My Site
Skip to Content

Leland Teschler's Editorial: The Myth of Free Markets

March 16, 2010

Leland E. Teschler

Printer-friendly version

Consumer confidence is at a 10-month low and the job situation isn’t much better. Meanwhile, pundits on TV seem to behave as though the loss of U.S. manufacturing jobs to Asia is like the law of gravity: It is a certainty we have to accept.

That’s not what you’ll hear coming from John Hofmeister, once the president of Shell Oil Co. and now heading up an organization called Citizens for Affordable Energy. Hofmeister has taken part in what he calls the globalization of four different companies, and as such, has lived an appreciable amount of time outside the U.S. The experience has given him no patience with the idea that U.S. manufacturing resources must inevitably move offshore. In fact, he feels the migration of jobs is a result of the way governments treat manufacturing industries.

“What I have seen in every country other than the U.S. is a determined effort by government to help manufacturers site, build, and operate new facilities. There is a deliberate design of public policy to help manufacturers with their costs as they invest in jobs,” he says. “The national tax code ought to take into account that investments in manufacturing are creating value and growing jobs.”

Hofmeister says it is no accident that the strongest U.S. industries are those having modest capital-equipment needs. “The financial industry doesn’t have the capital expenditures you find in manufacturing industries. Most IT companies do their capital investing outside this country,” he says. These practices aren’t so much because of labor costs as from penalties imposed on companies that must spend money on tools, buildings, and numerous other brick-and-mortar items before they can make their first widgets.

Outside the U.S., on the other hand, tax codes are more likely to favor manufacturers. Among the favorite methods: Tax incentives to rehabilitate old facilities, writing-down investments rapidly to give a faster payback, and reducing corporate income taxes of companies that make investments within the country’s borders.

Such shenanigans don’t exactly sound like the free markets preached by economic purists. “The only people who believe in the free market are a very few who have had it pretty good throughout their lives,” says Hofmeister. “Every other government in the world knows there is no such thing as a free market. We perpetrate the myth of free markets because a few people can make a heck of a lot of money talking about them. And the myth of the free market comes at the expense of American jobs.”

The frustrating thing about U.S. manufacturing is that it needn’t be this way. “We have outsourced or closed whole industries where we can still pay a competitive wage and stay in business,” insists Hofmeister. “Manufacturing can be a primary absorber of people who are looking for purposeful work. Our government has a responsibility to just do what other governments have done in this area.”

Certainly true, but it would take a change in mind-set at the federal level toward creating private-sector jobs rather than more government bureaucracy.

Leland Teschler, Editor

Comments

The market is not free enough!

The penalties to which Leland was referring to are taxes.
At times when equipment utilization is low, companies unload excess inventory and capital goods because the annual tax on ownership is the same whether there is profit or not. This discourages strategic growth, and it floods the used equipment market, making recessions even more dramatic for those smaller businesses that are barely hanging on. Dumping excess inventory is neither sustainable nor competitive.
Regulation favors big business. The high cost of compliance with regulations eliminates smaller competitors. Shifting regulations cause instability in the markets which further eliminates smaller competitors while large companies have the finances to hang on. Big business has the lobbyists to influence regulation in their favor even as the politicians are stuffing their pockets and praising themselves for going after the big bad ______ industry.
Leland does a pretty good job delivering an even handed and non-political argument here. But in the online comments, the Liberal attack dogs are out for blood.

What penalties?

"These practices aren’t so much because of labor costs as from penalties imposed on companies that must spend money on tools, buildings, and numerous other brick-and-mortar items before they can make their first widgets."
What penalties is Hofmeister referring to? Does he mean a lack of tax breaks? The same people who dislike personal tax based on the ability to pay complain that corporations should be taxed based on the ability to pay.

free markets are a myth

Of course free markets are not a myth. However free markets are just mostly free. Industry etc. does not pay for the education of its labor force, or for the cost of infrastructure or protection. We have government (with the permission of the the people) to do that and so far it has worked well.
The free market has had to have government regulate it, police it, break monopolies, bail it out and even prosecute it.
So the free market behaves like a teenager. Ok, the government is the parent, should act like a parent and can promote it to some extent, like a parent.

