehensible.
Social conservatives should be fighting to reign in the market not give it more of the unfounded blind faith in human nature.. particularly where fiscal matters are of concern. You should be telling economic libertarians to go lay down, not lying down with them. It is like social conservatives are committing suicide by knowingly sleeping with an infected aids patient.(a politically incorrect analogy conservatives might appreciate.)
Columbia Business School
[video]http://fora.tv/2009/04/01/John_Bogle_The_Free_Markets_Moral_Crisis#chapter_0 1[/video]
Resolving to reinstitute fiduciary duty as being a legally binding contract with serious implications may be a means of circumventing government regulatory policy. One could argue that indeed enforcing moral obligatory legality is in itself a regulatory instrument. This would be arguably an acceptable libertarian ideal as opposed to outright deregulation to the degree of making derivatives legal again.
When Bogle asks the questions regarding massive management market conflicts overlooked he implies these money managers were acting in the interest of personal gain over the interest of fund share holders. Clear disregard for their obligatory fiduciary position of trust. Because these money managers are supposed to be acting for a large collective group it is expected they behave as they are expected to with moral regard for the people they are entrusted with. Considering the integration of public funds that are collectively derived and privately invested these institutions should be working for the benefit of society under obligatory fiduciary duty. This would be a true conservative argument that runs contrary to libertarian deregulatory free marketing. There should be a huge disconnect between libertarians individual greed accumulation and collective morality inherent in the market via the ideal of fiduciary duty.
I feel conservatives have become lazy and lean on their right wing counterpart libertarian economic anarchy for fiscal policy with regards to the economic sharing self regulation as an axiom. However they only worry about self preservation of their religious convictions and abortion, traditional family, divorce, propagation of their religious convictions .. etc. These are particular issues an economic libertarian disregards. Here we have another disconnect between social libertarians and economic libertarians.
Social libertarians have a large degree of anarchist compassion. However they must include individual liberty to be included in collective social contracts to insure political protection for that said liberty. As such I suppose there is a divide between republican social conservatives and republican economic libertarians. There must be serious cognitive dissonance for social conservatives while considering matters of moral economic relativistic policy results. Even I, being a morally social relativist, find myself concerned for the shared results of economic relativism in the financial markets. How the economic libertarians square that circle and simultaneously rationalise wide spread economic inequality is incomprehensible.
Social conservatives should be fighting to reign in the market not give it more of the unfounded blind faith in human nature.. particularly where fiscal matters are of concern. You should be telling economic libertarians to go lay down, not lying down with them. It is like social conservatives are committing suicide by knowingly sleeping with an infected aids patient.(a politically incorrect analogy conservatives might appreciate.)
Last edited: