financial markets. :-) Or so I would lead you to believe. I blogged previously about listening to the Financial Markets course from Yale University on Academic Earth. This has got to be one of the coolest websites ever. I just wish they would expand their offerings. I know a lot of other universities have these online courses as well which are free to the public. I would like more variety.
I have to say after finishing the course I feel like watching courses is a suboptimal way to learn a subject. Which raises serious questions in my mind about the ability of learning from online courses. Though if I had the book with me and was reading it while watching the courses online, maybe I would feel differently.
The course is by Robert Shiller who is famous for, among other things, the Case-Shiller housing index. Also I learned in the course that he was trying to setup a futures market for housing prices which is very interesting. Apparently the Chicago Board of Exchange was listing it for a time about a year ago but I can no longer find it on their website. There were a bunch of interesting guest lecturers. One particularly interesting one was Carl Icahn who is the stockholder accountability guy. Also there was an interesting one by Stephen Schwarzman who is a big bonds investor. It was interesting to hear him talk about why he only invests in bonds. Mostly because (until recently thank you very much Obama) the bondholders were the first in line in bankruptcy and the company is required to return the money to the investors. This is in opposition to the stocks which are not required to pay a dividend. Essentially the stock is buying the present value of future earnings and if the stock will never pay a dividend then its value should be zero. (Makes sense to me.)
One thing that really came out of this course for me is that the markets are way more complicated than I would have originally thought they were. It was nice to have an overview of the markets and all aspects of them even if the depth was shallow. One thing I did appreciate more than I previously did was the utility of financial markets. Markets are just a way to spread risk. The discussion on life insurance was interesting and the struggle the companies had to sell life insurance for so long.
The course is about 30 hours of content and so I don't suggest you start it unless you want to finish it. It is actually a nice thing to listen to while you cook or something kinda like music but with a point. However if your time is more limited I suggest you at least listen to the guest lecturers. There is a lot of nuggets of investor wisdom that are just too interesting to pass up.
Sunday, June 28, 2009
Saturday, June 27, 2009
Like such as....
Ok, so this is old news but I found some fun videos that will give you a good laugh today. So if you don't remember Miss South Carolina:
Here is her the next day...
I have to say, the first time most people are in TV they usually don't say something intelligent, but they don't say something ridiculous. And here is Jimmy Kimmel trying to explain it...
Well here is a song about it which is awesome. :-)
Just remember that you need maps. We need maps so we know where, such as, the Iraq is. :-) For reference I can honestly say in my life I have known over 20% of people I know who couldn't locate 'The Iraq' on a world map. Anyway, if you need a pick me up have a watch. I can't believe I still find this funny after all this time.
If you would like to bone up on your skillz you can check out this link (or just play below). I made it to level 10 with a score of 367718. Those island nations are a killer...
This Traveler IQ challenge compares your geographical knowledge against the Web's Original Travelogue's other 4,201,388 travelers who have taken this challenge as of Thursday, June 25, 2009 at 01:26AM GMT. (TravelPod is a member of the TripAdvisor Media Network)
Here is her the next day...
I have to say, the first time most people are in TV they usually don't say something intelligent, but they don't say something ridiculous. And here is Jimmy Kimmel trying to explain it...
Well here is a song about it which is awesome. :-)
Just remember that you need maps. We need maps so we know where, such as, the Iraq is. :-) For reference I can honestly say in my life I have known over 20% of people I know who couldn't locate 'The Iraq' on a world map. Anyway, if you need a pick me up have a watch. I can't believe I still find this funny after all this time.
If you would like to bone up on your skillz you can check out this link (or just play below). I made it to level 10 with a score of 367718. Those island nations are a killer...
Adblock
This Traveler IQ challenge compares your geographical knowledge against the Web's Original Travelogue's other 4,201,388 travelers who have taken this challenge as of Thursday, June 25, 2009 at 01:26AM GMT. (TravelPod is a member of the TripAdvisor Media Network)
Wednesday, June 24, 2009
The Return of Depressing Economics
I just finished reading my most recent book, "The return of depression economics." This is the second book by Paul Krugman that I have read in the last month. I want to start with a couple of observations which add to my last post. Basically it can be summed up as, "Paul Krugman won the Nobel Prize for his work before he was a New York Times columnist." What I mean by that, Krugman is in general a very partisan columnist and writer. While his economic credentials are good for analysis his predictive and current affairs analysis he purports doesn't always mean he is right. If you read the stuff he writes you will see his discussion of the need to reform health care is helpful but then he goes and attacks the right for things they do while not realizing the left is just as bad. So anyway I wanted to get that out of the way first.
