A lesson from the Mississippi Bubble
Two of the most celebrated (and denounced) figures in the history of economic analysis are Adam Smith and John Maynard Keynes. Most people believe that Smith single-handedly invented the modern science of economics and that Keynes revolutionized the field with the idea that prosperity comes from spending. Great thinkers, however, do not spring out in a vacuum of ideas. Most of the concepts and theories in Smith’s The Wealth of Nations, for example, were “borrowed” from his teachers and predecessors (notably Francis Hutcheson and Richard Cantillon).
And before Keynes, FDR, Krugman, or Obama there was John Law. When, after a reign of 72 years, the Sun King Luis XIV finally died in 1715, he left the French economy ruined by wars and burdened with heavy debt. The new government appointed Law in charge of its finances. The enthusiastic Scottish economist began by investing in infrastructure, subsidizing domestic businesses through low-interest loans, and “spreading the wealth around” in the agricultural sector. Law proceeded by replacing gold with paper credit, swapping the national debt for a promise of increased future earnings from a revived economy. It took about four years for the flood of counterfeit money to run its course and the giant Mississippi Bubble to burst. The rest is history.
The question for us is not whether the new government-subsidized bubble will burst. We’d better start preparing our exit strategies. It is not unthinkable that, when the poop hits the fan, our crafty politicians and their omniscient economic advisors would consider defaulting on our national debt or a further expansion in the supply of money. The first “solution” was tried by King Philip II in the 1500s, leading to credit stringencies and a wave of bankruptcies in the private sector. It ruined the chances of the Spanish Empire to dominate Europe and the world in the centuries to come.
Inflating the money supply to deal with an oppressive fiscal burden was the path walked by the democratically elected government of the Weimar Republic in the 1920s. Wiping out the savings of their middle class, German “liberals” paved the way for Adolf Hitler’s reign of terror. Where will our own “liberals” take us if we leave them in charge? I hope that we will not give Friedrich von Hayek an opportunity to tell us from the grave: “I warned you 65 years ago that you were going down the road to serfdom. You laughed at me. Who’s laughing now?”




Learn it! Speak it! Live it!
Bring Christmas to a child in need!








