Manhattan Institute for Policy Research.
search  
 
Subscribe   Subscribe   MI on Facebook Find us on Twitter Find us on Instagram      
 
 
   
 
     
 

The New York Times

 

Bad for the Economy and Society

November 19, 2009

By Nicole Gelinas

Goldman Sachs’s new initiative — $500 million for small businesses, with some funding to come from its charitable arm — is the investment firm’s latest attempt to show the world that it’s a hero, not a villain, of the economic crisis. But Goldman is neither one. It’s a financial company with a fiduciary responsibility to shareholders.

Goldman’s job is to wring as much profit as possible out of a broken Washington regulatory system. That system allows the firm to benefit from lenders’ expectation of future government bailouts.

In this respect, Goldman’s initiative may be narrowly good for shareholders. It will help Washington see how politicians, too, can benefit by keeping the financial system unreformed (or pretend-reformed), creating bigger short-term profits. That is, Goldman makes tons of money thanks to an implicit taxpayer “too-big-to-fail” subsidy, and it will give a little bit of that money back in ways that please important political constituencies like the National Federation of Independent Business on the right and the National Urban League on the left, each of which will help the firm with its small-business undertaking.

Because it sweetens too-big-to-fail politically, the charitable initiative is bad for the economy and society.

Until we fix too-big-to-fail, small businesses are at a disadvantage created by government. All companies, including Goldman, compete for the same financial resources. When a local bank can lend its money to Goldman at no risk thanks to too-big-to-fail (by purchasing Goldman bonds), why would it lend money to a risky start-up company with no such backing?

If Goldman wanted to act selflessly, it would direct its public relations team and its smart executives to explain clearly to Washington politicians why it’s so important to end too-big-to-fail. The firm would explain further that it’s not that difficult to do so.

But that is not Goldman’s job. In fact, such an effort would be bad for the firm’s shareholders, at least in the short term. Washington has no such excuse.

Original Source: http://roomfordebate.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/11/19/is-goldmans-charitable-gesture-enough/#nicole

 

 
PRINTER FRIENDLY
 
LATEST FROM OUR SCHOLARS

5 Reasons Janet Yellen Shouldn’t Focus On Income Inequality
Diana Furchtgott-Roth, 10-20-14

Why The Comptroller Race Matters
Nicole Gelinas, 10-20-14

Obama Should Have Picked “Ebola Czar” With Public-Health Experience
Paul Howard, 10-18-14

Success Of Parent Trigger Is Unclear­—Just As Foes Want
Ben Boychuk, 10-18-14

On Obamacare's Second Birthday, Whither The HSA?
Paul Howard, 10-16-14

You Can Repeal Obamacare And Keep Kentucky's Insurance Exchange
Avik Roy, 10-15-14

Are Private Exchanges The Future Of Health Insurance?
Yevgeniy Feyman, 10-15-14

This Nobel Prize-Worthy Economist Figured Out How To Destroy Terrorism
Diana Furchtgott-Roth, 10-15-14

 
 
 

The Manhattan Institute, a 501(c)(3), is a think tank whose mission is to develop and disseminate new ideas
that foster greater economic choice and individual responsibility.

Copyright © 2014 Manhattan Institute for Policy Research, Inc. All rights reserved.

52 Vanderbilt Avenue, New York, N.Y. 10017
phone (212) 599-7000 / fax (212) 599-3494