The European Tribune is a forum for thoughtful dialogue of European and international issues. You are invited to post comments and your own articles.
Please REGISTER to post.
The financial markets are about to be "Napsterised" - or as the purists here have it - "Bit-Torrentised" "The future is already here -- it's just not very evenly distributed" William Gibson
Boom-bust cycles are a feature of the unregulated Market.
Well, that's what I meant. Unregulated markets are to economics what battery acid is to gourmet cuisine.
Deregulation is a political choice with predictable consequences. Regulation is a different choice with different predictable consequences.
The problem isn't making sure regulation happens, it's making sure that deregulation becomes politically unthinkable - except for kooks and fringers.
Stranger things have happened in the US.
... and it had been long enough since the last time that cooking with that ingredient had spoiled an entire cohort of fine cuisine ...
... we might see the emergence of chefs that used that ingredient.
And definitely, it the wealthiest gourmets were able to eat millions of times as much food as ordinary people, the possibility of that ingredient becoming the norm would be considerably amplified. I've been accused of being a Marxist, yet while Harpo's my favourite, it's Groucho I'm always quoting. Odd, that.
But funding your own pet approach in economics turns out to be possible with only a small fraction of the wealth incomes at the top end of the wealth ladder. Funding means the ability to attract grad students means opportunities to win arguments with the current status quo when it stumbles. I've been accused of being a Marxist, yet while Harpo's my favourite, it's Groucho I'm always quoting. Odd, that.
we're formula one!
seriously, apart from being batshit loony for thinking that anyone will swallow the notion that their motor has no need of a governor, what are they so afraid of?
their more exotic investment toys being taken away?
under regulation, will every transaction require vetting by banks of lawyers before being executed?
is it the slowing down they fear?
or is it that they want to try every shiny new prototype investment vehicle they can, to con an ever less gullible public, without any government ethics agent looking over their shoulder, second guessing?
they always make it sound like regulation would be such a ball and chain, implying that if someone really understood the nuances of their 'jobs', then they'd be in on the game too, not trying to take the fun and pzazz out of it.
banking in the 60's was in no way glamorous, it has since gone through a period of what looks like coke-addled fashion, flyboy-style, similar to admen in the 60's, especially from the gecko thatcher 80's on. it's ironic that what could have been a good-ish system, if governed without so much living 'in the red', so proud of being 'free' and not controlled by the state, is brought to its knees by strings pulled from china, japan, the middle east, with contrastedly different ideologies about economics.
people don't seem to remember that what goes too far up, comes down hard and fast... 'The history of public debt is full of irony. It rarely follows our ideas of order and justice.' Thomas Piketty
by gmoke - Jul 4
by Oui - Jul 3 1 comment
by Oui - Jun 30 25 comments
by IdiotSavant - Jun 24 16 comments
by Oui - Jun 25 50 comments
by IdiotSavant - Jun 16 16 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Jun 15 14 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Jun 10 15 comments
by Oui - Jul 4
by Oui - Jul 3
by Oui - Jul 31 comment
by gmoke - Jul 2
by Oui - Jun 3025 comments
by Oui - Jun 301 comment
by Oui - Jun 296 comments
by Oui - Jun 2735 comments
by Oui - Jun 2550 comments
by IdiotSavant - Jun 2416 comments
by Oui - Jun 2310 comments
by Oui - Jun 2313 comments
by gmoke - Jun 22
by Oui - Jun 20
by Oui - Jun 1916 comments
by asdf - Jun 184 comments
by Oui - Jun 184 comments
by IdiotSavant - Jun 1616 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Jun 1514 comments