So this second book of his I am actually more happy with from a content perspective. However the price per word was way higher in this book as the book is very short. The book deals with the history of bank failures and depressions in a general forum. Paul Krugman has an ideology which supports government intervention (Keynesian economics) and the role of government. So from that perspective all of the writings must be taken as such. However the book does a good job of covering the 1990's bubble, the Japanese lost decade, and the Asian financial crisis all from a 50000 feet level. This is helpful because there is a lot to learn from these thing that will help us understand the events of today. Additionally he discusses the causes (and as of Oct. 2008) the current crisis.
Besides directing you to the wikipedia articles on these events I have little else to say except that this is obviously a mass market book. I in general prefer more meaty books with more complicated arguments and graphs. This means that this books will only get a $1 of present value in 1920 (about $0.10 in buying costs) as opposed to $1 in 1990 dollars. I would recommend it if you just want something interesting to read and don't want an in depth analysis, however I would imagine that most people who read my blog would prefer the opposite.
For a little bit of fun here is something I found, this person obviously thinks higher of Paul Krugman than I do but the song is pretty funny.
So this second book of his I am actually more happy with from a content perspective. However the price per word was way higher in this book as the book is very short. The book deals with the history of bank failures and depressions in a general forum. Paul Krugman has an ideology which supports government intervention (Keynesian economics) and the role of government. So from that perspective all of the writings must be taken as such. However the book does a good job of covering the 1990's bubble, the Japanese lost decade, and the Asian financial crisis all from a 50000 feet level. This is helpful because there is a lot to learn from these thing that will help us understand the events of today. Additionally he discusses the causes (and as of Oct. 2008) the current crisis.
Besides directing you to the wikipedia articles on these events I have little else to say except that this is obviously a mass market book. I in general prefer more meaty books with more complicated arguments and graphs. This means that this books will only get a $1 of present value in 1920 (about $0.10 in buying costs) as opposed to $1 in 1990 dollars. I would recommend it if you just want something interesting to read and don't want an in depth analysis, however I would imagine that most people who read my blog would prefer the opposite.
For a little bit of fun here is something I found, this person obviously thinks higher of Paul Krugman than I do but the song is pretty funny.
Monday, June 22, 2009
Book Review: Omnivore's Dilemma Part 1
The Children of the Corn
The first meal the author considers is a fast food meal which is derived almost exclusively from corn. I found this section of the book fairly repetitive with other books I have read about the meat, dairy, and agri-business industries in America. Thus I will likely say little beyond that if you don't know much about your food chain especially if you are a meat eater, then you should really read this. The author takes an interesting tact in that he follows the corn from seed in Iowa to a calf born and consequently slaughtered. Through all of this he weaves through the section the ideas and research into the foods we eat. What is surprising is that at the end of the section I felt like he wasn't condemning the meat industry and advocating a life of strict veganism. While I think the experience would have done this to me I can appreciate that their exist other people in the world who are not like that. Thus I strongly recommend this section of the book for those who would like a slightly more meat friendly approach to the 'this is what you actually eat' discussion over say 'fast food nation'. In the later book the descriptions are more likely to make you throw up than to ever eat anything again. Which while more true to the slaughtering of the animals, is untimately unhelpful to most readers.
The history of corn in this book is a little sparse honestly. I much preferred the discussion in 'Guns, Germs, and Steel' by Jard Diamond. In that book he talks about the spread of agriculture on different continents and has a long discussion of the origins of corn. Additionally the GMO movie I posted a while ago had a good discussion of current corn practices in Mexico (where corn is originally from). What is interesting additionally is the discussion of how corn and corn products are every where (likely in every food that is even a little processed). Most of this is because we (as Americans) heavily subsidize the production of corn. There is a discussion of the farmers in the book and about how they never make any money. Additionally they talk about how the corn is homogenized while the reality is that corn grown in different places is actually very different nutritionally. As for the meat part there is a slight discussion (which has fuller bloom later in the book) about the actual diet of cows in modern America.
While this section was not really anything I personally didn't already know this section is written in a way as to not be abrasive to omnivores which is likely helpful to those who still eat meat and believe that eating meat in modern society is nutritionally acceptable. The author will later tackle more down to eat ideas later. He did discuss the farmers trap and why most farmers are poor and end up bankrupt. For those that dislike the farm bills this will just add fuel to the fire.
