The Political Economy of Corruption: How Social Democracy Became the Engine of Decay

 

In a world of uncertainty, no one knows the correct answer to the problems we confront and no one therefore can, in effect, maximize profits.  The society that permits the maximum generation of trials will be the most likely to solve problems through time (a familiar argument of Hayek, 1960).  Adaptive efficiency, therefore, provides the incentives to encourage the development of decentralized decision-making processes that will allow societies to maximize the efforts required to explore alternative ways of solving problems—Douglass North 

In this issue

The Political Economy of Corruption: How Social Democracy Became the Engine of Decay 

Part I: How Social Democracy Sows the Seeds of Corruption

IA. Corruption Starts with the Electoral Process

IB. Public Choice Theory and Barangay Projects: Microcosm of the National Rent Machine

IC. A Caveat: Between System and Choice

ID. Dynasties, and the Patron–Client Trap, From Adaptive to Extractive Efficiency

IE. Goodhart’s Law and the Metric Illusion: Governance by the Numbers

IF. The Limited Access Orders: Elite Stability Through Controlled Competition

IG. The Financialization of Patronage

IH. Ochlocratic Democracy and the Squid Game Parable

II. The Tragic Paradox of Philippine Social Democracy

Part II: The Political Economy of Corruption

IIA. The Pandora’s Box of Public Spending

IIB. The Fiscal Mirage: Bigger Budgets, Shrinking Revenues

IIC. The Economic Undercurrent: A Slowdown Beneath the Noise

IID. The Policy Backlash: Easy Money Meets Fiscal Decay

IIE. The Mirage of Deficit-to-GDP Ratio: When Optics Replace Substance

IIF. The Mirage of Prudence: Debt, Deception, and the Ochlocratic State

Part III: Conclusion: The Final Drift: From Rent-Seeking to Crisis 

The Political Economy of Corruption: How Social Democracy Became the Engine of Decay 

From ballot to budget, the Philippine political economy drifted from progress to patronage—where fiscal populism and elite collusion sustain the illusion of democracy 

Part I: How Social Democracy Sows the Seeds of Corruption 

IA. Corruption Starts with the Electoral Process

Figure 1

Corruption begins not in backroom deals—but at the ballot box. 

How much does a candidate spend to get elected? 

While formal spending limits exist under law, field estimates and media-monitoring data reveal that actual campaign expenditures, especially at the national level, reach hundreds of millions to billions of pesos. In urban settings, Barangay officials reportedly spend upwards of Php 500,000, city councilors tens of millions, and candidates for national seats billions. (Figure 1) (see reference) 

Given their modest stipends, what motivates them and their backers to pour in such vast sums? Patriotism? Or the expectation of returns—through power, access, and extraction? 

IB. Public Choice Theory and Barangay Projects: Microcosm of the National Rent Machine 

Here, Public Choice Theory—or as the late Economist James Buchanan artfully defined it—"politics without romance," strips away the illusion of altruistic politics. (see reference) 

Elections, far from being contests of ideals, are investments in rent-seeking. Politicians rationally pursue interventions—public works, subsidies, welfare programs—that expand budgets and open opportunities for returns. 

Barangay officials, for instance, may build health centers or basketball courts to tout “accomplishments,” while pocketing funds through overpricing, commissions, or other channels within their networks. 

At the grassroots, popular barangay projects—covered courts, health stations, road repairs—serve dual purposes: visible service and invisible extraction. These projects justify budget allocations while enabling leakage through padded contracts and favored suppliers. The barangay becomes a microcosm of the national rent machine. 

That is, the larger the government’s footprint, the larger the potential rents.

Fiscal expansion is often framed as developmental necessity. In reality, it’s a mechanism for rent distribution. More projects mean more contracts, more intermediaries, more leakage—and most importantly, more VOTES.

Politicians push for interventions not to solve problems, but to create extractive opportunities and extend their tenure.

IC. A Caveat: Between System and Choice

As a caveat, while the seeds of corruption are sown in the electoral system—where incentives reward control, manipulation, and extraction through patron–client ties and dependency-building programs—individual agency still matters. Not all who enter the system succumb to its temptations.

We must resist the fallacy of division: the idea that because the system is corrupt, every actor within it must be. While many—or even most—may exploit the structure, others attempt to navigate it with integrity, often at great personal and political cost.

Moreover, corruption is not monolithic. Its degree, visibility, and method vary:

• At the barangay level, corruption may be more modest—petty overpricing, padded logistics, or informal commissions.
• At the national level, it scales. Many officials may not directly pocket funds from projects. Instead, some exploit indirect mechanisms—through layered corporate networks, proxy ownerships, and business interests within their jurisdictions.

