Subject: | |
From: | |
Date: | Fri Mar 31 17:19:17 2006 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
================= HES POSTING =================
To suggest that "free banking" involves the absence of any regulatory
context is of course wrong. In America, the regulatory context in New York
was a well-crafted law that facilitated easy entry into banking, and hence
competition, and hence innovation. Even the Suffolk system in Massachusetts
relied on a disciplinary regulatory structure, though one that was largely
"private" (but it is still effectively state sanctioned). All markets, even
those for money and finance, are socially constructed, and in the
Anglo-American experience, that has always meant a formal articulation of
an initial legal framework to define property, contract, and tort. The
historical record of "free banking" may have argued persuasively for the
ability to devise systems that function without public central banks, but
it does not suggest that banking (or any market process beyond simple
commodity exchange) can function without socially defined and enforced
rules.
Fred C.
**********************************************************************
Prof. Fred V. Carstensen Office: (860) 486-0614
Department of Economics Dept: (860) 486-3022
341 Mansfield Road FAX: (860) 486-4463
University of Connecticut Home: (860) 242-6355
Storrs, CT 06269-1063 e-mail: [log in to unmask]
**********************************************************************
============ FOOTER TO HES POSTING ============
For information, send the message "info HES" to [log in to unmask]
|
|
|