Skip to main content

Government and Big Business

You may have noticed a theme running through some of our recent posts on noted investors John Paulson, T. Boone Pickens, and Warren Buffett.

Take a look. It turns out that every one of these posts details the point at which an investor's self interest meets with government regulation. Often to the benefit (or planned benefit) of the investor/business, and at the expense of other individuals, such as yourself.

Now, this theme was apparent in the recent posts on Boone Pickens' foray into the water pipeline business, and Paulson & Co.'s perceived efforts to influence bankruptcy and mortgage legislation for the benefit of their remaining subprime market positions.

However, this theme was not so apparent in our post on Warren Buffett and his continued support of the estate tax. At least, it was not apparent to me until I did some extra reading shortly after making that post.

It turns out that self interest is well represented in Buffett's stance on inheritance taxes, at least according to some observers who feel Buffett's position is a logical outgrowth of his company's investments in life insurance and annuities and his interest in family-owned businesses as acquisition targets for Berkshire Hathaway.

We can argue over the legitimacy of these arguments in each of these instances, but the issue is plainly hanging over them. In a practical sense, we see that businesses and investors seek to use and influence government regulations and legislation to their benefit. They just don't like to advertise that fact.

Having said that, perhaps you will be interested to read the essays, "Government and Big Business", by Christopher Mayer, and, "The Snare of Government Subsidies", by Gary North.

Both articles make some interesting points about the marriage of business and government. Here's a particularly telling excerpt from North's piece:

The idea that businessmen are strong defenders of the free enterprise system is one which is believed only by those who have never studied the history of private enterprise in the Western, industrial nations.

What businessmen are paid to worry about is profit. The problem for the survival of a market economy arises when the voters permit or encourage the expansion of government power to such an extent that private businesses can gain short-term profits through the intervention into the competitive market by state officials.

Offer the typical businessman the opportunity to escape the constant pressures of market competition, and few of them are able to withstand the temptation. In fact, they are rewarded for taking the step of calling in the civil government.

Something to consider the next time someone tries selling our "mixed economy" as a model of the "free enterprise" system.

Still, the situation is not a hopeless one. North concludes his essay by reminding businessmen to first, "avoid sniffing at the bait" of government subsidy, as a matter of principle.

If principle is not enough, he reminds them that the strings attached to government subsidies become chains over time. So, it is better for individuals (even those who are simply pragmatic, rather than principled) to understand this chain of events ahead of time.

Have a look and consider these arguments for yourself.

Popular posts from this blog

The Dot-Com Bubble in 1 Chart: InfoSpace

With all the recent talk of a new bubble in the making, thanks in part to the Yellen Fed's continued easy money stance, I thought it'd be instructive to revisit our previous stock market bubble - in one quick chart.

So here's what a real stock market bubble looks like. 

Here's what a bubble *really* looks like. InfoSpace in 1999-2001. $QQQ$
— David Shvartsman (@FinanceTrends) February 24, 2015
For those of you who are a little too young to recall it, this is a chart of InfoSpace at the height of the Nasdaq dot-com bubble in 1999-2001. This fallen angel soared to fantastic heights only to plummet back down to earth as the bubble, and InfoSpace's shady business plan, turned to rubble.

As detailed in our post, "Round trip stocks: Momentum booms and busts", InfoSpace rocketed from under $100 a share to over $1,300 a share in less than six months. 

In a pattern common to many parabolic shooting stars, the stock soon peaked and began a…

New! Finance Trends now at

Update for our readers: Finance Trends has a new URL! 

Please bookmark our new web address at

Readers sticking with RSS updates should point your feed readers to our new Finance Trends feedburner.  

Thank you to all of our loyal readers who have been with us since the early days. Exciting stuff to come in the weeks ahead!

As a quick reminder, you can subscribe to our free email list to receive the Finance Trends Newsletter. You'll receive email updates about once every 4-8 weeks (about 2-3 times per quarter). 

Stay up to date with our real-time insights and updates on Twitter.

Moneyball: How the Red Sox Win Championships

Welcome, readers. To get the first look at brand new posts (like the following piece) and to receive our exclusive email list updates, please subscribe to the Finance Trends Newsletter.

The Boston Red Sox won their fourth World Series titleof the 21st century this week.

Having won their first Series in 86 years back in 2004, the last decade-plus has marked a very strong return to form for one of baseball's oldest big league clubs. So how did they do it?

Quick background: in late 2002, team owner and hedge fund manager,John W. Henry(with his partners)bought the Boston Red Sox and its historic Fenway Park for a reported sum of $695 million.

Henry and Co. quickly set out to find their ideal General Manager (GM) to help turn around their newly acquired, ailing ship.

This brings us to one of my favorite scenes from the 2011 film, Moneyball, in which John W. Henry (played by Arliss Howard) attempts to woo Oakland A's GM Billy Beane (Brad Pitt) over to Boston with an excellent job off…