In such cases, transparency tools like the SALN (Statement of Assets, Liabilities, and Net Worth)—while symbolically important—often remain cosmetic. They measure disclosure, not control. As such, they are easily gamed, rarely enforced, and structurally blind to the artifice of legally structured beneficial ownership. 

ID. Dynasties, and the Patron–Client Trap, From Adaptive to Extractive Efficiency

Over time, this incentive structure breeds dynastic entrenchment. Voters become dependent on welfare, contracts, and subsidies—reinforcing the very system that sustains them.

Political families consolidate control over access to state resources, while bureaucracies serve as vehicles for loyalty rather than performance.

Here, Douglass North’s concept of adaptive efficiency becomes central. In healthy societies, innovation and problem-solving emerge through decentralized experimentation—allowing multiple actors to test ideas and learn over time.

But in a captured social democracy, decision-making becomes centralized, risk-averse, and politically motivated.

Instead of adaptive efficiency, the system evolves toward extractive efficiency—maximizing rent extraction rather than problem-solving. Every “reform” becomes another opportunity for patronage. 

IE. Goodhart’s Law and the Metric Illusion: Governance by the Numbers 

When a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure. 

Goodhart’s Law explains why governance quality erodes: once developmental indicators—poverty reduction, infrastructure spending, digitalization—become political targets, they cease to measure real progress.

Politicians and bureaucracies chase metrics, not meaning. Budgets swell to create the optics of success, even as institutional capacity stagnates. 

Despite headline growth, nearly half of Filipino families still identify as poor, and hunger rates remain stubbornly high—underscoring the dissonance between GDP triumphalism and lived reality. 

The logic of numbers has replaced the logic of outcomes. For instance, infrastructure becomes a scoreboard; social amelioration, a campaign metric. 

What cannot be measured—quality of life—disappears from governance priorities. 

IF. The Limited Access Orders: Elite Stability Through Controlled Competition 

North, Wallis, and Weingast’s framework of Limited Access Orders capture this equilibrium. In such systems, elites maintain stability by controlling access to political and economic privileges. Violence is contained not through rule of law, but through negotiated rents among dominant coalitions. 

Competition—whether electoral or market—is not eliminated, but managed to prevent instability. 

In the Philippine context, the political economy resembles a cartel: quasi-competition among elites crowds out MSMEs through the BSP’s easy-money regime and the regulatory state. 

Access to capital, permits, and protection is rationed—not by merit, but by proximity to power. 

The ruling oligarchy—masquerading as democratic elites—justifies this concentration through the promise of trickle-down prosperity. Anchored on a record-high savings-investment gap, the benefits rarely diffuse. They consolidate, reinforcing privilege and power. 

Corruption, then, is not a malfunction. It is the stabilizing mechanism of the political order. Public works and welfare programs distribute rents downward to maintain consent, and upward to preserve privilege. 

IG. The Financialization of Patronage 

The BSP’s easy-money regime acts as the lubricant of this system. Cheap credit, monetized deficits, and liquidity injections sustain the illusion of prosperity. Fiscal populism flourishes, financing both vote-buying and elite projects under the banner of “inclusive growth.”

Figure 2

Yet as public debt expands (Php 17.468 trillion in August) and private credit is crowded out (Bank compliance of MSME lending share 4.59%), efficiency dissipates, innovation recedes, and systemic risk mounts. (Figure 2, upper image)

The same elites who dominate politics now dominate finance—transforming competition into collusion. What began as political capture of budgets has evolved into financial capture of capital. Bank’s net claims on central government (NCoCG) reached Php 5.445 trillion or 31% of public debt, last August. (Figure 2, lower graph)

However, elite finance no longer thrives on production, but on asset transfers anchored in debt—rent extraction by other means.

IH. Ochlocratic Democracy and the Squid Game Parable

Social democracy becomes a shell—democratic in ritual, oligarchic in practice. Elections legitimize extraction. The state grows as both employer and benefactor. Bureaucracies serve dynasties. Welfare becomes vote collateral.

Philippine politics drifts toward ochlocracy—where collective dependency replaces civic reason, and politics becomes an auction of favors.

In the popular Korean drama Squid Game, participants vote democratically on whether to continue the deadly contest. It’s a grim parody of ochlocratic democracy—where the masses “choose” within a system they cannot change, while elites watch from above, entertained by their struggle.

Philippine politics mirrors this cruel symmetry: voters play the game of elections, but the rules—and the rewards—belong to the few who own the arena.