Coming up next, Big-Business Organic.
The first meal the author considers is a fast food meal which is derived almost exclusively from corn. I found this section of the book fairly repetitive with other books I have read about the meat, dairy, and agri-business industries in America. Thus I will likely say little beyond that if you don't know much about your food chain especially if you are a meat eater, then you should really read this. The author takes an interesting tact in that he follows the corn from seed in Iowa to a calf born and consequently slaughtered. Through all of this he weaves through the section the ideas and research into the foods we eat. What is surprising is that at the end of the section I felt like he wasn't condemning the meat industry and advocating a life of strict veganism. While I think the experience would have done this to me I can appreciate that their exist other people in the world who are not like that. Thus I strongly recommend this section of the book for those who would like a slightly more meat friendly approach to the 'this is what you actually eat' discussion over say 'fast food nation'. In the later book the descriptions are more likely to make you throw up than to ever eat anything again. Which while more true to the slaughtering of the animals, is untimately unhelpful to most readers.
The history of corn in this book is a little sparse honestly. I much preferred the discussion in 'Guns, Germs, and Steel' by Jard Diamond. In that book he talks about the spread of agriculture on different continents and has a long discussion of the origins of corn. Additionally the GMO movie I posted a while ago had a good discussion of current corn practices in Mexico (where corn is originally from). What is interesting additionally is the discussion of how corn and corn products are every where (likely in every food that is even a little processed). Most of this is because we (as Americans) heavily subsidize the production of corn. There is a discussion of the farmers in the book and about how they never make any money. Additionally they talk about how the corn is homogenized while the reality is that corn grown in different places is actually very different nutritionally. As for the meat part there is a slight discussion (which has fuller bloom later in the book) about the actual diet of cows in modern America.
While this section was not really anything I personally didn't already know this section is written in a way as to not be abrasive to omnivores which is likely helpful to those who still eat meat and believe that eating meat in modern society is nutritionally acceptable. The author will later tackle more down to eat ideas later. He did discuss the farmers trap and why most farmers are poor and end up bankrupt. For those that dislike the farm bills this will just add fuel to the fire.
Coming up next, Big-Business Organic.
Sunday, June 21, 2009
Book Review: Omnivore's Dilemma Part 0
This posting is a general overview of myself in reference to my culinary life. This is part of a larger series on the book 'Onivore's Dilema'. (Parts 1 through 4 will be forth coming in the next week or two).
My early life up through college was similar to the average person. I grew up when fast food was coming into its own. I remember my first happy meal (and the Legos in the happy meal). I can remember sitting down dinners when my mother was not working and large family meals where everything was hand cooked. I also saw the transformation over the years to prepared meals and the invasion of fast food into my diet in high school. I was a busy child and teenager and was sometimes home until very late. However I did learn cooking through the Boy Scouts (though I let the skill atrophy in college). I was a omnivore and never even thought about where my food was coming from. I remember learning about the food pyramid as well (I just started reading the (Food Politics) and I never realized that potato chips were bucketed under vegetables. I wonder where a Twinkie is...).
In college I could get as much of whatever food I wanted. It was great. Towards the end of my undergraduate career I spent time in the single occupancy building and as all my friends moved off campus my eating suffered (since eating is a social activity for me). So I can remember they put in this meal card swipe area with a pizza hut. They had personal pan pizzas. I would get 2 mini pizzas (usually sausage) and a thing of breadsticks every day. Since I rarely ate lunch or breakfast this was my meal for the day. I know you are thinking, holy crap, how are you still alive? Luck maybe.
Then I went to graduate school and my eating habits stayed the exact same for a while. Weekly runs to Sam's Club to get a million frozen super-processed foods. Then something happened. I got a kitchen. I moved into my first apartment and I could cook. It didn't happen all at once but I started with cookies and muffins. Then my grandma would send recipes to me everyday. I usually cooked them (I loved my aunt's lasagna). One of my friends likes to discuss the time he had 'burger bundles'. Then one day something happened. I got bored.
All of my friends were away or forsook me for the weekend. I was pissed in a kind of weird way. I mean why should I be mad, they have lives. So I decided I was going to do something crazy. I have a very level and methodical head about me and so bridge jumping was out. So I decided I was going to be a vegetarian. Now those that know me now would say, 'So?' but at the time it was a huge thing. I was the devoted meat eater at this time. I never ate vegetables or fruits unless they were highly caramelized or deep fried. My dad had flirted with veganism previously for a couple of months due to an almost heart attack. But to me being a vegetarian was unthinkable. So I set the date for July 1st when I would no longer cook or eat meat.
