When Government Provides Incentives to Buy

When Government Provides Incentives to Buy

When Government Provides Incentives to Buy

I am usually dubious about the government trying to encourage certain behaviors.  Examples:

  • Buy a house
  • Go to college
  • Manufacture goods
  • Any number of special interest earmarks
  • “Saving” through IRAs and other tax-deferred vehicles

I like to think that most people know well enough to look out for themselves.  They know well enough whether they can afford and need a house.  They know whether they are college material or not.

Exclusive: Dan Loeb’s Two New Stock Picks [Q1 Letter]

Nestle Dan Loeb Daniel Loeb third point capital hedge fund manager activist investor poison pen activism Yahoo corporate governance famous investorsThird Point's Dan Loeb discusses their new positions in a letter to investor reviewed by ValueWalk. Stay tuned for more coverage. Loeb notes some new purchases as follows: Third Point’s investment in Grab is an excellent example of our ability to “lifecycle invest” by being a thought and financial partner from growth capital stages to Read More

But in both of those cases, the government provided incentives to invest in houses and college educations, and managed to push up home ownership for a time, and college students as well.

The problem is that not everyone wants to or it capable of taking on the fixed commitment of buying a home.  Not everyone is bright enough or motivated enough to go to college, and the effect of college on wisdom and job prospects is is dubious if you are not a top quartile high school student.

Better to be a welder than a Anthropology BA.  Better to be a plumber than a Sociology BA.  Better to be an electrician than a Humanities BA.  Better to rent than own a home that you can’t afford.

Governments imagine that they can shape outcomes, and in the short-run, they can.  In the long-run, the real productivity of the economy matters, and only those that can make it without government help will make it.  Whatever government policy may try to achieve, eventually the economy reverts to what would happen naturally without incentives.  There is a natural carrying capacity for most activities, and efforts to change that usually fail.

Politicians err greatly, both Democrats and Republicans, by promising that they can create a better economy.  Please, leave the economy alone, and it will do better.  Regulate the banks tightly, because their borrowing short and lending long causes most financial crises, but in general, the government errs when it encourages us via the tax code to do anything.  Eliminate preferences, simplify the tax code, reduce the ability to defer income.

We will do better with humble politicians and bureaucrats who realize that there is not much that they can do, and so the size of government reduces.

Simple government and taxes causes companies to focus on operations, not tax savings.  Same for individuals; let them focus on productivity, not tax angles.

Pushing an economy beyond its natural limits (carrying capacity) by government intervention does not work.  Limited government works, and people have to live with the fact that the government can’t solve every problem.  Woe to those where the government thinks it can do so.

By David Merkel CFA of alephblog


Previous article What is the Best Valuation Metric? 26 Years of Data Points to One
Next article While California Hurts, New York Real Estate Tech Boom Continues
David J. Merkel, CFA, FSA — 2010-present, I am working on setting up my own equity asset management shop, tentatively called Aleph Investments. It is possible that I might do a joint venture with someone else if we can do more together than separately. From 2008-2010, I was the Chief Economist and Director of Research of Finacorp Securities. I did a many things for Finacorp, mainly research and analysis on a wide variety of fixed income and equity securities, and trading strategies. Until 2007, I was a senior investment analyst at Hovde Capital, responsible for analysis and valuation of investment opportunities for the FIP funds, particularly of companies in the insurance industry. I also managed the internal profit sharing and charitable endowment monies of the firm. From 2003-2007, I was a leading commentator at the investment website RealMoney.com. Back in 2003, after several years of correspondence, James Cramer invited me to write for the site, and I wrote for RealMoney on equity and bond portfolio management, macroeconomics, derivatives, quantitative strategies, insurance issues, corporate governance, etc. My specialty is looking at the interlinkages in the markets in order to understand individual markets better. I no longer contribute to RealMoney; I scaled it back because my work duties have gotten larger, and I began this blog to develop a distinct voice with a wider distribution. After three-plus year of operation, I believe I have achieved that. Prior to joining Hovde in 2003, I managed corporate bonds for Dwight Asset Management. In 1998, I joined the Mount Washington Investment Group as the Mortgage Bond and Asset Liability manager after working with Provident Mutual, AIG and Pacific Standard Life. My background as a life actuary has given me a different perspective on investing. How do you earn money without taking undue risk? How do you convey ideas about investing while showing a proper level of uncertainty on the likelihood of success? How do the various markets fit together, telling us us a broader story than any single piece? These are the themes that I will deal with in this blog. I hold bachelor’s and master’s degrees from Johns Hopkins University. In my spare time, I take care of our eight children with my wonderful wife Ruth.

No posts to display