WEBVTT

NOTE "Parity" Prices

1
00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:17.800
This is Jeffrey Tucker again. I'm here with yet another economist to talk about our new

2
00:00:17.800 --> 00:00:21.880
edition of Economics in One Lesson. We're covering two more chapters. The economist in

3
00:00:21.880 --> 00:00:24.720
question is Peter Klein. Welcome, Peter.

4
00:00:24.720 --> 00:00:25.960
Thank you, Jeff. It's great to be here.

5
00:00:25.960 --> 00:00:30.160
And the two chapters you're talking about, well, the first one begins with the title

6
00:00:30.160 --> 00:00:31.160
Parity Prices.

7
00:00:31.160 --> 00:00:32.160
Right.

8
00:00:32.160 --> 00:00:33.160
Parity Prices.

9
00:00:33.160 --> 00:00:36.000
I haven't heard this term in modern journalism anymore.

10
00:00:36.000 --> 00:00:37.000
What's up with this?

11
00:00:37.000 --> 00:00:38.000
Right.

12
00:00:38.000 --> 00:00:41.320
This is a term that, I guess it's a little bit archaic, you still see it in the technical

13
00:00:41.320 --> 00:00:44.800
economics literature, what they call purchasing power parity.

14
00:00:44.800 --> 00:00:47.500
Parity just meaning equality or sameness.

15
00:00:47.500 --> 00:00:53.680
So the concern that Hazlitt was dealing with in the 1940s is the worry that certain groups,

16
00:00:53.680 --> 00:00:59.440
Farmers, for example, would lose purchasing power if the prices of the goods and services

17
00:00:59.440 --> 00:01:03.880
that they produce, commodities, for example, did not maintain their parity from year to

18
00:01:03.880 --> 00:01:04.880
year.

19
00:01:04.880 --> 00:01:10.880
So as a general, the concern Hans-Luz is dealing with is the fear that prices will fall and

20
00:01:10.880 --> 00:01:16.120
that therefore sellers of those commodities will be harmed and that will have negative

21
00:01:16.120 --> 00:01:19.040
effects on other sectors of the economy and so on.

22
00:01:19.040 --> 00:01:21.320
So it's basically a plea to keep prices up.

23
00:01:21.320 --> 00:01:27.320
Well, it turns out to not do that much of a consideration anymore, partly because of inflation, right?

24
00:01:27.320 --> 00:01:35.320
Exactly, exactly. We don't worry too much about falling prices. Where we do see prices falling in industries like telecommunications, computers, of course we think it's a great thing.

25
00:01:35.320 --> 00:01:49.320
I mean, think of what a personal computer cost in 1980 or 1985 compared to what you got, $2,000, $2,500, $3,000 or something that doesn't have the computing power of the cheapest cell phone today

26
00:01:49.320 --> 00:01:54.760
Today, and you can get a PC for $500 today that's, of course, vastly greater than anything

27
00:01:54.760 --> 00:02:01.440
you could have gotten in 1980, Hazlett actually uses a numerical example like that with automobiles

28
00:02:01.440 --> 00:02:08.120
and shows how the real cost of producing automobiles has fallen and how we would think it was a

29
00:02:08.120 --> 00:02:14.320
horrible thing if we had to pay in today's dollars the equivalent of what we paid for

30
00:02:14.320 --> 00:02:19.160
a Model T Ford to get that kind of quality because we simply wouldn't pay for that quality

31
00:02:19.160 --> 00:02:23.360
Today. So in general, you know, price is falling is a good thing. It means there's

32
00:02:23.360 --> 00:02:28.340
an increase in productivity. So that I understand the argument. The argument

33
00:02:28.340 --> 00:02:34.400
concerning purchasing power is slightly different from the point that it's bad

34
00:02:34.400 --> 00:02:37.640
for the industry for prices to fall, because it is difficult to do business

35
00:02:37.640 --> 00:02:42.680
under falling price conditions, right? So talk first about this purchasing

36
00:02:42.680 --> 00:02:47.360
power point. What does it mean? Right. What he has in mind is the idea that

37
00:02:47.360 --> 00:02:53.760
that particular group in society, let's say that I am in the plumbing business and let's

38
00:02:53.760 --> 00:02:59.320
say that for some reason the demand for plumbing services falls and the market price of plumbing

39
00:02:59.320 --> 00:03:00.800
services goes down.