Now I was vegetarian in the beginning because I was bored. Then I started reading about vegetarianism (and veganism) and learning about nutrition and then my life changed. I read 'Fast Food Nation' and watched 'Super Size Me'. All of a sudden the whole under belly of the industry was laid bare in a way I had never considered. Food is so important, why didn't I care where my food came from? It was an interesting question. Since then I have started going to farmer's markets to get food. I have toyed (with very limited success) to make bread for myself. What changed? One could argue as a graduate student I had a lot of free time to experiment (most people experiment with drugs and booze I experimented with expanding my horizons through reading and self-discovery). At least my experimentation was not illegal.
So why do I tell you all of that besides grandstanding on how great I am? I am going to review the four meals presented in this book ina series of posts and I wanted to let you know my background and where I come from. I think it is important to know the biases in the people you read. In the last year I have actually moved away from my vegetarianism some because of laziness (which I hate). However food is something that really interests me.
I give this book like 15 stars. It is a great book. Well put together with a high words per page count (which is important). Additionally there are lots of references for the extremely interested. This book also contains chapters on 4 different types of foods, fast food (the corn eaters), organic, pastoral, and hunting and gathering. So there is something in there for everyone. I appreciate that I feel that the author does not really take a side in the discussion. For instance is not 100% pro-vegan or 100% pro-eating meat. This is very helpful as you can identify with the author at all points. As I said I highly recommend this book and will be discussing my thoughts on the chapters, I wouldn't do that unless I really liked the book. :-)
My early life up through college was similar to the average person. I grew up when fast food was coming into its own. I remember my first happy meal (and the Legos in the happy meal). I can remember sitting down dinners when my mother was not working and large family meals where everything was hand cooked. I also saw the transformation over the years to prepared meals and the invasion of fast food into my diet in high school. I was a busy child and teenager and was sometimes home until very late. However I did learn cooking through the Boy Scouts (though I let the skill atrophy in college). I was a omnivore and never even thought about where my food was coming from. I remember learning about the food pyramid as well (I just started reading the (Food Politics) and I never realized that potato chips were bucketed under vegetables. I wonder where a Twinkie is...).
In college I could get as much of whatever food I wanted. It was great. Towards the end of my undergraduate career I spent time in the single occupancy building and as all my friends moved off campus my eating suffered (since eating is a social activity for me). So I can remember they put in this meal card swipe area with a pizza hut. They had personal pan pizzas. I would get 2 mini pizzas (usually sausage) and a thing of breadsticks every day. Since I rarely ate lunch or breakfast this was my meal for the day. I know you are thinking, holy crap, how are you still alive? Luck maybe.
Then I went to graduate school and my eating habits stayed the exact same for a while. Weekly runs to Sam's Club to get a million frozen super-processed foods. Then something happened. I got a kitchen. I moved into my first apartment and I could cook. It didn't happen all at once but I started with cookies and muffins. Then my grandma would send recipes to me everyday. I usually cooked them (I loved my aunt's lasagna). One of my friends likes to discuss the time he had 'burger bundles'. Then one day something happened. I got bored.
All of my friends were away or forsook me for the weekend. I was pissed in a kind of weird way. I mean why should I be mad, they have lives. So I decided I was going to do something crazy. I have a very level and methodical head about me and so bridge jumping was out. So I decided I was going to be a vegetarian. Now those that know me now would say, 'So?' but at the time it was a huge thing. I was the devoted meat eater at this time. I never ate vegetables or fruits unless they were highly caramelized or deep fried. My dad had flirted with veganism previously for a couple of months due to an almost heart attack. But to me being a vegetarian was unthinkable. So I set the date for July 1st when I would no longer cook or eat meat.
Now I was vegetarian in the beginning because I was bored. Then I started reading about vegetarianism (and veganism) and learning about nutrition and then my life changed. I read 'Fast Food Nation' and watched 'Super Size Me'. All of a sudden the whole under belly of the industry was laid bare in a way I had never considered. Food is so important, why didn't I care where my food came from? It was an interesting question. Since then I have started going to farmer's markets to get food. I have toyed (with very limited success) to make bread for myself. What changed? One could argue as a graduate student I had a lot of free time to experiment (most people experiment with drugs and booze I experimented with expanding my horizons through reading and self-discovery). At least my experimentation was not illegal.
