But wait, some of the comments and diaries on ET seem to root for the same outcome,,,,don't they?
We do indeed, sometimes, to finally have a chance to show the frauds the neolibs are. Of course, then sanity comes back, as we know that (i) the crash will hurt the poor first and (ii) the neolibs will find a way to blame it on lack of "reform".
As long as we have a media that cares little about facts, and cares so much about "process" and perceptions, little that can be done. In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes
But besides facts and perception of facts, we have numbers. They keep "surprising" WSJ analysts a few months in a row.
Keynes called it a "convention":
In practice we have tacitly agreed, as a rule, to fall back on what is, in truth, a convention. The essence of this convention--though it does not, of course, work out quite so simply--lies in assuming that the existing state of affairs will continue indefinitely, except in so far as we have specific reasons to expect a change. ... Nevertheless the above conventional method of calculation will be compatible with a considerable measure of continuity and stability in our affairs, so long as we can rely on the maintenance of the convention. For if there exist organised investments markets and if we can rely on tthe maintenance of the convention, an investor can legitimately engourage himself with the idea that the only risk he runs is that of a genuine change in the news over the near future, as to the likelihood of which he can attempt to form his own judgement, and which is unlikely to be very large. ... Thus investment becomes reasonably 'safe' for the individual investor over short periods, and hence over a succession of short periods however many, if he can fairly rely on there being no breakdown of the convention and on his therefore having an oportunity to revise his judgement and change his investment, before there has een time for much to happen. ... ... But it is not surprisingthat a convention, in an absolute view of things so arbitrary, should have its weak points. ...
Nevertheless the above conventional method of calculation will be compatible with a considerable measure of continuity and stability in our affairs, so long as we can rely on the maintenance of the convention.
For if there exist organised investments markets and if we can rely on tthe maintenance of the convention, an investor can legitimately engourage himself with the idea that the only risk he runs is that of a genuine change in the news over the near future, as to the likelihood of which he can attempt to form his own judgement, and which is unlikely to be very large. ... Thus investment becomes reasonably 'safe' for the individual investor over short periods, and hence over a succession of short periods however many, if he can fairly rely on there being no breakdown of the convention and on his therefore having an oportunity to revise his judgement and change his investment, before there has een time for much to happen. ...
... But it is not surprisingthat a convention, in an absolute view of things so arbitrary, should have its weak points. ...
But I'm afraid that, by and large, cultural norms (like scientific paradigms) only change when the old people die off. "It's the statue, man, The Statue."
And the "napsterisation", due to internet "peer to peer" connectivity, means emerging phenomena such as Voice over IP catch on a lot quicker.
Are generations becoming more adaptable? "Any economic unit can emit money. The serious problem is to get it accepted" Hyman Minsky
What happens is that technologies are starting to go obsolete and disappear from the market over a decade or two, so people are being forced to adopt new technologies more than they used to. "It's the statue, man, The Statue."