40
00:03:00.800 --> 00:03:03.960
I as a plumber have a hard time making ends meet.

41
00:03:03.960 --> 00:03:08.320
In general, you know, you might say, well, that's a sad thing, Peter.

42
00:03:08.320 --> 00:03:09.320
We're sorry for you.

43
00:03:09.320 --> 00:03:13.040
Maybe you should consider another line of work, but I as a plumber and my plumber friends

44
00:03:13.040 --> 00:03:19.040
I go to the state, I go to the American people, and I say, pity the plight of the poor plumbers.

45
00:03:19.040 --> 00:03:21.040
Wow, that takes a lot of alliteration.

46
00:03:21.040 --> 00:03:30.040
If we don't have plumbers, then society can't get by without plumbing, and we're a vital part of the American system, and so on.

47
00:03:30.040 --> 00:03:34.040
Your spending habits, or just the critical link in the...

48
00:03:34.040 --> 00:03:37.040
Our existence, and also our spending.

49
00:03:37.040 --> 00:03:41.040
In other words, if the plumbers go out of business, then they won't be spending money

50
00:03:41.040 --> 00:03:44.480
on the goods and services the plumbers buy, and there will be some sort of ripple effect

51
00:03:44.480 --> 00:03:45.800
throughout the whole economy.

52
00:03:45.800 --> 00:03:49.280
So essentially, it ends up being a kind of protectionist argument.

53
00:03:49.280 --> 00:03:55.440
It's interesting that even though this term, where we see the term parity as in purchasing

54
00:03:55.440 --> 00:04:00.480
power parity, where that appears today, it's more in the international trade and macro

55
00:04:00.480 --> 00:04:01.480
economics literature.

56
00:04:01.480 --> 00:04:05.000
I mean, this is in a series of chapters in which Hazlitt is talking about different kinds

57
00:04:05.000 --> 00:04:09.040
as a protectionism, special interest group politics, and he has in particular groups

58
00:04:09.040 --> 00:04:14.160
like agricultural producers in mind, that the call for agricultural producers to use

59
00:04:14.160 --> 00:04:18.600
government policy to keep prices from falling is just another form of special privilege

60
00:04:18.600 --> 00:04:21.160
for one particular group, a politically connected group.

61
00:04:21.160 --> 00:04:25.400
You know, I'm going to say that when you're presenting the argument, it's not inherently

62
00:04:25.400 --> 00:04:26.400
implausible, right?

63
00:04:26.400 --> 00:04:27.400
Sure.

64
00:04:27.400 --> 00:04:28.400
Yeah.

65
00:04:28.400 --> 00:04:29.400
Sure.

66
00:04:29.400 --> 00:04:36.260
It's absolutely true that, you know, when plumbers or farmers, let's say, are economically

67
00:04:36.260 --> 00:04:41.040
successful and doing well, they have money to spend on other goods and services, and

68
00:04:41.040 --> 00:04:43.920
there are certainly positive effects throughout the economy.

69
00:04:43.920 --> 00:04:48.280
But remember, there's a difference between the overall condition of the economy and the

70
00:04:48.280 --> 00:04:50.600
condition of one particular sector.