So why do I tell you all of that besides grandstanding on how great I am? I am going to review the four meals presented in this book in
I give this book like 15 stars. It is a great book. Well put together with a high words per page count (which is important). Additionally there are lots of references for the extremely interested. This book also contains chapters on 4 different types of foods, fast food (the corn eaters), organic, pastoral, and hunting and gathering. So there is something in there for everyone. I appreciate that I feel that the author does not really take a side in the discussion. For instance is not 100% pro-vegan or 100% pro-eating meat. This is very helpful as you can identify with the author at all points. As I said I highly recommend this book and will be discussing my thoughts on the chapters, I wouldn't do that unless I really liked the book. :-)
Monday, June 15, 2009
What, Time Magazine can be wrong...
This is an 'On a lighter note' but there is an interesting article over at reason.com where they talk about all of the time covers that were really wrong in retrospect. I wonder how the reason magazine would fair under such scrutiny? Anyway here is the article. This is kinda like the daily show where the issue seems ridiculous in retrospect (or at the time... :-) ). It is an interesting read with a lot of links for more information.
Monday, June 8, 2009
Hasta la Governator
I think this is and interesting video about the current governor of California and the crisis affecting the state. (Warning: it is from Reason.com so take that as you may.) California has consistently expanded it's budget without regard to income, payment, or sensibility. (Here is an article from the economist.) Basically the state is in huge trouble and not all of it can be blamed on any one group (liberal, conservative, illegal immigrants, unemployed, elderly, etc.) they are all to blame.
There are lots of reasons for the problems however I suspect one reason that goes under reported is the moving of industry out of the state. If you look at major players who were once completely in that state, they have moved a lot of work outside the state. Who can blame them with a state income tax of 10% and a sales taxes of about 10% it wouldn't be hard to lose over 50% of your paycheck to taxes (Lets say you were trying to live a middle class lifestyle in San Diego: 8.750% sales tax + 9.3% income tax + 33% Fed taxes to buy companies + property taxes + etc.). Who would want to do business in that state? Your employees are going to be poor forever even if (maybe because) you pay them well.
What I find interesting is that even Paul Krugman (prior post) is against prop. 13. It is sensible to be against it as it is a very destructive law that hurts the state. However I would not have suspected he would have been as outspoken against it. Price controls on rents and housing are a mainstay of modern liberal thought of which he is a card carrying member. For proof look at anything the democrats say currently about propping up the housing bubble. Which actually makes the housing unaffordable but they coach it as making housing affordable by giving tax breaks and the like. (Which just raises the costs for everyone which leads to inflation and on and on.)
Basically it is very likely that major change will have to come to the state soon. The system just cannot support itself. For me, I feel the biggest problems are the ease with which the California constitution is amended and prop. 13. If those two things were removed then maybe other systemic issues could be solved. However without those changes there is little hope for real change as the state is subjected to the every whim of current popular thought.
There are lots of reasons for the problems however I suspect one reason that goes under reported is the moving of industry out of the state. If you look at major players who were once completely in that state, they have moved a lot of work outside the state. Who can blame them with a state income tax of 10% and a sales taxes of about 10% it wouldn't be hard to lose over 50% of your paycheck to taxes (Lets say you were trying to live a middle class lifestyle in San Diego: 8.750% sales tax + 9.3% income tax + 33% Fed taxes to buy companies + property taxes + etc.). Who would want to do business in that state? Your employees are going to be poor forever even if (maybe because) you pay them well.
What I find interesting is that even Paul Krugman (prior post) is against prop. 13. It is sensible to be against it as it is a very destructive law that hurts the state. However I would not have suspected he would have been as outspoken against it. Price controls on rents and housing are a mainstay of modern liberal thought of which he is a card carrying member. For proof look at anything the democrats say currently about propping up the housing bubble. Which actually makes the housing unaffordable but they coach it as making housing affordable by giving tax breaks and the like. (Which just raises the costs for everyone which leads to inflation and on and on.)
Basically it is very likely that major change will have to come to the state soon. The system just cannot support itself. For me, I feel the biggest problems are the ease with which the California constitution is amended and prop. 13. If those two things were removed then maybe other systemic issues could be solved. However without those changes there is little hope for real change as the state is subjected to the every whim of current popular thought.
