John Cochrane, Fama's son in law, is also doing much work to "undermine"
the EMH.  Cochrane's current academic work is entirely centered on that.
People in the left doesn't acknowledge that the EMH is to Shiller's and
Cochrane's work like, well, the 3rd volume of Das Kapital is to the 1st
volume.  But the relationship is *really* not that different.  It's about
achieving increasing levels of concretion.  Not about rejecting these
theories altogether.

Recently, Jurriaan alluded in a post to the fact that today's value theory
is (in my words, not Jurriaan's) not a "flow" (or "microeconomic") theory
of value but a "stock" (or "financial") theory of value.  I second that.
It is much more general and transparent.  The approach sidesteps most of
the old arguments by a rather simple re-framing of the problem.  The target
keeps shifting, for good.
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l

Reply via email to