This is the tragedy of ochlocratic democracy: people mistake participation for power, and choice for change.

II. The Tragic Paradox of Philippine Social Democracy

The paradox is tragic. Social democracy began as an ideal of empowerment, but its penchant for populist collectivism and institutional capture devolved into systemic dependency. It rewards extraction over experimentation, and loyalty over learning and entrepreneurship.

As North warned, prosperity depends not on good intentions or efficient markets, but on institutions that foster experimentation, decentralization, and accountability. When these vanish, societies lose their adaptive capacity—and settle into the stability of decay. 

That decay now finds fiscal expression. 

The controversial 2025 national budget, packed with pork-laden projects, confidential allocations, and populist welfare programs, does not represent governance—it exposes social democracy’s rent-distribution paradigm.

It is the modern stage of our own Squid Game democracy: grand spending justified by social ideals, yet orchestrated to consolidate power. The next step forward is not reform in name, but reckoning in structure.

Part II: The Political Economy of Corruption

IIA. The Pandora’s Box of Public Spending 

The opening of the public spending Pandora’s Box exposes the government’s MIDAS touch—except that what it touches doesn’t turn into gold but corruption. From overpricing to kickbacks, bribery to ghost projects, and more, allegations of improprieties have emerged not only in flood control programs but also across farm-to-market roads, election platforms, healthcare centers, the DICT’s WiFi subscription services, LTO license plates, and more yet to come. 

The iceberg unravels. 

We recently wrote: 

Authorities hope for three things: 

• That time will dull public anger
• That the probe’s outcome satisfies public appetite
• That new controversies bury the scandal

But history warns us: corruption follows a Whac-a-Mole dynamic—until it hits a tipping point.

Here is what we missed. 

In a striking inversion of democratic logic, the Philippine Navy’s recent warning—that public outrage over flood control failures may expose the nation to foreign propaganda—reveals a deeper institutional reflex: the impulse to reframe civic dissent as geopolitical vulnerability. 

The narrative is shifting: from corruption to propaganda, from domestic failure to foreign destabilization. In this alchemy of blame, scandal becomes sovereignty, and criticism becomes treason. 

The Thirty-Six Stratagems offer an apt lens: “Let the enemy’s own spy sow discord in his own camp.” When power is cornered, it conjures enemies to restore cohesion—sowing the seeds of conflict, via diversion, to preserve its own survival. 

By invoking the specter of foreign interference, the regime deflects attention from systemic rot to imagined threats, weaponizing patriotism against dissent. 

Yet one must ask: is the Philippine military also attempting to obscure internal corruption within its own agency? 

IIB. The Fiscal Mirage: Bigger Budgets, Shrinking Revenues

Figure 3

Despite the domino trail of corruption being exposed, political authorities recently passed the 2026 budget of Php 6.793 trillion—up from this year’s enacted Php 6.326 trillion. Though this marks a 7.4% increase, it rose by Php 467 billion from last year, the fourth highest ever. (Figure 3, topmost chart) 

The House of Representatives even increased its allocation by Php 10 billion. 

However, the Bureau of the Treasury quietly revised the 2025 expenditure target downward—from Php 6.326 trillion to Php 6.082 trillion—likely after realizing it had overestimated non-tax revenue projections. 

All things equal, this translates to an 11.7% increase or ₱711 billion, the largest peso expansion in Philippine fiscal history. 

While actual spending this year may fall below the enacted budget, history suggests it will still exceed the revised target. 

In any case, because corruption is often framed in binary terms—black or white, good or evil—the 2026 budget signals that the establishment expects the scandal to breeze over and the good times to continue. 

This echoes Aldous Huxley’s warning:

That men do not learn very much from the lessons of history is the most important of all the lessons of history. 

IIC. The Economic Undercurrent: A Slowdown Beneath the Noise 

While the September Php 248.1 billion deficit was reported as having narrowed from last year—due to a 7.5% decline in expenditures amid DPWH embroilment— few noted that public revenues also fell by 5.99%. 

Yes, tax revenues grew: BIR up 4.74% YoY, BoC up 5.25%. But non-tax revenues collapsed by 65.8%. 

The quarterly and year-to-date numbers reveal a broader slowdown: (Figure and Table 3, middle and lower windows) 

Q3 2025: -3.22% revenues, +4.47% tax revenues (BIR +4.87%, BoC +3.297%), non-tax -48.24%

Q3 2024: +16.95% revenues, +11.7% tax revenues (BIR +14.7%, BoC +3.61%), non-tax +61.7%

9M 2025: +2.2% revenues, +8.6% tax revenues (BIR +10.9%, BoC +1.6%), non-tax -34.7%

9M 2024: +16.04% revenues, +10.6% tax revenues (BIR +12.73%, BoC +4.6%), non-tax +62.85% 

The bottom line: where revenues are conditioned on economic performance and administrative capacity, the Q3 slowdown signals deeper economic weakening—dragging down the 9M performance. The GDP leads tax collections. 

