Naked Economics by Wheelan, Charles (spanish books to read .txt) 📕

it; the Indian Nation does. What that means to a commercial bank is that a mortgage that has fallen delinquent cannot be foreclosed. If a bank is denied that unpleasant but necessary option, then the lender is left without any effective collateral on its loan. A trailer, on the other hand, is different. If you fall delinquent on your payments, the company can show up one day and haul it off the reservation. But trailers, unlike conventional housing, do not support local building trades. They are assembled thousands of miles away in a factory and then transported to the reservation. That process does not provide jobs for roofers, and masons, and drywallers, and electricians—and jobs are what America’s Indian reservations need more than anything else.

Government lowers the cost of doing business in the private sector in all kinds of ways: by providing uniform rules and regulations, such as contract law; by rooting out fraud; by circulating a sound currency. Government builds and maintains infrastructure—roads, bridges, ports, and dams—that makes private commerce less costly. E-commerce may be a modern wonder, but let’s not lose sight of the fact that after you order khakis from Gap.com, they are dispatched from a distribution center in a truck barreling along an interstate. In the 1950s and 1960s, new roads, including the interstate highway system, accounted for a significant fraction of new capital created in the United States. And that investment in infrastructure is associated with large increases in productivity in industries that are vehicle-intensive.9

Effective regulation and oversight make markets more credible. Because of the diligence of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), one can buy shares in a new company listed on the NASDAQ with a reasonable degree of certainty that neither the company nor the traders on the stock exchange are engaging in fraud. In short, government is responsible for the rule of law. (Failure of the rule of law is one reason why nepotism, clans, and other family-centered behavior are so common in developing countries; in the absence of binding contractual agreements, business deals can be guaranteed only by some kind of personal relationship.) Jerry Jordan, former president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland, once mused on something that is obvious but too often taken for granted: Our sophisticated institutions, both public and private, make it possible to undertake complex transactions with total strangers. He noted:

It seems remarkable, when you think about it, that we often take substantial amounts of money to our bank and hand it over to people we have never met before. Or that securities traders can send millions of dollars to people they don’t know in countries they have never been in. Yet this occurs all the time. We trust that the infrastructure is set in place that allows us not to worry that the person at the bank who takes our money doesn’t just pocket it. Or that when we use credit cards to buy a new CD or tennis racquet over the Internet, from a business that is located in some other state or country, we are confident we will get our merchandise, and they are confident they will get paid.10

Shakespeare may have advised us to get rid of all the lawyers, but he was a playwright, not an economist. The reality is that we all complain about lawyers until we have been wronged, at which point we run out and hire the best one we can find. Government enforces the rules in a reasonably fair and efficient manner. Is it perfect? No. But rather than singing the praises of the American justice system, let me simply provide a counterexample from India. Abdul Waheed filed a lawsuit against his neighbor, a milk merchant named Mohammad Nanhe, who had built several drains at the edge of his property that emptied into Mr. Waheed’s front yard. Mr. Waheed did not like the water draining onto his property, in part because he had hoped to add a third room to his cement house and he was worried that the drains would create a seepage problem. So he sued. The case came to trial in June 2000 in Moradabad, a city near New Delhi.11

There is one major complication with this civil dispute: The case had been filed thirty-nine years earlier; Mr. Waheed was dead and so was Mr. Nanhe. (Their relatives inherited the case.) By one calculation, if no new cases were filed in India, it would still take 324 years to clear all the existing cases from the docket. These are not just civil cases. In late 1999, a seventy-five-year-old man was released from a Calcutta jail after waiting thirty-seven years to be tried on murder charges. He was released because the witnesses and investigating officer were all dead. (A judge had declared him mentally incompetent to stand trial in 1963 but the action was somehow lost.) Bear in mind that by developing world standards, India has relatively good government institutions. In Somalia, these kinds of disputes are not resolved in the courts.

All the while, government enforces antitrust laws that forbid companies from conspiring together in ways that erase the benefits of competition. Having three airlines that secretly collude when setting fares is no better than having one slovenly monopoly. The bottom line is that all these institutions form the tracks on which capitalism runs. Thomas Friedman, foreign affairs columnist for the New York Times, once made this point in a column. “Do you know how much your average Russian would give for a week of [the U.S. Department of Justice] busting Russia’s oligarchs and monopolists?” he queried.12 He pointed out that with many of the world’s economies plagued by endemic corruption, particularly in the developing world, he has found that foreigners often envy us for…hold on to your latte here…our Washington bureaucrats; “that is, our institutions, our courts, our bureaucracy, our military, and our regulatory agencies—the SEC, the Federal Reserve, the FAA, the FDA, the FBI, the EPA, the IRS, the INS, the U.S.