Tom Watson's Magazine, Vol. I, No. 4, June 1905Various
General
Tom Watson's Magazine, Vol. I, No. 4, June 1905
Various
United States -- Politics and government -- Periodicals
If this seem a novel proposition to the reader I will ask him not to grow
impatient, for the demonstration will grow upon him as he reflects. It
will seem novel, for if true all the laws and statutes for the regulation
of combinations are so much waste of time and paper and the hours of
legislatures and courts. In the acceptance of such explanation of the
trust problem must go the rejection of many proposed remedies, among
them the much-lauded one of “publicity.” While publicity is always to
be commended and sought for in public or semi-public matters, it does
not appear that laws enforcing publicity upon purely private industrial
combinations are founded upon equity. Nor is it likely that publicity
will assure us the possession of knowledge beyond what we already have
through the work of independent investigators. Nor is it probable that
enforced publicity will elicit impartial truth. This proposition is of a
piece with the punitive theory in the treatment of the problem, a theory
which has already led the people far astray. Men shrink instinctively
from such stringent regulation, and this is a true index of the moral
relation, if we may so speak, of this problem to legislation. But because
they will not think clearly they return to the proposition of legal
interposition.
Along with the remedy of “publicity” must go all laws, existing or
proposed, limiting capitalization or stock watering. Beyond the fact
that such laws would often force capitalization below the earning
capacity—which is no unfair basis of capitalization—it must be said
that the evils of stock watering are largely imaginary. It is true
that over-capitalization may conceal from the public the real extent
of monopoly profits, and is for this purpose, if for no other, often
resorted to. But this of itself ought to constitute no valid reason
for drastic legislation. Investors ought to be left free to take their
own risks, and speculative ventures ought to be left free to fix their
own capitalization, for otherwise perfectly legitimate, if largely
speculative, business interests may be made to suffer injuriously to
the interests of the community. But laying aside for the time all
considerations of this kind, stock watering is only a symptom—a sign that
monopolistic powers, and not legitimate business interests, are being
capitalized.[2]
High capitalization, it is sometimes said, tends to increase price. It
does offer temptation to increase of price, but nothing can put it
within the power of combinations to increase price save the forces of
monopoly. This power you do not increase or decrease by adding to the
numbers of the counters, the considerations governing which are purely
those of the stock-gambling fraternity.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account