G'day all, Enjoyed the equilibrium bash a lot. Ta. Jim, inimitably, writes: >For my part, the so-called "retreats" (glimpses of recognition of aspects of >reality and the inability of the marginalist paradigm to seriously recognize >or deal with those aspects--e.g. imperfect and asymmetric access to >information, shaped rather than autonomously determined "revealed >preferences, etc when challenged) of marginalism are like a sypillitic rash >on which different types fo skin cream are being applied to attempt to make >the rash go away. I reckon you only got sit back and try to apply the eyes you had a dozen years ago to the stock markets of today. There is NO information on how 'the new economy' might play out. NOBODY has that information - so I guess it's symmetrical in that light. And if you use the right cream, I guess you can hide syphillus's ugly markings right up to the point it kills you dead. Like the syphillus victim, Wall St is going mad first. Anyone read that report HSBC's Stephen King wrote on the US economy stocks bonanza? I realise he tends to use comparative empirical evidence and even dares delve into history in his search for clues (very inappropriate for gauging 'new economies', I s'pose), but apparently it's a buttock-tightening lip-biter of a read. It culminates in a 12-point checklist for bubbleness: As the US economy boasts ten of 'em (a couple don't mean anything to me, but most of you'll get it: above growth trend; below trend inflation; global commodity price collapse; exchange rate rise; faster real money supply growth; financial innovation; domestic monetary aims sub-ordinated; current account deterioration; falling private sector savings; and this 'paradigm shift' conventional wisdom), King reckons we're for it in a big way. I only have the 1987 hiccough to go on from personal experience, and there I found media nervousness to be a good indicator. People forget that the stunning surprise of October 20 1987 had actually been anticipated and discussed a fair bit through preceeding months - the media not just reporting the news, but taking a visible hand in making it, perhaps? Half this weekend's *Australian Financial Review* is reading a few hundred points off (and the 'new economy' stocks are at the root of this) as so many San Andrean rumbles. And this has been going on for three months. Even Greenspan has been trying hard to achieve that 'gentle prick', which, for King, is doomed policy. Reserve banks either have no effect (as with the first couple of hikes), or they break the camel's back (that last little hike). And the Oz Reserve Bank's big banana (a rather impressive bloke called Ian McFarlane) is already saying he's worried, but can say to the institutions only that reserve banks are about all care and no responsibility - that's what happens when you eschew conscious control and throw your fate at the invisible hand, I guess ... Rid the world's economy of the US's gaping maws, and we're talking a lot of the world's new neo-liberal fans hitting the shit, eh? I just thought it had been a while since last I declared the end of the world, that's all. If it doesn't end soon, I'm gonna have to finish this #!* thesis ... Cheers, Rob.