Yet, the public barely realizes that the economy is tacitly emaciating, while the corruption scandal, which partly curtailed spending, exacerbates the decline.

Figure 4

Despite the September contraction in public spending, 9M YoY growth slipped from 11.6% in 2024 to 5.2% in 2025. Still, public spending hit an all-time high of Php 4.484 trillion. Figure 4, topmost visual) 

As a result, the 9-month deficit swelled to Php 1.117 trillion—just 1.92% or Php 21.85 billion shy of the historic Php 1.139 trillion budget gap during the pandemic recession year of 2021 —an astounding fiscal gap without a recession. (Figure 4, middle diagram) 

A massive pandemic-sized fiscal backstop without a crisis—what is the government not telling the public? 

IID. The Policy Backlash: Easy Money Meets Fiscal Decay 

One might add: all this unfolds amid the BSP’s easing cycle—marked by interest rate and RRR cuts, plus a doubling of deposit insurance. 

All told, the economy now reels from the unintended consequences of overlapping policies:

• Bank-financed asset bubbles,
• Crowding-out of private credit,
• The soft USD-peg, and
• Implicit backstops for bank balance sheets. 

Together, these reinforce malinvestments that distort both fiscal and monetary stability. 

Once again, from our September post (bold original): 

Many large firms are structurally tied to public projects, and the economy’s current momentum leans heavily on credit-fueled activity rather than organic productivity. 

Curtailing infrastructure outlays, even temporarily, risks puncturing GDP optics and exposing the private sector’s underlying weakness. 

Or if infrastructure spending is curtailed or delayed, growth slows and tax revenues fall—VAT, corporate, and income tax collections all weaken when economic activity contracts. 

This means the deficit doesn’t necessarily shrink despite spending restraint; the “fiscal hole” may, in fact, widen—imperiling fiscal stability and setting the stage for a potential fiscal shock. 

The irony is stark: efforts to contain corruption by tightening spending could deepen the very gap they aim to close.

This means that an extended softening of GDP entails a much higher deficit-to-GDP ratio—recently adjusted to 5.5% for 2025.

Crucially, few realize that further slippage in this ratio amplifies the risk of a fiscal shock—a scenario no longer theoretical but increasingly imminent.

IIE. The Mirage of Deficit-to-GDP Ratio: When Optics Replace Substance 

Yet what policymakers increasingly celebrate as "fiscal discipline" may in fact be a statistical mirage. 

The narrowing of the deficit-to-GDP ratio, often paraded as proof of resilience, conceals deeper structural decay beneath the surface. (Figure 4, lowest chart) 

For while nominal figures appear stable, the underlying engine of growth—real production, capital formation, and household income—has been hollowing out. The economy’s apparent balance is not born of strength, but of accounting illusion. 

The obsession with deficit-to-GDP optics reveals how politicians and bureaucrats chase statistical benchmarks—or what I call as ‘benchmark-ism’—over structural integrity. As the ratio falls—even while real GDP softens—authorities infer that deeper deficits carry little cost. 

Numerically, the ratio implies GDP is outperforming the deficit, either through faster nominal growth or slower deficit expansion. But this dissonance masks a dangerous illusion: debt-financed deficits now comprise a substantial and growing share of GDP. 

The economy’s rising dependency on public spending, funded by mounting debt, creates a fragile equilibrium. 

Once the extraction and redistribution mechanism weakens—manifesting as a sharp GDP decline—the ratio could spike violently. 

In all, the falling deficit-to-GDP ratio conceals the economy’s eroding capacity to absorb and repay debt. It’s not a sign of resilience, but a warning of latent fragility. 

IIF. The Mirage of Prudence: Debt, Deception, and the Ochlocratic State 

This leads us to debt. 

Media and authorities entertain us with a dramatic 71.1% plunge in BSP-approved FX borrowings in Q3 2025, projecting an image of fiscal prudence and stability. 

Officials attribute the slowdown to the “frontloading” of offshore financing earlier in the year. 

Yet BSP approved $12.28 billion in the first 9 months of 2025—up 16.1% from $10.58 billion in the same period last year. For context, BSP approved $13.8 billion for the full year 2024. 

What they fail to highlight is that the Q3 deficit—among the largest on record—pushed the 9-month shortfall to 2021 levels. This demands financing. The data suggests BSP either shifted operations through banks, reclassified borrowings via accounting gymnastics, or pivoted to peso-denominated debt.

Figure 5

What BSP’s data shows supports this view. In August, banks’ net foreign assets surged 45% year-on-year, while the BSP’s claims rose by a mere 0.7%. This divergence indicates a clear shift in FX borrowing and asset buildup from the BSP and national government toward the banking sector. (Figure 5, topmost graph) 

In effect, external leverage didn’t disappear—it was privatized, migrating into bank balance sheets where it escapes fiscal scrutiny but magnifies systemic risk. 

However, financing did slow in September, marking a second consecutive decline. This pulled 9-month financing back to 2024 levels, implying a slowdown in national debt growth—even as deficits soared past last year’s. Again, this hints at rescheduling maneuvers or creative fiscal accounting. (Figure 5, middle pane) 

We saw a similar pattern with amortization. Media and consensus proudly cited a debt financing slowdown in 1H 2025. But analyzing the June deficit, we surmised in August that this reflected one or more of the following: Scheduling choices, prepayments in 2024 and political aversion to public backlash 

Amortizations resurfaced by August, and September data reinforced the rebound. 

More strikingly, interest payments surged 15.4% in September, pushing their 9-month share of expenditures to 14.85%—the highest since 2009. (Figure 5, lowest graph)

Figure 6

Combined, amortization and interest payments in the first 9 months of 2025 already exceed 2023’s annual totals and sit just 7.5% below 2024’s all-time high— with a full quarter remaining! (Figure 6, upper chart) 

Meanwhile, foreign-denominated debt servicing fell 35% in September—its fourth straight monthly decline and the largest yet. This pulled its 9-month share of total debt servicing down from 21.04% in 2024 to 19.7% in 2025. (Figure 6, lower image) 

What’s apparent is a deliberate effort to paint macro stability by suppressing FX loan exposure. 

But in doing so, even if a fiscal shock doesn’t erupt in 2025, its shadow has: the pullback in FX loans weakens BSP’s structural defenses for its ‘soft peg’ regime. 

Finally, while we view the deficit-to-GDP ratio as a flawed metric, its relevance to consensus sentiment remains. A shock could send USD/PHP soaring, stocks plummeting, inflation spiking, rates rocketing and the economy stumbling—a chain reaction born of fiscal manipulation disguised as discipline. 

Part III: Conclusion: The Final Drift: From Rent-Seeking to Crisis 

The current flood control scandal reaffirms the lessons of the EDSA I and II Revolutions: corruption is not a binary, black-and-white event underwritten by good or bad ethics, but a symptom of a broader, deeper, and entrenched political-economic pathology called social democracy—where elections are treated as opportunities to gain both political capital and economic power through tenure-based rent-seeking. 

Thus, the systemic drift deepens toward free lunch policies—protecting the interests of a privileged few, while masking them as welfare interventions for the many. These “trickle-down” redistributions, in practice, breed dependence and disincentivize productivity. 

Intervention begets intervention, as every maladjustment and distortion calls forth another. 

As of this writing, the Philippine leadership has ordered a 50% cut in construction material prices while previously imposing both price ceilings on rice (MSRP and the “20-peso rollout”), and recently, price floors on palay farmgate prices.

Each measure deepens the drift toward centralization or socialism. 

The entropic consequences of the ochlocratic–social democratic regime are now manifesting even in embellished government data—suggesting that worsening conditions can no longer be shielded by the gaming and manipulation of marketplace and statistics (GDP, CPI, fiscal deficit, and debt among the most politically sensitive). 

The more the state intervenes to sustain the illusion of stability, the faster its underlying contradictions compound. 

The emergence of deeply seated corruption amid an ongoing economic slowdown exposes not only the late-cycle phase transition—but also Kindleberger’s drift toward the age of swindles, fraud, and defalcation. 

In the end, because both political and economic structures are ideological and self-reinforcing, reform from within is improbable. 

The deepening economic and financial imbalances will not resolve through policy, but will ventilate through a crisis—again the lessons of the post-1983 debt restructuring of EDSA I and the post-Asian Financial Crisis of EDSA II. 

____ 

References 

Based on legal caps under RA 8370 and RA 7166 and independent estimates (PCIJ, Inquirer, SunStar), actual campaign spending in competitive areas far exceeds statutory limits.

