After 21 Hours of Negotiations, Vice President JD Vance Provides an Update. It's...
President Trump, You Should Shut Down the Strait of Hormuz
What Stupid Ayatollahs
A Quick Bible Study Vol. 315: Seeking God’s Love Through His Word When...
MAGA Means MAGA
If I Want Your Opinion, I'll Give It to You
Proven Deceptions and the Duty of Distrust
Those Who Have Sacrificed for Our Freedom Deserve a Day of Gratitude, and...
God, Science, and ‘The Invisible Everywhere‘
The Case for Joy in Ecclesiastes
The Only Bailout That Ever Worked
The Cross and the Classical World: Tom Holland’s 'Dominion' and the Roads That...
USDA Fraud, Bank Scheme, and Stalking Land Iowa Farmer in Prison for 13...
Mamdani Just Took His Commie Jihad Against New Yorkers One Step Further
IBM to Pay $17M to Settle DEI Allegations
OPINION

Monstrous Moral Hybrids

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.
Monstrous Moral Hybrids

Sunday’s dinner of the Society for Development of Austrian Economics featured a keynote from George Mason University economics professor Richard Wagner. The talk brought back a lot of memories for me. Wagner was chair of my dissertation committee and it was in his graduate public finance class (back in 1992?) that I first gave any thought to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac when I wrote a paper on government sponsored enterprises. Little did I know I’d spend much of the following years working to reform Fannie and Freddie.

Advertisement

During his talk, Wagner invoked a term first used by Jane Jacobs: “monstrous moral hybrids.” I suspect Jacobs used the term to describe how Robert Moses managed to wield unaccountable power over development in New York City (Caro’s account of Moses, Power Broker, still being the single best read on city government). Ms. Jacobs describes two distinct moral syndromes,  commercial and guardian. Obviously commercial pertains to the market, while guardian can pertain to government. The monstrous moral hybrids are when we get the worst of both instincts combined in one entity. For instance, I generally view competition as a good thing; however, competition underwritten by government guarantees will almost always lead to disaster. Its competition without the discipline of failure.

I  repeatedly watched, while working in the Senate, Fannie/Freddie invoke their “private” nature in order to avoid regulation while invoking their “public” nature to gain protection and privilege. The result was little accountability from either the market or the government (our largest banks currently enjoy a smaller version). Of course, one of the primary differences in debates over financial regulation is the degree to which one believes that either the market or government provides accountability. Setting aside those debates, we should all be able to agree that companies should be either private or government. That the mixing of the two, government sponsored enterprises, is a recipe for avoiding accountability and transparency. But then I suspect that might have been the intent all along. Monstrous moral hybrids by design.

Advertisement

Mark Calabria, Cato Institute

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement