Once upon a time, President Reagan said, "The nine most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the government, and I'm here to help."
Decades earlier, Aim?(C) C?(C)saire wrote a blistering screed against European colonialism that started with:
A civilization that proves incapable of solving the problems it creates is a decadent civilization.
A civilization that chooses to close its eyes to its most crucial problems is a stricken civilization.
A civilization that uses its principles for trickery and deceit is a dying civilization.
The authors couldn't be farther apart on the political spectrum, but if you strip both down far enough, there is room for agreement between them on a lot of topics.
That's where putting these quotes next to each other gets interesting, especially for anyone on the outside that is involved with the markets.
Two examples, supposedly related, are seeing very different treatment. The disparity reveals a fundamental hypocrisy few talk about.
First up, new asset types are sending government regulators into a flurry of overreach that is designed to solve some problems but goes much further.
Cryptocurrencies are a prime example. I'll refer back to what I wrote a couple weeks ago and highlight this quote from Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen:
We have a strong interest in ensuring that innovation does not lead to a fragmentation in international payment architectures.
Short version? The proposals do far less to help investors with hacking attempts or crypto exchange liquidity - both valid concerns - while pushing surveillance and wealth control to an extreme.
"Payment architecture" control is all about how wealth is allowed to flow between private parties... and how the government can have unlimited access to information about them with the explicit intent of regulating the flow.
And, of course, dollar-denominated transactions are already strictly controlled by U.S. government policy that any and all regulated banks or exchanges must adhere to at the risk of decertification and sanction. The government intends to bring any and all transactions anyone makes to heel.
Don't think that's just macroeconomics, like Russian oil or money laundering or any of the other headlines you see. It strikes far closer to home than you may believe.
Second, the much-delayed virtue signaling by the SEC for mom and pop investors. This is practically an inverse of the first concern - The changes are designed to solve some problems but fall far short.
The SEC is looking at the problems with commission-free trading, specifically how data is sold and capitalized upon to nickel-and-dime small investors as they enter and exit positions.