Prudent Investor Newsletters, The Philippine Flood Control Scandal: Systemic Failure and Central Bank Complicity, Substack, October 05, 2025 

Prudent Investor Newsletters, When Free Lunch Politics Meets Fiscal Reality: Lessons from the DPWH Flood Control Scandal, Substack, September 07, 2025 

Prudent Investor Newsletters, June 2025 Deficit: A Countdown to Fiscal Shock, Substack, August 03, 2025

 

How the Rent Seeking Model Failed Enron

When companies shift focus from servicing the consumers to seeking to profit from regulation, trouble lies ahead. That’s the story of Enron’s debacle according to a former employee.

Enron used to be the seventh largest corporation in the US, but filed for bankruptcy in 2001 (see timeline of Enron scandal here)

Writes Robert L Bradley Jr. at the Library of Economics and Liberty (hat tip Professor David Henderson)

Enron was a political colossus with a unique range of rent-seeking and subsidy-receiving operations. Ken Lay's announced visions for the company—to become the world's first natural-gas major, then the world's leading energy company, and, finally, the world's leading company—relied on more than free-market entrepreneurship. They were premised on employing political means to catch up with, and outdistance, far larger and more-established corporations.

A big-picture Ph.D. economist with Washington, D.C. experience regulating oil, gas, and electricity, Lay found his niche in the private sector managing federally regulated interstate gas-transmission companies, first at Florida Gas Company and then at Transco Energy Company. When Lay became CEO of Houston Natural Gas Corporation, he transformed a largely unregulated intrastate natural-gas company to a federally regulated (interstate) one in 1984-85. Then, during the next 16 years, he steadily moved the renamed Enron into rent-seeking.

The interesting part is how Enron gamed the system (bold added)

Any analysis of Enron's business history will reveal entrepreneurial error and unhealthy government dependence that left major divisions of Enron in the red or just marginally profitable. But rather than make midcourse corrections, Enron manipulated the highly prescriptive—indeed politicized—tax and accounting systems to create the illusion of profitability. Such gaming was another crucial government front for the company.

The corporate tax division acted as a profit center at Enron by meeting earnings targets. Federal investigators identified 881 offshore subsidiaries as part of Enron's tax-sheltering strategy. Enron's general tax counsel remembers reaching his gaming limit: "When the [tax-saving] number got up to $300 million [in 2001] I said... 'We have to come up with a way to get this through [real] earnings—through regular business'."

Gamed financial reporting was a second "profit center," as Enron scoured the Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) rulebook to book paper earnings where economic profit (positive cash flow from operations) was absent. "Financial engineering" also hid liabilities and inflated assets, allowing Enron to meet investor expectations and concoct peculiar narratives about its business performance.

A particularly contrived business in this regard was Enron Energy Services (EES), which purportedly split energy savings with customers via long-term outsourcing agreements. EES buttressed Enron's "green" image, but the green was not monetary. Mark-to-market accounting turned into mark-to-model, under which arbitrary assumptions about future energy prices turned losses into profits. The GAAP game was even explained in Enron's employee Risk Management Manual:

Reported earnings follow the rules and principles of accounting. The results do not always create measures consistent with underlying economics. However, corporate management's performance is generally measured by accounting income, not underlying economics. Risk management strategies are therefore directed at accounting rather than economic performance.

A third exercise in government gaming that gave Enron false profitability concerned electricity trading in California in 2000-2001. Through contrived schemes with code names like "Get Shorty" and "Ricochet," Enron exploited loopholes in the state's highly regulated system, which generated hundreds of millions of dollars of paper profits that utilities and their ratepayers could not and would not pay. One manipulation was described in an Enron memo: "The net effect of these transactions is that Enron gets paid for moving energy to relieve congestion without actually moving any energy or relieving any congestion."

The bottom line:

Although an Enron could not have been predicted, it is yet another example of the unintended consequences of interventionism in the field of energy, as well as from the politicized accounting and tax systems that governed all corporations

And then there is the ultimate consequence from the dynamics of intervention. Historically, the failures of the mixed economy have been an excuse to further politicize the economy. Richard Epstein warned: "The greatest tragedy of the Enron debacle is not likely to be the consequences of the bankruptcy, but from the erroneous institutional reforms that will take hold if its causes are not well understood." The Sarbanes-Oxley Act (2002) and the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (2002), enacted with Enron in mind, proved him right.

Read the rest here

The Anatomy of Rent Seeking: China Edition

Rent seeking is simply the manipulation of the social or political environment in order to obtain wealth through monopoly privileges (Wikipedia.org). Such actions usually comes in the form of subsidies, various political concessions and or regulations which works to prevent free market competition.

The following controversial article from Bloomberg (which reportedly has been censored in China, according to Zero Hedge) gives an example.

