finance

shaky foundation of economics

still on the issue of the cancelled singularity

a dinner chat between a physicist and an economist on the physical limits to infinite growth , the infinite growth postulated by economists in their models.

I got there from this tweet on ergodicity economics https://twitter.com/DrCirillo/status/1201782869712146432

and gave another read to Ole Peter’s Nature paper which sinks deeper in my reasoning on economics.

It all started because some economist on Facebook complained that some other economist had opposing views, but this is not the point, he started with an “in science, no economic theory …” science and economics so close in one sentence got me thinking about epistemics

a comprehensive article on “is economics a science?” lots of quotes so probably it isn’t you would not need so many instead

EDIT: I found today Noah Smith arguing that economic policy today seems limited to “Give poeple money” without any attempt to ground the directive in theory, unlike what happened in 2008 crisis where economists resorted to theory and in course they wrecked the economy even more. So the state of economics, macroeconomics I mean, is dismal https://noahpinion.substack.com/p/the-new-macro-give-people-money

UPDATE june2021:I had not realized that Noah Smith had a rebuttal of the physicts and economist dialogue https://noahpinion.substack.com/p/murphys-law-or-follies-of-a-finite

efficient markets, or not

on askblog I read of Fama efficient market hypothesis and monetary policy https://www.arnoldkling.com/blog/finance-theory-and-the-fed/

he says that “Actually, the central banks don’t do anything real. They are issuing one form of debt to buy another form of debt. If you are an old Modigliani–Miller person the way I am, you think that’s a neutral activity: You’re issuing short-term debt to buy long-term debt or vice-versa. That’s not something that should have any real effects“

I should study the Efficient Market hing. It also prompted me to punt on reading list Mandelbrot The (Mis)Behavior of Markets https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/665134.The_Mis_Behavior_of_Markets

things to grow

Fad chasing pigs

the story of Soros and Druckenmiller (was it at quantum fund?) taking opposite sides on the dotcom boom

Money Machines and useless money in Covid times

2 money machines like no other are no more in times of Coronavirus

Renaissance down

Blitzscaling done for good?

In coronavirus times it’s loud the lack of blockchain solution to pandemia problems, like contact apps. The silence is loud we are used to being pitched all sorts of blockchain solution to real world problems we did not know we had, or we did not think we could not solve with othee means

And this is refreshing, why you have to make a money useful to be money ? Value and purchasing power aren’t enough. Really, sometimes I have used 10 Lire to open the batteries lid of RC caes but that’s it, it’s not what gives value to my coin

words and acronyms

spread, like spread the virus, spred Bund-BTP, spread the goodness of the web GNUtella. Just because I want to talk about Fold@home that reminds me of SETI@home that was alive at the time DIvX Napster and Indymedia were born (GNUtella followed suit, once Napster was killed)

PEEP and PEPP, easy to confuse, both actual now:

PEEP some parameter in ventilators, the reason you can’t hack together a mechanichal ventilator, PEEP must be managed by some electronics and specific mechanics

PEPP is some Pandemic Emergency something  created by the ECB, which will buy bods for 750 billions, it already started buying Italy’s Btp and that should allow Italy to stay comfortably in 5% deficit for 2020, BOTs have already a buyr, Over that level,  check twice

Farmer’s fable (ergodicity economics)

sharing is actually maximizing profit https://www.farmersfable.org/ a cartoon that show how sharing to reduce fluctuation leave both parties better off (on a random walk)

Screenshot 2020-02-13 at 15.44.36

 

Homo Ergodicus https://glandfried.github.io/post/homoergodicus/

“Multiplicative process offers a concrete physical advantage in favor of cooperative behavior”

Also, Warren Buffet’s 3 rules in light of ergodicity  (St. Peterburg’s Paradox explained) https://sinaas.blogspot.com/2020/02/warren-buffetts-rules-nr-12-and-3-in.html

Helicopter VC Money

1. some says the stock market has matured, all blue chips company are pretty much well managed, so it does not really matter picking the right one, so passive investing

2. But some other noted that if you take out the value created by a 4% of high-performers the rest of the pubblic companies just thred water, so pick thos 4% and grow rich. So pick the google and facebook early. Buy a crystal ball

3. Or just get into any seed round you can, because someone says this is the best way to gt into those winners

1. would Maubouissin in this paper The Incredible Shrinking Universe of Stocks

2. would be The best-performing four percent of listed companies explain the net gain for the entire U.S. stock market since 1926, as other stocks collectively matched Treasury bills

3. is Angel List If you miss the best-performing seed investment, you will eventually be outperformed by someone who blindly invests in every credible deal.

 

Asset valuation? Really?

hope it is not lost on you the humour of an investment banker, not any one, the CEO of Goldman Sachs who claims assets cannot be valued,of all assets, houses https://twitter.com/thomaskaplan/status/1196844704916287494

Screenshot 2019-11-21 at 09.37.36.png

This argument has some merit, for example Goldman Sachs at some point valued WeWork at 47 billion, that point was right before selling it to investors in the IPO, the investors balked nd WeWork was refinanced by its current owner, Softbank at 8 Bln valuation https://techcrunch.com/2019/10/21/report-softbank-is-taking-control-of-wework-at-an-8b-valuation/

“The global market for private equity, including venture capital, has swelled fivefold in the past two decades to $4.2tn,” says the FT—they become increasingly dominated by more public-style investors who don’t have that discernment.  Matt Levine in newsletter