« Centrists - become Marxists | Main | "Good policy, badly implemented" »

October 11, 2017

Comments

Patrick Kirk

Thanks for introducing me to the idea of preference falsification. In another context, the difference between opinion polls and actual election polls might well be another example of preference falsification. People swear blind they will never vote for Jeremy Corbyn and then when forced to act, ofc they voted for him. Same with the 2015 election and people saying they would never vote Tory. It makes opinion polls very hard to believe if its an accurate model of oru behaviour.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preference_falsification

AP

Difference between Private knowledge vs Common knowledge
It’s not what the crowd believes. It’s what the crowd believes that the crowd believe.

Weinstein, Ceausescu, Markets, naked Emperors or Trumps obsession with inauguration crowds, common knowledge rules over society because all power systems rest upon legitimation.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_knowledge_(logic)

Tony M

"so investors can suppress their doubts about an asset’s value if they see others buy it"

This is true. But it is also true that many investors shared the doubts but assumed that they were smarter than everyone else and could get out before the collapse. I think from the 90's on a trader mindset took hold where the underlying attributes didn't matter - the price did. No one cared of a price was justified or sustainable as long as they could get in and out at the right time.

Rich

Jesus Christ talk about over-intellectualization for a phenomenon that occurs in the workplace everyday. Basically it only takes one other person to stand shoulder to shoulder with the lone voice to defeat the bully or the boss. Except as a gross contradiction, we have people siding with The Trump, The Jerry Jones, The Bigoted white people and The Idolatrous Soldier/Flag Worshippers, well, because the boss, because the corporation, because you're an employee.

Jim

Or more likely is that now Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama aren't in positions of power anymore, or requiring his money raising capabilities in their attempts to gain power, he's been thrown to the dogs. Funny how it all comes out now, do we really think that if Hillary was in the White House all this would be plastered over the media, given his links to her and St Barry?

Joseph Wright

@ Jim. Conspiracy theorists not welcome here.

Blissex

«introducing me to the idea of preference falsification»

Perhaps to the term "preference falsification", because the idea is quite ancient, as expressed in the ancient tale "The emperor's new clothes". Truth comes out when someone asks "But why is the emperor naked?"
Any implied references to the derivatives "markets" and 2008 entirely intentional :-).

Blissex

«Conspiracy theorists not welcome here.»

Not even Adam Smith, who had the theory that men of business when they come together always end up conspiring against the public?

Blissex

BTW, my usual point of view: look also at the *benefits* of suppression, and in particular at who benefits. In the case of Caesescu obviously himself, even if it ended quite badly for him, but consider also his family, followers and accomplices.
In the case of derivatives speculators, themselves and their accomplices.
Equilibriums of silence may be brittle, but indeed they often last many years, and during those years they make a lot of money for their beneficiaries, who then have every interest in maintaining those equilibriums of silence and making them thus less brittle.

The comments to this entry are closed.

blogs I like

Why S&M?

Blog powered by Typepad