As Eumênides e a Crise: responsabilidade, risco moral e dissuasão no sistema financeiro
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2022 |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | por |
Título da fonte: | Economic Analysis of law Review |
Texto Completo: | https://portalrevistas.ucb.br/index.php/EALR/article/view/10274 |
Resumo: | We face objections against punishing financial firms and managers for producing risks for the financial system – that it’s either paternalistic or inefficient. Against the first: financial crises are so damaging that governments and deposit insurance funds have to intervene – an implicit guarantee to creditors. This is controversial from the perspective of political morality: it implies using resources from the public for the benefit of better-off people who willingly incur risks. So, we begin by studying a possible justification for this arrangement from the ‘incentives argument’ derived from the Rawls difference principle, in the light of G. Cohen’s criticisms. Against the second: we cannot completely dispense with coercive instruments - mainly for the moral hazard entailed by the implicit guarantee. Therefore, we conclude the threat of liability must have a punitive and a preventive character, extending to non-compliance with norms on risk even before generating major economic effects. |
id |
UCB-6_a9d32857637ca81bad6357b1fc6d9dc0 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:ojs.portalrevistas.ucb.br:article/10274 |
network_acronym_str |
UCB-6 |
network_name_str |
Economic Analysis of law Review |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
As Eumênides e a Crise: responsabilidade, risco moral e dissuasão no sistema financeiroIncentivos Responsabilidade Risco Moral Justiça FinançasWe face objections against punishing financial firms and managers for producing risks for the financial system – that it’s either paternalistic or inefficient. Against the first: financial crises are so damaging that governments and deposit insurance funds have to intervene – an implicit guarantee to creditors. This is controversial from the perspective of political morality: it implies using resources from the public for the benefit of better-off people who willingly incur risks. So, we begin by studying a possible justification for this arrangement from the ‘incentives argument’ derived from the Rawls difference principle, in the light of G. Cohen’s criticisms. Against the second: we cannot completely dispense with coercive instruments - mainly for the moral hazard entailed by the implicit guarantee. Therefore, we conclude the threat of liability must have a punitive and a preventive character, extending to non-compliance with norms on risk even before generating major economic effects.Universidade Católica de Brasília2022-02-20info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionAvaliado por Pares; Peer ReviewedCritical Literature Reviewapplication/pdfhttps://portalrevistas.ucb.br/index.php/EALR/article/view/1027410.31501/ealr.v12i3.10274Economic Analysis of Law Review; Vol. 12 No. 3 (2021): Economic Analysis of Law Review; 301-319Economic Analysis of Law Review ; Vol. 12 Núm. 3 (2021): Economic Analysis of Law Review; 301-319Economic Analysis of Law Review; v. 12 n. 3 (2021): Economic Analysis of Law Review; 301-3192178-0587reponame:Economic Analysis of law Reviewinstname:Universidade Católica de Brasília (UCB)instacron:UCBporhttps://portalrevistas.ucb.br/index.php/EALR/article/view/10274/7658Copyright (c) 2022 Economic Analysis of Law Reviewinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessÁvila Peres, Ramiro2023-06-15T18:36:59Zoai:ojs.portalrevistas.ucb.br:article/10274Revistahttps://portalrevistas.ucb.br/index.php/ealrONGhttps://portalrevistas.ucb.br/index.php/EALR/oaieditor.ealr@gmail.com||sdi@ucb.br||benjaminm.tabak@gmail.com2178-05872178-0587opendoar:2023-06-15T18:36:59Economic Analysis of law Review - Universidade Católica de Brasília (UCB)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
As Eumênides e a Crise: responsabilidade, risco moral e dissuasão no sistema financeiro |
title |
As Eumênides e a Crise: responsabilidade, risco moral e dissuasão no sistema financeiro |
spellingShingle |
As Eumênides e a Crise: responsabilidade, risco moral e dissuasão no sistema financeiro Ávila Peres, Ramiro Incentivos Responsabilidade Risco Moral Justiça Finanças |
title_short |
As Eumênides e a Crise: responsabilidade, risco moral e dissuasão no sistema financeiro |
title_full |
As Eumênides e a Crise: responsabilidade, risco moral e dissuasão no sistema financeiro |
title_fullStr |
As Eumênides e a Crise: responsabilidade, risco moral e dissuasão no sistema financeiro |
title_full_unstemmed |
As Eumênides e a Crise: responsabilidade, risco moral e dissuasão no sistema financeiro |
title_sort |
As Eumênides e a Crise: responsabilidade, risco moral e dissuasão no sistema financeiro |
author |
Ávila Peres, Ramiro |
author_facet |
Ávila Peres, Ramiro |
author_role |
author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Ávila Peres, Ramiro |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Incentivos Responsabilidade Risco Moral Justiça Finanças |
topic |
Incentivos Responsabilidade Risco Moral Justiça Finanças |
description |
We face objections against punishing financial firms and managers for producing risks for the financial system – that it’s either paternalistic or inefficient. Against the first: financial crises are so damaging that governments and deposit insurance funds have to intervene – an implicit guarantee to creditors. This is controversial from the perspective of political morality: it implies using resources from the public for the benefit of better-off people who willingly incur risks. So, we begin by studying a possible justification for this arrangement from the ‘incentives argument’ derived from the Rawls difference principle, in the light of G. Cohen’s criticisms. Against the second: we cannot completely dispense with coercive instruments - mainly for the moral hazard entailed by the implicit guarantee. Therefore, we conclude the threat of liability must have a punitive and a preventive character, extending to non-compliance with norms on risk even before generating major economic effects. |
publishDate |
2022 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2022-02-20 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion Avaliado por Pares; Peer Reviewed Critical Literature Review |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://portalrevistas.ucb.br/index.php/EALR/article/view/10274 10.31501/ealr.v12i3.10274 |
url |
https://portalrevistas.ucb.br/index.php/EALR/article/view/10274 |
identifier_str_mv |
10.31501/ealr.v12i3.10274 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
por |
language |
por |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
https://portalrevistas.ucb.br/index.php/EALR/article/view/10274/7658 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2022 Economic Analysis of Law Review info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2022 Economic Analysis of Law Review |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidade Católica de Brasília |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidade Católica de Brasília |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Economic Analysis of Law Review; Vol. 12 No. 3 (2021): Economic Analysis of Law Review; 301-319 Economic Analysis of Law Review ; Vol. 12 Núm. 3 (2021): Economic Analysis of Law Review; 301-319 Economic Analysis of Law Review; v. 12 n. 3 (2021): Economic Analysis of Law Review; 301-319 2178-0587 reponame:Economic Analysis of law Review instname:Universidade Católica de Brasília (UCB) instacron:UCB |
instname_str |
Universidade Católica de Brasília (UCB) |
instacron_str |
UCB |
institution |
UCB |
reponame_str |
Economic Analysis of law Review |
collection |
Economic Analysis of law Review |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Economic Analysis of law Review - Universidade Católica de Brasília (UCB) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
editor.ealr@gmail.com||sdi@ucb.br||benjaminm.tabak@gmail.com |
_version_ |
1798675420685533184 |