« Defending FPTP | Main | Should never have put me with that woman-gate »

April 28, 2010

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451cbef69e20133ed04aa04970b

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference On limited attention:

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Giles Wilkes

Though, of course, "Ignore the markets, they have limited attention (when they don't agree with my view)" might undermine other central tenets of Tory thinking.

william

Here's another example: prior to the Dr Who advert, I might have dismissed Over the rainbow as yet another sad but irrelevant piece of Graham Norton's shit, but now I actively detest both of them. Over the Rainbow hadn't changed, but the BBC brought it to my attention.

SMU Cox MBA

Unfortunately, the "house" always wins. Instead of putting some controls on pension plans and what they're allowed to invest in, we just have video footage of a f-tard congressman who can't stop using profanity and who is angry because a company got some other companies to purchase admittedly crappy investments.

Buy low and sell high is the capitalist mantra. Why do we suddenly expect that to change? It's not like the institutional investors who bought these things didn't know exactly what they were getting. They knew what they were. They were just willing to accept the risk. Goldman Sachs was, quite frankly, very smart for seeing that the bubble was getting ready to pop and unloading the crap.

And NOWHERE have I seen anyone mention the legislation that drove banks to offer up the "No doc" loans in the first place. Both sides of the aisle are being awfully mum about that.

Jock

Ah yes, this could all certainly explain why, when in February 2007, Eddie George did explain to the Treasury Select Committee just how they deliberately stoked the loose money policy in the early naughties to try to ensure there wasn't a disastrous recession before Labour got the chance to be re-elected and that they knew they were storing up trouble for the future and that his legacy to the current Bank of England management and MPC was to "sort it out" it was never mentioned again - http://jockcoats.me/biggest_frauds_go_unpunished_and_we_are_all_victims

Alex

1. The Lib Dems were already going up in the polls BEFORE the first debate.

2. Your advertising point contradicts your debate point. Why, on adverts, do you say "We need the message rammed home every 15 minutes", but on the debate you say that one debate was all that was needed to make Clegg popular?

3. Tim Montgomerie saying that it was "unlikely to be a game changer" doesn't prove anything. He's a Conservative partisan. He would say that.

4. "What if these cognitive limits cause them to overweight information such as our relatively low debt-GDP ratio (yes - PDF) and long debt maturity, but underweight other information which might become relevant?" Other information such as ....?

chris c

"Alex

2. Your advertising point contradicts your debate point. Why, on adverts, do you say "We need the message rammed home every 15 minutes", but on the debate you say that one debate was all that was needed to make Clegg popular?"

Because there are hundreds of adverts thrown at us every day for very similar products, but only three political parties who get their own special place in the news cycles. Politics would be subject to the Von Restorff effect in this respect.

Bruce

Also Alex, on point 2 - the media have magnified the impact of the debate and kept it alive. You only have to read a newspaper, blog or listen to a news bulletin to be reminded of the Clegg effect. This has the repeat benefits of adverts.

I wonder about the extent to which the Clegg effect has been driven by not so much the debates themselves first hand but by the subsequent media coverage and analysis.

Jim PIckard

Due to the vagaries it's still reds vs blues, even with the Clegg surge: unless of course he gets a vote share past about 32, 33 per cent.....still not expecting it myself! Jim Pickard

Alex

"the media have magnified the impact of the debate and kept it alive"

Yes, but polls straight after the first debate overwhelming showed he'd won.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Why S&M?

Blog powered by Typepad