71
00:04:50.600 --> 00:04:55.040
And if we use government policy to keep prices artificially high for farmers, well, that

72
00:04:55.040 --> 00:04:59.080
means higher prices that consumers pay for food, less money that those consumers have

73
00:04:59.080 --> 00:05:03.280
to Spend on Goods and Services, and so on. It's really just, it all goes back to the

74
00:05:03.280 --> 00:05:07.280
basic lesson of the book, The Broken Window Fallacy. The argument that if we don't protect

75
00:05:07.280 --> 00:05:12.720
the farmers, the economy will collapse, is no different from the argument that what's

76
00:05:12.720 --> 00:05:17.440
good for one particular piece of the economy is necessarily good for all of it. It's the

77
00:05:17.440 --> 00:05:18.440
broken window all over again.

78
00:05:18.440 --> 00:05:22.200
It's also interesting, isn't it, that so much of this, I don't know if you would call it

79
00:05:22.200 --> 00:05:26.560
Keynesian macroeconomic theorizing or whatever it is behind there, especially Keynesian I

80
00:05:26.560 --> 00:05:32.560
It was good out of the experience of the Great Depression when it was widely believed that the falling prices were causing it.

81
00:05:32.560 --> 00:05:39.560
Yes, that's absolutely right. It makes sense in a sort of common sense intuitive way.

82
00:05:39.560 --> 00:05:47.560
If I'm a business person and I can't get a high price for the products that I sell, well clearly that's bad for me.

83
00:05:47.560 --> 00:05:54.560
I'm in poor economic shape if I can't get a high price for the things that I want to exchange on the market.

84
00:05:54.560 --> 00:06:10.560
And it doesn't follow from that that it's not the fact that prices are falling for my goods and services that is the cause of some sort of general economic problems, right?

85
00:06:10.560 --> 00:06:21.560
I mean, the falling prices are a result of, in this case, falling demand for the services of plumbers or the commodities produced by farmers or the services of economics professors or whatever it might be.

86
00:06:21.560 --> 00:06:23.560
So there's a confusion of cause and effect.

87
00:06:23.560 --> 00:06:33.560
You know it's interesting too how what's behind this macroeconomic theorizing is contrary to the interest of consumers, because as consumers you always want to pay a lower price.

88
00:06:33.560 --> 00:06:40.560
Absolutely. That's right. And we're all producers and consumers in a sense. And it's just like any other, you know, a tariff to protect the steel industry, for example.

89
00:06:40.560 --> 00:06:47.560
If you look only at the steel industry, it looks like, wow, higher prices for steel, higher profits, they can pay their workers more, and so on and so forth.

90
00:06:47.560 --> 00:06:48.560
Many people made that mistake.

91
00:06:48.560 --> 00:07:18.560
Exactly, and you forget about the fact that all the users of steel are paying higher prices and that those effects essentially, it's not just that they cancel each other out and are neutral, but the effects of the protectionist policy are actually harmful in terms of distorting the allocation of resources throughout the economy, directing resources artificially toward one particular sector and away from others, which is not according to the wishes of consumers as they spend.

92
00:07:18.560 --> 00:07:33.560
The argument that Wal-Mart shouldn't come to a city, come to a community, because look what happens, you know, the local merchants, okay, so it's a version of the same kind of argument, they'll have to lower the prices, then we'll be able to make a profit, and they'll have to go out of business, then Wal-Mart takes over.

93
00:07:33.560 --> 00:07:38.400
You can remember Hazlitt's one lesson that you have to see the whole story, the whole

94
00:07:38.400 --> 00:07:41.560
part and the whole system and not just one part.

95
00:07:41.560 --> 00:07:45.880
And of course if we look at a mom and pop business that cannot compete with a more efficient,

96
00:07:45.880 --> 00:07:50.160
more effective, more productive Walmart, of course it's sad for that mom and pop industry.

97
00:07:50.160 --> 00:07:55.260
But if we stop the analysis there, we've lost the most important part, namely that everybody

98
00:07:55.260 --> 00:07:59.600
else is actually much better off with the presence of a store like Walmart.

99
00:07:59.600 --> 00:08:00.600
Right.

100
00:08:00.600 --> 00:08:01.600
Evidently so, right?

101
00:08:01.600 --> 00:08:02.600
Or else they wouldn't go.

102
00:08:02.600 --> 00:08:04.600
and Walmart would go out of business.

103
00:08:04.600 --> 00:08:08.600
It's interesting that you mention Walmart because the next chapter in the book is titled

104
00:08:08.600 --> 00:08:10.600
Saving the X Industry.

105
00:08:10.600 --> 00:08:11.600
So the themes tie together.

106
00:08:11.600 --> 00:08:16.600
Exactly, same theme where he gives lots of examples of industries, steel automobiles,

107
00:08:16.600 --> 00:08:21.600
whatever it is, that claim to have a special standing in the economy.

108
00:08:21.600 --> 00:08:25.600
They're particularly important for economic prosperity.

109
00:08:25.600 --> 00:08:29.600
If this industry were to fall, well, then the dominoes will collapse.

110
00:08:29.600 --> 00:08:31.600
Shoes, what would be real without shoes?

111
00:08:31.600 --> 00:08:35.440
and of course it's very cleverly named Saving the X Industry because you can fill in the

112
00:08:35.440 --> 00:08:41.140
blank any way you like. Today of course it's the banking industry and the home mortgage

113
00:08:41.140 --> 00:08:46.040
industry and oh my goodness if we let Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae collapse, well then something

114
00:08:46.040 --> 00:08:51.220
else will collapse and then the whole financial system will go under. If we don't do something

115
00:08:51.220 --> 00:09:00.220
to stop foreclosures, all these people who lose their homes due to foreclosure, their

116
00:09:00.220 --> 00:09:04.720
The economic condition will lead to these spillover effects to sort of the rest of the economy and so on.

117
00:09:04.720 --> 00:09:08.720
It was the same thing after 9-11. Remember the airline industry and the insurance industry.

118
00:09:08.720 --> 00:09:11.720
We won't be able to visit our families across over on the west coast.

119
00:09:11.720 --> 00:09:19.220
Same thing. And the point is, you know, every argument like that ultimately boils down to some kind of special pleading

120
00:09:19.220 --> 00:09:26.720
why the state should favor my industry as opposed to other industries at the expense of other industries in the economy.

121
00:09:26.720 --> 00:09:32.160
The reason I had a seg to that from Walmart is because I was thinking about this argument.

122
00:09:32.160 --> 00:09:37.120
People who say we need to protect homeowners, we need to protect banks, we need to protect

123
00:09:37.120 --> 00:09:42.280
particular investment firms that bet heavily on these mortgage-backed securities and made

124
00:09:42.280 --> 00:09:46.360
the wrong bet.

125
00:09:46.360 --> 00:09:50.960
Walmart is a great example of a company that to the mass of consumers that it serves is

126
00:09:50.960 --> 00:09:52.320
of course heroic.

127
00:09:52.320 --> 00:09:57.840
to most intellectuals, professors, journalists and so on, is a sort of symptom of the evil

128
00:09:57.840 --> 00:10:00.520
of capitalism driving up a little guy and so on.

129
00:10:00.520 --> 00:10:04.680
But I think, suppose Wal-Mart were to be in financial hardship, suppose Wal-Mart were

130
00:10:04.680 --> 00:10:09.280
to declare bankruptcy or be on the verge of collapse, do you think the same members of

131
00:10:09.280 --> 00:10:14.520
the intelligentsia would be crying for the government to prop up Wal-Mart, to save Wal-Mart?

132
00:10:14.520 --> 00:10:15.800
Because it really is true.

133
00:10:15.800 --> 00:10:20.400
Think of all these small rural communities that are served by Wal-Mart and little else.

