|
|
|
![]() |
In the 1980s, Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher made deregulation a guiding theme of economic policy in America and Britain, and much of the world followed along. Businesses were given new freedoms. In many cases, if rules were deemed necessary, firms were invited to regulate themselves. This empowerment of the market was usually advantageous, sometimes bungled, and nearly always controversial—but for years the trend was mostly one-way.
Now a major rethink is under way. Regulatory failure in banking and “shadow banking” is widely seen—even by onetime proponents of the light touch—as a main cause of the subprime-mortgage meltdown. A Republican administration hitherto committed to deregulation is calling a halt, and in mortgage-lending is proposing new rules.
A Democratic administration, if the country gets one, will surely do more, and not just in finance. Advocates of stricter regulation worldwide will sound more credible, and champions of market forces less so. For years, what drove deregulation were good results (in most cases) and a sufficiently widespread presumption that the idea made sense. The subprime crisis has overturned both. Regulation is back.
David H. Freedman on smartphone apps and the perfected self, Mark Bowden on being in the dumb kids' class, James Parker on Glenn Beck, Isaac Chotiner on P. G. Wodehouse, and more
Browse back issues of The Atlantic that have appeared on the Web. From September 1995 to the present, the archive is essentially complete, with the exception of a few articles, the online rights to which are held exclusively by the authors.
See All Back Issues: September 1995
Join the Discussion
After you comment, click Post. If you’re not already logged in you will be asked to log in or register. blog comments powered by Disqus