Bloomberg: (bold emphasis mine)

Xi Jinping, the man in line to be China’s next president, warned officials on a 2004 anti-graft conference call: “Rein in your spouses, children, relatives, friends and staff, and vow not to use power for personal gain.”

As Xi climbed the Communist Party ranks, his extended family expanded their business interests to include minerals, real estate and mobile-phone equipment, according to public documents compiled by Bloomberg.

Those interests include investments in companies with total assets of $376 million; an 18 percent indirect stake in a rare- earths company with $1.73 billion in assets; and a $20.2 million holding in a publicly traded technology company. The figures don’t account for liabilities and thus don’t reflect the family’s net worth.

No assets were traced to Xi, who turns 59 this month; his wife Peng Liyuan, 49, a famous People’s Liberation Army singer; or their daughter, the documents show. There is no indication Xi intervened to advance his relatives’ business transactions, or of any wrongdoing by Xi or his extended family.

While the investments are obscured from public view by multiple holding companies, government restrictions on access to company documents and in some cases online censorship, they are identified in thousands of pages of regulatory filings.

The trail also leads to a hillside villa overlooking the South China Sea in Hong Kong, with an estimated value of $31.5 million. The doorbell ringer dangles from its wires, and neighbors say the house has been empty for years. The family owns at least six other Hong Kong properties with a combined estimated value of $24.1 million.

Standing Committee

Xi has risen through the party over the past three decades, holding leadership positions in several provinces and joining the ruling Politburo Standing Committee in 2007. Along the way, he built a reputation for clean government.

He led an anti-graft campaign in the rich coastal province of Zhejiang, where he issued the “rein in” warning to officials in 2004, according to a People’s Daily publication. In Shanghai, he was brought in as party chief after a 3.7 billion- yuan ($582 million) scandal.

A 2009 cable from the U.S. Embassy in Beijing cited an acquaintance of Xi’s saying he wasn’t corrupt or driven by money. Xi was “repulsed by the all-encompassing commercialization of Chinese society, with its attendant nouveau riche, official corruption, loss of values, dignity, and self- respect,” the cable disclosed by Wikileaks said, citing the friend. Wikileaks publishes secret government documents online.

A U.S. government spokesman declined to comment on the document.

While inequality is an innate feature of the marketplace, it is even worse when political access and privilege drives these.

Again from the same Bloomberg article:

Increasing resentment over China’s most powerful families carving up the spoils of economic growth poses a challenge for the Communist Party. The income gap in urban China has widened more than in any other country in Asia over the past 20 years, according to the International Monetary Fund.

“The average Chinese person gets angry when he hears about deals where people make hundreds of millions, or even billions of dollars, by trading on political influence,” said Barry Naughton, professor of Chinese economy at the University of California, San Diego, who wasn’t referring to the Xi family specifically.

Read the rest here

Realize that when politicians and their followers peddle arguments based on “noble sounding” or “feel good policies” such as self sufficiency, nationalism, anti-foreign, currency manipulations-trade deficits, the need for political spending to generate employment (make work bias) and etc.., they are preaching of mercantilism and protectionism which tacitly promotes their interests and NOT of the consumers or of the “people”.

The ultimate beneficiaries of interventionists policies, like the above, are the powers that be.

Interventionism is the essence of rent-seeking politics or crony capitalism.

The rent seeking political economy is a universal phenomenon. The greater share of the political influences on the economy, the more economic opportunities are driven by rent seeking. This includes the Philippines. All you’ve got to do is to OPEN your eyes, use common sense and stop listening to sycophants and the institutional propaganda machines.

Politicians hardly practices on what they preach, as they are focused mainly on generating votes or approval ratings to preserve or expand their entitlements.

In the rent seeking political economy, there are many ways to skin a cat, something which the public can hardly see.

When media and politicians talk about “inequality”, like magicians, they simply are engaged in verbal manipulative framing of the public’s mindset. They deliberately shift the blame on market forces, what in essence are mainly caused by political inequality.

Warren Buffett’s Political Entrepreneurship Investing Paradigm

Warren Buffett has been unabashed crony for the Obama regime, to the extent that has even spited on the principles embraced by his Dad, Howard.

From an erstwhile venerable “value” investor, today Mr. Buffett’s investing formula has pronouncedly shifted into rent seeking.

Peter Schweizer of Reason reckoned in his March exposé on Warren Buffett that this folksy fellow “needed the TARP bailout more than most.”