134
00:10:20.400 --> 00:10:50.400
Walmart would have disappeared right away. Masses of people would be much worse off, but I bet you wouldn't see the cause for Walmart because Walmart is so politically... Oh yeah, it could be. Of course, there are extra economic arguments typically brought into these kind of saving the X industry stories with steel or automobiles. Oh, people might make a national defense argument. We don't have a healthy U.S. steel

135
00:10:50.400 --> 00:11:20.400
In the case of agriculture, people say, well, agriculture is special somehow, it's part of the fabric of American society, the Jeffersonian ideal, we need to have, this sector has to be strong, it's important to have a strong agricultural sector, even if it's not purely for economic reasons, but just for sort of moral, spiritual, economic reasons, and so forth.

136
00:11:20.400 --> 00:11:50.400
and other virtual inspirational reasons. In fact, you do see that policy much more explicit in Europe, for example, where, you know, agriculture, having beautiful little, you know, communities, it's like rural France, it's like Disneyland, right, so the people who live in Paris and the big cities want to have the beautiful countryside to escape to, and they want to see a guy with a plow or a pitchfork, you know, the yeoman farmer in his little cottage, because it's part of the scenery. It looks pretty.

137
00:11:50.400 --> 00:11:54.400
And it's a purely economic story. It's sort of a political and social story as well.

138
00:11:54.400 --> 00:11:58.400
And it's why they keep out these big, big stores, big discount stores.

139
00:11:58.400 --> 00:12:01.400
Absolutely. It would ruin the landscape.

140
00:12:01.400 --> 00:12:04.400
Meanwhile, unemployment is very high.

141
00:12:04.400 --> 00:12:08.400
I've actually heard about a case where, a place in Europe where

142
00:12:08.400 --> 00:12:13.400
there are popular biking routes and where some local governments have put up

143
00:12:13.400 --> 00:12:17.400
fake cows and horses up on the hillside

144
00:12:17.400 --> 00:12:29.400
When the bikers are going by, they look off and they see this pastoral scene with the horses and the cows and so on, but they're actually just made of cardboard and they're off in the distance on the mountaintop to make it look more romantic.

145
00:12:29.400 --> 00:12:33.400
A virginian local industry, the manufacture of cardboard cows?

146
00:12:33.400 --> 00:12:37.400
You might think they would wonder at some point why the cows never move.

147
00:12:37.400 --> 00:12:43.400
Can I ask you something about the whole question of falling prices and doing business under falling prices?

148
00:12:43.400 --> 00:12:51.400
You mentioned the computer industry earlier. What are the kinds of challenges that an industry faces under these conditions?

149
00:12:51.400 --> 00:12:58.400
Well, it's extremely difficult because you not only have prices falling, but just the fact that prices are so uncertain.

150
00:12:58.400 --> 00:13:07.400
It's much easier to run, to be in business as an undertaker, where demand and supply conditions are relatively stable

151
00:13:07.400 --> 00:13:14.400
in a rapidly changing industry like IT, where there's all sorts of technological innovations coming down the road.

152
00:13:14.400 --> 00:13:20.400
On the other hand, we have to keep in mind, when we talk about falling prices in the computer business, for example,

153
00:13:20.400 --> 00:13:27.400
it's not just the price of the PCs that Dell or Apple or HP or Lenovo sell to consumers,

154
00:13:27.400 --> 00:13:32.400
but also the prices of the intermediate products that go into the computer are falling as well.

155
00:13:32.400 --> 00:13:36.400
I'm sure the final manufacturers are paying less for the products.

156
00:13:36.400 --> 00:13:41.400
Absolutely. It would be bad for Dell if output prices were falling but input prices remained the same.

157
00:13:41.400 --> 00:13:45.400
Then Dell would be in an increased, there would be a squeeze.

158
00:13:45.400 --> 00:13:52.400
But of course the prices of memory and hard drives and the LCD screens, all of the components, those prices are falling too.

159
00:13:52.400 --> 00:13:54.400
But you have to be very careful about inventory then, don't you?

160
00:13:54.400 --> 00:13:55.400
Oh, absolutely.

161
00:13:55.400 --> 00:14:02.400
What are the factors? It's just an extreme attachment to the whole question. You have to just have very good short-term forecasts.