Click to Print
Include Comments











back to top15 Comments to “A lesson from the Mississippi Bubble”
I see only one way out of this future.
Republicans need to have fiscal restraint. Republicans need to be elected. Conservatives need to vote Republican.
Liberals and Democrats are wrong to keep borrowing and taxing. We can not afford their beliefs and ideas.
Report comment to moderator
History repeats itself, but no one truly listens or learns. Power is what seems to matter, and that at the expense of the masses.
Nothing new under the sun.
MARANATHA!
Report comment to moderator
sorry to do the drive-by (work, you know!), but this for Bob Buckles:
In economic terms, the decision to cut revenue without cutting expenditures has the same impact as adding programs without raising taxes.
The post raises some interesting questions, not least is whether government spending per se should be considered inflationary. That is there’s a question about the function of actual inflationary mechanisms. I’m sure Reader and I will get around to discussing this later tonite.
gotta run.
Report comment to moderator
From Wikipedia:
Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds is a history of popular folly by Scottish journalist Charles Mackay, first published in 1841. The book chronicles its subjects in three parts: “National Delusions”, “Peculiar Follies”, and “Philosophical Delusions”.
The subjects of Mackay’s debunking include economic bubbles, alchemy, crusades, witch-hunts, prophecies, fortune-telling, magnetisers (influence of imagination in curing disease), shape of hair and beard (influence of politics and religion on), murder through poisoning, haunted houses, popular follies of great cities, popular admiration of great thieves, duels, and relics. Present day writers on economics, such as Andrew Tobias and Michael Lewis, laud the three chapters on economic bubbles.
Among the bubbles or financial manias described by Mackay are the South Sea Company bubble of 1711–1720, the Mississippi Company bubble of 1719–1720, and the Dutch tulip mania of the early seventeenth century. According to Mackay, during this bubble, speculators from all walks of life bought and sold tulip bulbs and even futures contracts on them. Allegedly some tulip bulb varieties briefly became the most expensive objects in the world during 1637.
Mackay’s accounts are enlivened by colorful, comedic anecdotes, such as the Parisian hunchback who supposedly profited by renting out his hump as a writing desk during the height of the mania surrounding the Mississippi Company.
In our times, we have Republican bubbles and Democratic bubbles.
The Christian bubble seems to have lasted for at least 2,000 years. If your bubble exists in an imaginary place, I guess it never pops.
Report comment to moderator
what a pointless article you have found, random. perhaps we all exist only in mackay’s imagination after all
Report comment to moderator
Hi Harris.
“In economic terms, the decision to cut revenue without cutting expenditures has the same impact as adding programs without raising taxes.”
these are not quite identical. while it’s true that both increase the debt, the first scenario lowers the current burden and may improve efficiency of spending, the second one increases the government’s role in our lives
Report comment to moderator
According to my high school econ textbook, there were 10 depressions between 1781 and 1941 (160 years). From 1941 until now, there have been NO depressions, but about 15 recessions.
A serious question: What would it take for the Fed to use the D-word?
Soup lines (we have soup kitchens and food banks.)
Homelessness (yep)
Joblessness (10.4% and climbing)
Foreclosures (a record number)
Bankruptcies (another record number)
Report comment to moderator
Pattyjane, the textbook definition of recession takes none of those into account – it looks only at GDP
I’m not aware of a universally accepted definition of depression but it has to go on for a very long time in addition to being very deep – so have some patience
Report comment to moderator
on a more personal level:
A recession is when your neighbor loses his job. A depression is when you lose your job
Report comment to moderator
Reader — Even as I was quickly shooting out the note, I thought hmmm…. then hit send. I would agree that there is a slight preference for former scenario (cut taxes, don’t cut programs), but the impact on debt remains the same. Is there a slight efficiency? Perhaps. I tend to think this is more to be evaluated on a case-by-case pattern. For instance, in some instances the second option (spend, not tax) may be necessary when facing some immediate problem, such as disaster or armed conflict. The danger (as I’m certain you would point out) is that these short term measures take on a life of their own — just look at the so-called supplemental or emergency spending on Iraq.
But back to the article and mechanisms of inflation: I was thinking of a note that David Gross wrote the other day, how inflation comes from too much money pursuing too few goods, and how in the present economy operating under capacity, that danger was muted. Again, to borrow from above, the danger would be continuing programs once the economy starts taking off — at some point then it would be easy to slip into an inflationary mode. I could easily be missing something here: any thoughts?
Report comment to moderator
“in some instances the second option (spend, not tax) may be necessary when facing some immediate problem, such as disaster or armed conflict”
it would be nice to insert in the constitution a cap on the size of the federal government with exceptions for such emergencies
Report comment to moderator
“short term measures take on a life of their own”
right, Harris, there’s nothing more permanent than a temporary expansion of bureaucracy
Report comment to moderator
“David Gross wrote the other day, how inflation comes from too much money pursuing too few goods”
I don’t know the guy but his description seems correct. Just to point out – the cause is not “too few goods” but “too much money”
currently we have slowed down the production of goods and accelerated the production of money. it may be that the only thing between us and the Wiemar Republic is a temporary drop in velocity (how fast money circulates) due to uncertainty among consumers and investors about the direction we move
Report comment to moderator
READER (9): A recession is when your neighbor loses his job. A depression is when you lose your job.
FRANK: Reminds me of a funny T-shirt the other day:
Highly partisan — our current economic ills are the cumulative result of stupidity and evil at the hands of both political parties — but funny anyways!
Report comment to moderator
http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Investing/SuperModels/markman-new-crisis-ahead-5-things-to-watch.aspx
Good article by Marksman discussing Janjuah’s predictions.
Report comment to moderator
back to topJoin The Conversation
You need to be a registered user of WORLDonTheWeb.com to "join the conversation."
If you are not a member yet, what are you waiting for? Register / Login Now!