Let’s run through the numbers. Berkshire Hathaway firms in total received $95 billion in TARP money. Berkshire, you’ll recall, held stock in Wells Fargo, Bank of America, Goldman Sachs and American Express. Not only did these companies receive TARP funds… they also dipped into the FDIC’s treasury to back their debt. Total bailout: $130 billion. TARP-enabled companies accounted for 30% of the Oracle’s publicly disclosed stock portfolio.

He’s definitely one of the top beneficiaries of the big bank bailout. And to sharpen the sting, he even got a better deal to help ailing Goldman Sachs than our own government. Buffett got a 10% preferred dividend while the Feds got all of 5%. He cleaned up with $500 million a year in dividends. Without the bailout, you can bet many of his stock holdings would have gone near-zero instead.

That’s from Addison Wiggins of the Daily Reckoning.

As I previously wrote, I think Mr. Buffett has been desperate about preserving his popularity, social privileges and political clout which seems to have mainly been latched on the sustenance of his track record, where the scale of his portfolio may have met the law of diminishing returns using his traditional "value" methods.

So instead of admitting reality, egoism has motivated him to radically shift strategies and to sacrifice principles for convenience.

Quote of the Day: Keynes the Crony

Writes Bob Wenzel,

He was 83% long going into the downturn that resulted in the 1929 crash. So how could Keynes be a great investor with such a bad performance? Because Keynes, the evil bastard, along with Bernard Baruch, talked FDR into confiscating the gold owned by all Americans. He then loaded up his portfolio with gold mining stocks and then urged FDR to prop up the price of gold.

So John Maynard Keynes practiced the interventionist theories he preached because he personally profited from them—he was a rent seeking crony after all!

Quote of the Day: Central Banking Crony Capitalism

The second point made in the classic video is that open market operations are a handout to the dealer banks. Suppose the government is going to spend an extra $100 that it does not have, and it will finance this by printing $100. In practice, it borrows $100 from "the Goldman Sachs" by issuing a bond, prints the $100, then pays "the Goldman Sachs" to get its bond back. This second method of funding the deficit is costlier to the government, but yields profits to "the Goldman Sachs." It also yields profits to the Fed, because the Fed is the agency printing the money, while the Treasury is the agency issuing the bonds. However, from a taxpayer's point of view, the Fed's profits are a wash (all of the Fed's gains come at the expense of the Treasury), and the only net impact is the income transfer to "the Goldman Sachs."

The Fed's response to the financial crisis was to massively increase the size of its balance sheet, thereby massively increasing the income transfer to private financial institutions. In addition, in order to keep this additional money from leaking to businesses or consumers in the form of loans*, the Fed introduced a policy of paying interest to banks on reserves. This increased the value of the transfer from taxpayers to financial institutions.

That’s from Professor Arnold Kling.

How Foreign Trade Restrictions Obstructs Economic Growth

In discussing the official complaint filed by the US at the World Trade Organization (WTO) against China’s rare earth export restrictions, Cato’s Dan Ikenson explains the adverse implications of trade restrictions. Mr. Ikenson writes, (bold emphasis mine)

USTR’s argument against Chinese export restrictions in the raw materials and Rare Earths cases are just as applicable to U.S. import restrictions. Removing restrictions—whether the export variety imposed by foreign governments or the import variety imposed by our own—reduces input prices, lowers domestic production costs, enables more competitive final-goods pricing and, thus, greater profits for U.S.-based producers.

Yet the U.S. government imposes its own restrictions on imports of some of the very same raw materials. It maintains antidumping duties on magnesium, silicon metal, and coke (all raw materials subject to Chinese export restrictions). In fact, over 80 percent of the nearly 350 U.S. antidumping and countervailing duty measures in place restrict imports of raw materials and industrial inputs—ingredients required by U.S. producers in their own production processes. But those companies—those producers and workers for whom Ambassador Kirk professes to be going to bat in the WTO case on rare earths (and the previous raw materials case)—don’t have a seat at the table when it comes to deciding whether to impose AD or CVD duties. (Full story here.)

Ambassador Kirk’s logic and the facts about who exactly is victimized by U.S. trade policies provide a compelling case for trade law reform, such as requiring the administering authorities to consider the economic impact of AD/CVD measures on producers in downstream industries—companies like magnesium-cast automobile parts producers, manufacturers of silicones used in solar panels, and even steel producers, who require coke for their blast furnaces.

Feel good protectionist policies does the opposite of what they intend to accomplish

Yet such policies have been imposed by vested interest groups, who uses the law (in cahoots with vote seeking politicians) to protect their economic standings at the expense of consumers and of the society. This is known as Rent Seeking.

Trade restrictions has significant direct and indirect (unseen spillover) impact to the economy.