162
00:14:02.400 --> 00:14:08.400
No, no. I think that's exactly right. Because if the manufacturer were to stock up on a bunch of components,

163
00:14:08.400 --> 00:14:14.400
when the component prices are high and not use them until the price of the computers has fallen, it would be a difficult thing.

164
00:14:14.400 --> 00:14:20.400
But that's why we see in industries like that a move towards the sort of just-in-time manufacturing model

165
00:14:20.400 --> 00:14:50.400
And of course, Jeff, remember there are other things that businesses can do. They can try to reduce price variability through long-term contracts with suppliers and with customers. So, you know, companies like, computer companies like Dell, for example, you know, most of their business is not simply sales to computers, but sales to large companies, government agencies, universities, and so on. And they often have long-term, long-term, long-term, long-term, long-term, long-term, long-term, long-term,

166
00:14:50.400 --> 00:14:57.000
from contracts with those clients where some prices can be specified ahead of time.

167
00:14:57.000 --> 00:15:01.520
So of course, doing business in a highly volatile sector of the economy is challenging, but

168
00:15:01.520 --> 00:15:03.040
there are many opportunities there as well.

169
00:15:03.040 --> 00:15:06.200
It leads to increases in efficiency, doesn't it?

170
00:15:06.200 --> 00:15:07.200
Oh, sure.

171
00:15:07.200 --> 00:15:10.240
I mean, we as consumers, we just sit and enjoy the ride, right?

172
00:15:10.240 --> 00:15:14.640
Ultimately, it doesn't matter to me a lot whether it's Dell or Lenovo or HP or whoever

173
00:15:14.640 --> 00:15:15.640
manufactures the computer.

174
00:15:15.640 --> 00:15:19.820
I mean, my goodness, look at all the goodies I get to consume.

175
00:15:19.820 --> 00:15:23.620
They're competing with each other, dog-eat-dog, in a highly competitive world in which their

176
00:15:23.620 --> 00:15:27.420
margins are getting smaller and smaller, but hey, it's great for the consumer.

177
00:15:27.420 --> 00:15:30.860
And it must be good for them, ultimately, I mean, they could easily leave the industry,

178
00:15:30.860 --> 00:15:31.860
right?

179
00:15:31.860 --> 00:15:33.580
There's nothing forcing anybody to be a computer manufacturer.

180
00:15:33.580 --> 00:15:34.580
Exactly, that's exactly right.

181
00:15:34.580 --> 00:15:36.580
And the same is true in other industries.

182
00:15:36.580 --> 00:15:37.580
Agriculture?

183
00:15:37.580 --> 00:15:38.580
Sure.

184
00:15:38.580 --> 00:15:41.180
It would survive under the following prices.

185
00:15:41.180 --> 00:15:45.840
I mean, an additional problem with the argument for propping up Industry X is that it sort

186
00:15:45.840 --> 00:15:54.160
sort of locks us into the way the economy is at the point that that legislation comes

187
00:15:54.160 --> 00:15:56.960
into place where we may wish things to be completely different.

188
00:15:56.960 --> 00:16:02.960
It's an obvious example that I use in class all the time is imagine that when the automobile

189
00:16:02.960 --> 00:16:09.640
first came around, if we had special protection for horseshoe manufacturers, blacksmiths,

190
00:16:09.640 --> 00:16:14.000
people who scooped up after the animals in the roads and so on, sure it would be good

191
00:16:14.000 --> 00:16:18.520
Good for people who are employed in that sector, but how would you like to be riding a horse

192
00:16:18.520 --> 00:16:22.720
and driving a horse-drawn buggy today as opposed to the automobile?

193
00:16:22.720 --> 00:16:27.880
The point is with the computer business, again, think how rapidly things change.

194
00:16:27.880 --> 00:16:33.400
Who knows what kind of computing devices the market will give us in 20 years, 10 years,

195
00:16:33.400 --> 00:16:37.760
even five years, if we were to try to keep things the way they are right now to have

196
00:16:37.760 --> 00:16:41.880
some short-term stability, we might lose out in a huge way in the long term.