Free Market, the solution to the problem NOT the problem

What the government needs to do is allow people to keep their profits that they EARN, NOT redistribute them. Laissez Faire Capitalism is "hands off". No assistance, no discouraging, because government programs inevitably fail. Every time the government gets involved in picking winners they are most likely going to pick the wrong ones. GM is being backed by the government do you think that they are doing well?

I agree with Leland's article on "How Legislature's Discourage Manufacturing" but this one is way off in its conclusion.

There was a time in America where men did not expect the unearned and they had a sense of *self responsibility, they would not accept handouts. Apparently manufacturing has become so impoverished from being looted that it now expects it own handout, until this is reversed and men expect production as the accepted rule not handouts we will have a problem.

If you really want to know what the problem is, read Atlas Shrugged, Ayn Rand knew what it took to manufacture and her heroes were those real men of production.

General Motors

It's ironic that you bring up General Motors as an example of "laissez faire". The government did keep their "hands off" in response to GM's lobbying requests not to raise CAFE standards, which remained unchanged from 1985 until just a few years ago. This ultimately was a major factor in their demise (they are a zombie automaker now as far as I'm concerned). They had all but resigned to trying to make money on smaller more efficient vehicles (crossovers, sedans, small cars) up until the massive infusion of capital from the federal government. Not even the Chinese are willing to pry the Hummer brand from GM's cold dead hands...

Want another example? How about "hands off" the finance industry, what was the end result of deregulation of the banking/finance industry and repeal of the Glass Steagall Act? The two days after Lehman went belly up money literally stopped moving between banks. Had the government not stepped in there would have been a run on banks, and we would be in a Great Depression at this very moment.

I for one will not blindly accept the notion that the government never knows what's best. Nor will I accept the notion that the interests of the private sector will or should always take precedence in regards to government policy.

you misunderstood me.

"It's ironic that you bring up General Motors as an example of "laissez faire"."

I didn't it was a *Non*-laissez faire example in the context.

If you think government can redistribute wealth better than the free market, I have a bridge to sell you because by this maxim russia and china are the best places to live, which is not the case.

Free markets need the government

On March 26th, 2010 JT (not verified) says:

First of all Paul L., GM when it was private was run to the ground, now that government is involved it is being turned around.
This is a typical Republican rhetoric, bashing the government, deregulate and reduce taxes. According to that doctrine we should pay no taxes have no regulations and live in a country comparable to Somalia. Maybe you can move there and see how you like it.
We have Post Office that functions quite well. We have Internet which was by all accounts invented by Al Gore (this is true for sure), the DARPA or ARPANET was the result of government sponsored efforts. This laid the foundation for the Internet as we know it. We went to moon thanks to government. And now we need government to help the industry. Ayn Rand was a Republican extremist advocating no regulation at all, wake up there is a new sheriff in town!

Ayn Rand was not a

Ayn Rand was not a republican, she denounced the Conservatives often.

http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/conservatives.html

Most people get her wrong, she was also not an anarchist, she believed in limited government like the founders of our great country.

One based on individual rights and freedom of the individual from coercion by the state. This includes no redistribution of any kind because it requires violating people individual rights to property.

Re: Free Market, the solution to the problem NOT the problem

Remember this, Laissez Faire Capitalism will eventually mean no middle class. And I believe history is on the side of this assessment. You may want to read "The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism" by Naomi Klein. There's good capitalism and bad. This book is a tremendous piece of history and assessment by economist.

"free-market" editorial

Thanks for the succint commentary, Leland.

Also, thanks for the explicit quotation, with no attempt to disquise or plagiarize.

 cheers,  - vic

 

Leave a comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.

Acceptable Use Policy