Thursday, June 4, 2009
For the department of 'No duh' (with a class size of 20)
My dislike of the 'power rankings' for schools is well known. They are stupid, force people to focus on the wrong things, misrepresent the quality of education especially at large universities, and keep administrators and professors from focusing on the students.
Anyway, here is an article I found. This is from the department of 'No shit Sherlock'. In fact you can search Google for more things like this. I really think something needs to change in reference to this. Here is a link to an article closer to the source of the presentation.
Basically the higher education system in the US needs reform. Period. It is too important to get it wrong.
Anyway, here is an article I found. This is from the department of 'No shit Sherlock'. In fact you can search Google for more things like this. I really think something needs to change in reference to this. Here is a link to an article closer to the source of the presentation.
Basically the higher education system in the US needs reform. Period. It is too important to get it wrong.
Wednesday, June 3, 2009
Pass me a pint of that non-alcoholic ale, matey.
Those who know me know that I do not drink, most anything. Beer, wine, tea, coffee, etc. 'none for me, thanks.' However I still support other's right to drink. So this article on the reason is especially troublesome. I have long known for time that England is one of the most watched societies in the world however I did not really know that it was the most regulated (that award last I knew went to Switzerland where you can not pee standing up after like 10 pm).
So there are two sides of this coin, one which is the protection of other people and the other which is freedom to enjoy oneself. Now I am all for intelligent regulations which limit people's ability to infringe upon my rights but I think there is a very hard case to be made that the laws picked out in this article are reasonable. Now of course there is author's bias in here and there are likely very good regulations for bars in England. However because some laws are good it does not mean all laws are good. While I am more likely to be annoyed by people drinking (and subsequently walking home yelling) than enjoying a beer in a pub, I still this is ridiculous.
So there are two sides of this coin, one which is the protection of other people and the other which is freedom to enjoy oneself. Now I am all for intelligent regulations which limit people's ability to infringe upon my rights but I think there is a very hard case to be made that the laws picked out in this article are reasonable. Now of course there is author's bias in here and there are likely very good regulations for bars in England. However because some laws are good it does not mean all laws are good. While I am more likely to be annoyed by people drinking (and subsequently walking home yelling) than enjoying a beer in a pub, I still this is ridiculous.
Tuesday, June 2, 2009
Financial Markets for Thought
Some people know that I spend a lot of time outside of work studying and listening/watching various specials or educational presentations. It is important to keep your mind moving and learning because, let's face it, you can never know too much. Well I recently finished the Game Theory course on Academic Earth and started the Financial Markets course. The course is actually taught by Robert Shiller (yes the guy from the Case-Shiller index which is so well known these days). I actually got to ask Robert Shiller a question when I went to a presentation of his in the last year.
I won't post the 3 lectures I have watched so far since it is over 4 hours of watching and I know that if you wanted to watch them you would just follow my links. However I wanted to highlight a couple of interesting statements made by him. (All are paraphrased.)
I won't post the 3 lectures I have watched so far since it is over 4 hours of watching and I know that if you wanted to watch them you would just follow my links. However I wanted to highlight a couple of interesting statements made by him. (All are paraphrased.)
- Successful Finance people will be philanthropists because no one can ever spend a billion dollars. This is likely true. He asserted that all successful financial people will end up spending time with a charity where they donate their money.
- Financial Engineering is a great thing (as is patenting the processes) because it helps the markets work. See lower but he views all financial products as good things as they are equalizers.
- Financial Engineering is copied by everyone once it works but the time it takes to make them work is long. He had an interesting discussion in lecture 3 I believe about what happened in the 1800s to allow for financial markets. (Also about human experiences.)
- Financial Markets are similar to Communism (I know I am paraphrasing but his point was:) because they equalize things. Without financial markets and risk management the rich are the ones who were lucky enough to not have something bad happen (like lose their health insurance) and the poor were victims of fate. This is a gross generalization but I can see where he is coming from. So if you spread the risk around (financial markets and engineering) the risk is more equalized. (He also was a proponent of progressive taxes which is kinda expected given the other things.)
- If financial markets were prefect then there would be total equality and sharing of risk and everyone would be equally rich. Basically you can arrive at communism through financial markets because all risk and rewards are spread evenly. I know this is not communism but the point is what I believe he was trying to make. It is a very interesting idea that bares some thought.
Monday, June 1, 2009
Twit Post: Jay-Walking
So Jay Leno is done with the tonight show and they had a best of Jay-Walking on the show. This is hilarious you have to watch it. There is like one I did not know. (I did not know Nero played a fiddle, but oh well.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