197
00:16:41.880 --> 00:16:46.640
So how would you speculate what would happen to the housing industry if prices just continue

198
00:16:46.640 --> 00:16:47.640
to fall?

199
00:16:47.640 --> 00:16:48.640
What happens?

200
00:16:48.640 --> 00:16:50.400
Well, I mean, look, there are a couple different possibilities.

201
00:16:50.400 --> 00:16:58.160
I mean, if people's preferences for how they live and where they live and so on were to

202
00:16:58.160 --> 00:17:02.080
remain basically unchanged, there's going to be a demand for housing, right?

203
00:17:02.080 --> 00:17:06.320
Now, on the margins, some people who own their own homes might prefer to own condominiums

204
00:17:06.320 --> 00:17:10.520
or to be renters and so on, but it isn't the case that we're all going to start living

205
00:17:10.520 --> 00:17:14.320
Living in these massive, you know, collective apartment buildings where we live in family

206
00:17:14.320 --> 00:17:16.880
units of a thousand people each or something like that.

207
00:17:16.880 --> 00:17:21.920
So presumably there's a rough distribution of people between living in single-family

208
00:17:21.920 --> 00:17:24.800
homes versus apartments and so on.

209
00:17:24.800 --> 00:17:30.400
Probably wouldn't change that much, but, you know, there might be different entrepreneurs

210
00:17:30.400 --> 00:17:35.600
building the houses, different financial institutions funding the houses, and there might be different

211
00:17:35.600 --> 00:17:37.960
people living in the houses, sure.

212
00:17:37.960 --> 00:17:42.760
I mean, it's one thing that is so frustrating about the current mortgage bailout is how

213
00:17:42.760 --> 00:17:48.680
grossly unfair it is to people of modest means who didn't buy a house because they thought

214
00:17:48.680 --> 00:17:53.960
it was more financially prudent to rent, for example, and their friends of equal means

215
00:17:53.960 --> 00:17:58.880
who sort of recklessly purchased a house that they couldn't afford and signed an adjustable

216
00:17:58.880 --> 00:18:03.800
rate mortgage they didn't really understand and are now getting a subsidy check or are

217
00:18:03.800 --> 00:18:07.600
getting some kind of protection to bail them out, it's really unfair to the person who

218
00:18:07.600 --> 00:18:19.600
And the renter who's out on the housing market would probably appreciate housing prices falling a little bit more already.

219
00:18:19.600 --> 00:18:26.600
Jeff, you could turn the question around the other way and say to the person who advocates the subsidy, the protection of the bailout,

220
00:18:26.600 --> 00:18:31.600
essentially they're arguing that market forces don't work in this particular case.

221
00:18:31.600 --> 00:18:37.800
Space. Just as we had a horse and buggy industry at one point and now we have an automobile

222
00:18:37.800 --> 00:18:43.200
industry and there was a transition as technology changed, as new resources became available,

223
00:18:43.200 --> 00:18:49.300
as consumer preferences changed, we had a rapid, sudden dynamic shift from having one

224
00:18:49.300 --> 00:18:52.840
type of industry being prominent to having a new industry being prominent. Same thing

225
00:18:52.840 --> 00:18:58.660
with computers and aerospace and lots of other industries that we see. Well, if that's a

226
00:18:58.660 --> 00:19:04.460
If it's a bad thing, if we don't think the market can adequately meet people's demands

227
00:19:04.460 --> 00:19:09.580
and can adequately adjust for changes and for technological breakthroughs, well, I think

228
00:19:09.580 --> 00:19:13.140
the burden of proof ought to be on the critic to explain why the market doesn't work in

229
00:19:13.140 --> 00:19:14.140
that case.

230
00:19:14.140 --> 00:19:15.940
Why can't the free market handle housing?

