|
The interesting thing is that speculators are an essential part of the functioning of financial markets. A futures contract is essentially an apportionment of risk. When a farmer and a speculator write a futures contract, the farmer is selling the risk that the price of corn will be lower than is profitable, in exchange for a guaranteed profit that is likely to be less than the true expected value of the corn harvest (hence, "fees and expensive derivative products"). If there's a bumper crop of corn and the true market price is much lower than expected, then the person who is wiped out is the speculator, not the farmer. It's much better for society for commodity traders who invested in corn futures to go bankrupt than for all of its farmers to go bankrupt, because farmers have specialized knowledge that is necessary for the future production of corn. In exchange for taking on this risk, they get a profit, which they may choose to invest elsewhere to hedge the risk. It's basically the inverse of insurance. The farmer may also choose to take out an insurance contract that says "In the event of bad weather that causes my harvest to fail, the insurance company will pay me $X, enough for me to make good my futures contract with the commodity trader and have enough profit that I stay in business next year." As a result, he is completely insulated from events outside of his control, and can focus on what he does best, farming. Now, I probably agree that there are (or were, pre-2008) too many people in the financial markets, and that we got some chaotic behavior that had to be bailed out by the taxpayers. I also personally chose not to go into the industry - I started my career in financial software, but decided I liked making things more than underwriting other people making things. But it's worth understanding the financial industry's social purpose before condemning it. |