Ok, I can see how that might not have been clear. On the whole, I would certainly lean free market and I was making the point that government involvement (and backing-up of the system) has destroyed incentives for institutions to maintain financial health. If more of the risk actually fell on the people engaging in it (rather than the promise of government clean-up being present) I think we would see less of that risky behavior that people reference when they advocate for more regulation. A lot of current regulation is simply ineffective, so I’m suggesting there should be some natural hesitation as to adding more. More rules do not appear to be necessarily progressively good (or even effective), hence the analogy. But a few, sound ones are needed. I would be a proponent of higher capital requirements, for example. I’m not recommending anarchy in the finance sector, moreso I’m recommending conservatism. Just my thoughts.

Writer of economics, psychology, and lots in between. laurennreiff@gmail.com