In the remarks made by Henry Paulson in the month of March, he admits by saying: “The current system … can allow important regulatory matters to fall through the cracks.”

As i have said earlier in “Ushering in Theonomy and Global Paternalism” about Adam Smith’s self-regulatory proposal, Henry Paulson’s Self-Regulatory proposal too is broadly no different. It is not the answer to the crisis we face today at least not for the poor nations or for that matter small businesses. Today’s Financial markets have global scope and we need international regulation, be it financial or conduct. It is the developing nations which will suffer for not Ushering-in Theonomy and Global Paternalism in time, because capital and people will always be induced to move to the shores of the developed nations without regulation. If at all there is anyone who will stand to gain from Theonomy and Global Paternalism, it is the developing nations.

Here is an interesting comment by Dave Chapman on the “Blueprint” that appeared in the Herald Tribune:

“This document looks like an attempt to muddy the waters with a bogus proposal, in the hope that they can stall meaningful regulation until the crisis goes away”

or the threat from “Kingdom Now” proponents goes away.

Tags: , , ,

This entry was posted on Wednesday, October 22nd, 2008 at 10:25 AM and is filed under Economy, Global Polity, International Justice. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

Comments are closed at this time.