The last two days have seen the US stock market open down, only to end up. The rollercoaster ride is attributed to coincide with the earnings report season, Russian threats at the border of Ukraine, and the threat of tighter monetary policy from the Fed. One financial guru, Jeremy Grantham, is calling it a “super bubble”. (See the Guardian article.) But how many times have we been told that the bubble must burst, and it’s about to do it any moment now? As an economist I am often asked if it’s a bubble, and when will it burst. I usually say yes, and anytime now. And I’ve never been right. I didn’t predict the tech crash of 2000 and I didn’t predict the mortgage based crash of 2008. I sure didn’t predict the pandemic, and when the next crash happens, I’ll be the first to admit I didn’t predict it. My gut says this all has to come crashing down at some point. But that prediction feels similar to me declaring that the sun will rise again tomorrow morning – but without the accurate timing. See you on the other side.
and the Aussies aren’t laughing. I don’t give a shit if you’re the King of Egypt, or the greatest living male tennis star, rules is rules! Australia denied Novak Djokovic entry into the country to compete in the Australian Open tennis championships because the fucker is not vaccinated and does not qualify for an exemption. Earlier the Victorian government and the tennis association had granted him an exemption because they want him to defend his title and ensure them the financial success the championship represents. Fuck them. If there’s one thing Australian’s care about, it’s fairness, and treating that fucker as if he were immune from the same rules the rest of the population have to abide by is just plain unfair, and wrong. I hope he gets all upset and in a childish response decides never to set foot in Australia again. Good riddance I say!
UPDATE Jan 10. The Joker-vitch has been let in to play his tennis matches, unvaccinated. The court ruled on a technicality that the authorities had given him to 8:30am to object, but an hour before denied his visa application, so bad luck Aussie authorities, you fucked up. Fuck legal technicalities.
What makes something valuable? According to Dictionary.com value as a noun is the worth, merit, or importance of something, or more specifically monetary or material worth. The same dictionary defines worth as the usefulness or importance of something, or its value, as in money. Despite the somewhat circular definitions, value derives from usefulness in many cases, and the importance in some other cases. I think people place value on something for very personal reasons. As an economist I like to distinguish between cost, price, and value. Cost is essentially an accounting of the value of the things that went into producing a good or service. I make wooden spinning tops, and I can easily figure out the cost of making a top: there’s what I paid for the wood and the thread and the ball bearing, there’s the cost of buying the machines and running them, there’s my time (labor), and then there’s packaging and shipping. I will set a price for the top, based perhaps on the cost of making it as set out previously, but also based on what I think people will be willing to pay for it, and perhaps what I think is a fair price given what else they could buy if not my top. But finally there is what value a person places on that particular top. Economics theory has always been vague on the origins of value, saying value is an expression of preferences: fundamental enjoyment or utility, satisfaction derived from owning, using, or perhaps consuming the item in question. For items that are not directly consumed or used by those who possess them, there is the possibility of transferring ownership to another person who places some value on the item (presumably a higher value than the current owner for the transaction to go through.) Although not always the case (some automobiles and some antiques are among the exceptions) most tradeable items are not diminished, or “used”, by ownership. Financial assets are perhaps the most obvious examples. A financial asset reflects some claim on some real thing – usually, but there’s an entire class of financial assets called derivatives that derive their value based on an underlying claim to a real thing. For example a share in General Motors is a claim to a share in the value of the company, in general its assets but also its future profits.
I was listening to a podcast and it was sponsored by a company called Anatha. It’s a company that provides services related to trading in cryptocurrencies. Well, I *think* that’s what it is… Consider the Intro “About Us” blurb:
Disrupting structural violence isn’t simply a moral imperative; it’s an economic opportunity waiting to be unlocked. At Anatha, our mission is to help enable global human self-actualization by replacing structural violence with structural flourishing. The ability to deliver value and utility at zero marginal cost creates an environment in which our economic tools can move from being based on exclusivity and scarcity to inclusivity and abundance. Information is a renewable, sustainable resource. We are simply proposing we leverage that resource to ensure no human being gets left out in the cold. We are contributing towards the creation of a global economy premised on equality, regeneration, altruism, and self-actualization. Platform activity directly aids its community with real, spendable value. Yes, it’s ambitious. But the advent of information age economic systems makes what once seemed impossible — a fair and rational economy that puts human needs first — not only possible but inevitable.
What the fuck? A mission to enable global human self-actualization? What IS that? What does it mean? Does this company, which issues its own cryptocurrency, provides wallet services, and distributes some share of “profits” back to subscribers (so it seems), really believe it has the “ability to deliver value and utility at zero marginal cost”? Does anyone working at this company even know what that sentence means?
Gobbledeegook bullshit like this has me really worried about the future. Yes, so too do global warming and the erosion of democratic institutions, but selling snake oil to gullible people using smoke and mirrors is something that really irritates me. Deeply.
I can only hope that nobody believes any of this crap, and steers clear of this company, and they go belly up – an outcome they not only deserve, but which is the only reasonable outcome.
Philip Ganderton 