231
00:19:15.940 --> 00:19:18.580
Why can't the free market handle food?

232
00:19:18.580 --> 00:19:22.660
Why can't the free market handle automobiles or clothing or computers or anything else?

233
00:19:22.660 --> 00:19:26.560
Instead, usually the burden is put on the defender of the market to explain why this

234
00:19:26.560 --> 00:19:27.900
regulation isn't needed.

235
00:19:27.900 --> 00:19:32.140
Well, okay, fine, that's the world we're in, that's the game we have to play, and sometimes

236
00:19:32.140 --> 00:19:34.380
it's fun to turn it around and put the shoe on the other foot.

237
00:19:34.380 --> 00:19:38.660
Isn't it interesting how we're somehow only now paying the price for this policy that

238
00:19:38.660 --> 00:19:40.620
began sometime after World War II?

239
00:19:40.620 --> 00:19:41.620
Absolutely.

240
00:19:41.620 --> 00:19:42.620
Isn't it remarkable?

241
00:19:42.620 --> 00:19:46.340
And again, I think there's an extra economic aspect to this, too.

242
00:19:46.340 --> 00:19:51.820
There's this sort of romantic notion of post-war, baby boom notion of the high house and the

243
00:19:51.820 --> 00:19:56.580
white picket fence and the 2.5 kids and the car in the garage and so on, and of course

244
00:19:56.580 --> 00:20:00.100
that's a wonderful thing and there's nothing wrong with having that sort of

245
00:20:00.100 --> 00:20:04.060
vision each of us individually having one vision or another of how we want to

246
00:20:04.060 --> 00:20:09.220
live but the use of government policy to promote one particular lifestyle one

247
00:20:09.220 --> 00:20:14.300
particular you know housing choice doesn't seem to be justified and when

248
00:20:14.300 --> 00:20:18.300
Hazlitt speaks about thinking about the long-term implications of policies in

249
00:20:18.300 --> 00:20:21.900
this case the long term is something like 60 years that's absolutely right

250
00:20:21.900 --> 00:20:26.060
remarkable that's right and again we have to that's another as you do well

251
00:20:26.060 --> 00:20:29.980
to remind us that Hazlitt, when he talks about looking at the big picture, it's, you know,

252
00:20:29.980 --> 00:20:34.940
the overall economy at any one point in time, and also looking at the long-run consequences.

253
00:20:34.940 --> 00:20:41.820
Again, think of housing. You know, sort of the legislation that's just working its way

254
00:20:41.820 --> 00:20:47.660
through Congress now, right? There's massive mail-out policy, people, they're not at all

255
00:20:47.660 --> 00:20:55.700
looking at the obvious long-run consequence of encouraging irresponsible behavior. I don't

256
00:20:55.700 --> 00:21:25.700
I don't know what else to call it. Anytime you have an industry like housing, airlines, automobiles, whatever it is that is perceived to be, quote, too big to fail, there's an implicit, anytime there's an implicit government guarantee to protect you and you run into hard times, well of course that's going to affect behavior, right? The economists call that moral hazard, but in layman's terms we would call it, you know, irresponsible or inappropriate behavior. Sure, of course, if I know my downside is covered, I'm going to engage in a lot more risky behavior than I would.

257
00:21:25.700 --> 00:21:39.700
If I had to bear the consequences of my own action, and people talking about this legislation today, most of its advocates are completely ignoring these long-run consequences of encouraging malinvestment in the future, because you know the taxpayer is always going to come and pick up the tab.

258
00:21:39.700 --> 00:21:41.700
Well, we've got the solution. Read the book.

259
00:21:41.700 --> 00:21:44.700
Absolutely. Highly recommend it to all of your viewers.

260
00:21:44.700 --> 00:21:45.700
Thank you for explaining all this to us.

261
00:21:45.700 --> 00:21:47.700
My pleasure. Great to be with you, Jeff.

262
00:21:55.700 --> 00:22:05.700
Thank you for watching!