Madoff Explained
by
Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr.
by Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr.
DIGG THIS
The mystery
of Bernard Madoff will be storied a hundred years from now. As history's
biggest financial criminal, he took a cheap rip-off that you can
use at home the Ponzi scheme and turned it into a global empire
worth some $50 billion.
One ingredient
was financial intelligence. Madoff had buckets of it. Early in his
career, he was the real deal, an actual innovator. He combined this
with an amazing lack of conscience, for his scam was rooted most
fundamentally in lying and stealing. The difference between him
and all who came before was his grand scale, the grandest scale
imaginable.
There is a
saying in the world of Austrian economics about the business cycle.
The puzzle is not to explain business failures. Those are part of
the normal course of life, and the sign of a healthy economy. The
puzzle is to explain the "cluster of errors" that appears at the
beginning of a recession. How could so many have been so wrong about
so much at the same time? The business cycle is a system-wide failure,
not merely the mistaken judgment of a few.
So it is with
Madoff's scheme. The mystery isn't how one person was able to fool
a few. The scheme in which yesterday's "investors" are paid off
with the money of today's victims is known in all places and probably
all times and it always goes belly-up to the originator's complete
disgrace. It is a classic example of how moral laws are self-enforcing
in the world of economics.
The critical
difference this time is that Madoff ran his scheme during an economic
boom, a time when people's normal sense of incredulity is put on
the shelf. This is part of the grave cultural distortion introduced
by funny money. Money is the most widely demanded good in society,
and the Fed is making new quantities of it not as a reflection of
new real wealth, but purely as an administrative decree.
There
is a sense in which funny money literally drives everyone crazy,
leading to what is sometimes called the "madness of crowds." Guido
Hulsmann explains it all in his remarkably timely and revealing
new book:
The Ethics of Money Production. With artificial stimulation
from the credit machine, multitudes are willing to believe in something
that cannot possibly be true. In Madoff's case, it was that he could,
even in falling markets, earn 1520% a year without risk.
Why not? Most
everyone believed in some version of the myth. We believed that
house prices would go up and up despite the reality that houses
are physical things that deteriorate from the instant they are finished,
just like cars or computers or anything else. Why did we believe
this about houses? Again, you have to look to the fraudulent money
system to see why.
And we believed
that we could all become millionaires by putting our money in the
stocks of companies that weren't actually earning money or paying
dividends, companies whose wealth was entirely based on infusions
of cash from the stock market which in turn were based on the belief
that others would buy the stocks and so on. In other words, we believed
that something out of nothing was possible, and anyone who didn't
believe it was a chump. Its exactly what people believed during
the other great inflations of history.
What's more,
we believed that buying these stocks constituted not consumption,
but savings for the future. In fact, people routinely attacked official
savings data on grounds that they did not include what people were
"saving" in terms of their stock market accounts. In a
similar way, people were measuring our national wealth not in terms
of accumulated capital, but rather through consumption data, as
if granite kitchen counters in bigger houses were a measure of wealth
instead of the opposite: the depletion of wealth.
The left is
big on attacking the salaries of investment bankers, and they were
indeed outlandish. But these too represented not a unique problem,
but more evidence of inflationary finance. In a bubble economy,
the money chases what is most fashionable, and financial services
qualified. So the salaries represented market rates. What was wildly
distorted was the market itself.
Now let's talk
about government finance during these years. The market tried to
correct itself from 19992001, but the government wouldn't
tolerate it. Instead, it used every sign of downturn as an excuse
to keep the illusion going, creating billions and billions in new
dollars. The Fed drove interest rates lower and lower despite the
non-existence of savings available to back them up.
(Low interest
rates in a sound money system are a reflection of accumulated capital
and deferred consumption. When you see the Fed pushing them down
during a boom, it is creating a dangerous mirage.)
Did anyone
stop and wonder where the government was getting all this money
to pump up the system? Yes, the Austrian economists warned us. The
pages of Mises.org and LewRockwell.com were filled with alarms.
But it was something people wanted to ignore. We are talking about
human nature: the desire to believe in things that do not exist.
The government was happy to fuel this sense because it gave the
Fed, its connected industries, and the state more power and more
money in the short term.
Madoff's scheme
played into the belief that wealth was not something to work for,
but something to scheme for. It could be generated by playing your
cards right, hooking into the right networks, and finding the right
"investments." The people with whom he dealt had, it turns out,
some internal sense that there was something a little bit shady
about the whole operation. But they dispensed with this sense when
the fat checks arrived, and concluded that whatever was making this
perpetual motion machine operate, it did work.
But
listen: the government right now is using the same tactic to convince
you that it is saving you from the recession. The whole scheme partakes
of the same sense of denying reality that characterized Madoff's
scheme. And I'm not just talking about Social Security, which is
almost an exact replica of the Ponzi version, except that at least
Charles Ponzi didn't force people to give him money. I'm speaking
of something broader. The entire financial system that is propped
up by the Treasury and the Fed is based on the same idea: that something
out of nothing is possible.
So they will
jail Madoff. Wall Street would flog him if it could. He is disgraced
for all of history. But meanwhile, the likes of Bush, Bernanke,
Paulson, Obama, and all the rest are still riding high, even though
their scheme is far larger and more egregious.
Most of us
like to believe that we wouldn't have been tricked by Madoff. But
are you being tricked by the elites who claim that they can conjure
up a trillion dollars to stabilize our economy by clicking a few
buttons on a computer screen? Most people are. Certainly the press
seems to have bought it. Many people were outwitted by Madoff. Many
more people are today being outwitted by the government and its
central bank. And it will all end in disgrace and disaster, only
on a far, far grander scale.
December
22, 2008
Llewellyn
H. Rockwell, Jr. [send him
mail] is founder and president of the Ludwig
von Mises Institute in Auburn, Alabama, editor of LewRockwell.com,
and author of Speaking
of Liberty.
Copyright
© 2008 LewRockwell.com
Lew
Rockwell Archives
|