The Chicago school with its invincible confidence in the rationality of the markets always seemed to forget that they every single participant is a fallible human being just like the rest of us.
Econ 102 teaching us about Rational Economic Man. Meanwhile, across the quad Marketing 102 is showing the effectiveness of bikini clad girls in shiny convertible autos.
You are the only one I have seen question the rationality of Wall Street’s geniuses. Trump says he is just going to end the war (maybe wave Lindsay’s bubble wand?) and magically make this it — and high oil prices — go away and the markets respond as if Trump has that power?
Just a thought about equity markets. Those of us with our retirement savings in them like when they go up gradually over time—reflecting actual economic growth. But many who are riding the choppy waves on a daily or weekly basis are more invested in the rise and fall. Their approach is amoral. They only want to strike big and get out with more money. They are not contributing to the fund of available capital in a meaningful way in economic terms. They exist in a symbiotic relationship with Trump. They are not the friends of actual progress. They are parasites. Like Trump.
I'm befuddled about how Trump can get out of this Iran war. Say he does take the U.S. military out of play in the region. The Israelis haven't agreed to anything and likely will continue to bomb Iran. Iran is making use of the main weapon it has now--closing the Straits of Hormuz. And even if Israel stops its war on Iran, it still seems likely that Iran will continue to keep Hormuz mostly closed for weeks or months to punish the U.S. and its hostile neighbors--which will likely eventually make big concessions to Iran. Paul Krugman recently explained just how badly high oil and gas prices will affect U.S. consumers. Nor do I think that Europe can project the military force needed to reopen the Strait by force. Military analysts say this would require a ground invasion of Iran with a substantial likelihood of high casualties and uncertainty about being able to hold ground against Iran's million men under arms. If the U.S. is thinking twice about a ground invasion, I suspect Europe won't even consider it. So, if the U.S. leaves the theater, how many weeks before it has to return?
Skiers of the Washoe Mountains are known to flip out when their favorite position, out over our skis, is applied to the equivalent of a Portola Hills mountaineer adventuring where he (typically) shouldn't, ending up Out, UNDER his skis. Which is the same as In, Over their head.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Carbon economy now. If you all don't like the Washoe Forests Carbon Bank, then figure out something else. There are many paths, none that do not maximize CO2 avoidance.
That's me. Out over my skis. Happy as a clam on the Ohlone beach.
It’s not only that Trump waited 30 days to deliver a speech about why we are at war. If he made the same incoherent recitation of grievances with a few mentions of his reasons for an attack, he would have still been wrong. Those who say, “well, at least the region’s worst bad actor has had its ability to attack neighbors degraded” confuse outcomes with approach and tactics.
DONT MISS! Mick Ryan a distinguished strategist and retired Australian general, provides a detailed and balanced assessment of the Iran War and the future going ahead. 🥷🏼🥷🏻🥷🏽🥷🏽🥷🏽
This just a guess. I make prediction mathematical models. The rationality of Trump and the markets isn’t the point. The point is if what is the expected price of oil or a stock in an infinite value simulation if the war does end. The ability to move the markets, then, is based on what is expected penalty if Trump is wrong versus Trump is right. In other words, does Trump still have the ability to stop the war and, if so, what is the expected penalty for betting against this?
Then, it follows, what most likely is the case is the ability to stop the war is a geometric series with respect to time. In other words, it’s decreasing by a constant value with respect to time as the war progresses. So, just a guess, if Trump makes the same announcement in two months, that the war is going to “end soon”, the point isn’t if this is true or not, the point is that there’s been so much disruption to how oil is transported and priced, betting against the statement will be more valuable, more likely, than not. Or, the ability to calm the markets is most likely short-lived.
Also, your assumption is that the markets are moving to what Trump says, but I think it’s worth considering that many may be betting on his irrationality. Consider, the price of Brent is up 8% since Trump’s speech. That is, many predicted what he will say and many knew that it would be a series of lies and, therefore, the war wasn’t “ending soon”.
Too many players who are NOT in his regime; that's his condition. Midnight repetitive blather works on them but not the world. Gather all blather up edited for last night's attempt to show dominance again. Regime bows, world - aghast and snickering - goes on, dropping an alliance with more clarity/certainty than ever.
The Chicago school with its invincible confidence in the rationality of the markets always seemed to forget that they every single participant is a fallible human being just like the rest of us.
Economics is supposed to be the study of how to make the most efficient use of scarce resources.
Seems we have an abundance of
stupid in our midst.
Econ 102 teaching us about Rational Economic Man. Meanwhile, across the quad Marketing 102 is showing the effectiveness of bikini clad girls in shiny convertible autos.
You are the only one I have seen question the rationality of Wall Street’s geniuses. Trump says he is just going to end the war (maybe wave Lindsay’s bubble wand?) and magically make this it — and high oil prices — go away and the markets respond as if Trump has that power?
It’s common knowledge that the boy who cried wolf traded frequently in the sheep futures market.
Just a thought about equity markets. Those of us with our retirement savings in them like when they go up gradually over time—reflecting actual economic growth. But many who are riding the choppy waves on a daily or weekly basis are more invested in the rise and fall. Their approach is amoral. They only want to strike big and get out with more money. They are not contributing to the fund of available capital in a meaningful way in economic terms. They exist in a symbiotic relationship with Trump. They are not the friends of actual progress. They are parasites. Like Trump.
"Rather, it aimed to clarify why we needed to go to war, why now, and what victory looks like."
It did? Written by The Gang that Couldn't Shoot Straight, I guess.
I'm befuddled about how Trump can get out of this Iran war. Say he does take the U.S. military out of play in the region. The Israelis haven't agreed to anything and likely will continue to bomb Iran. Iran is making use of the main weapon it has now--closing the Straits of Hormuz. And even if Israel stops its war on Iran, it still seems likely that Iran will continue to keep Hormuz mostly closed for weeks or months to punish the U.S. and its hostile neighbors--which will likely eventually make big concessions to Iran. Paul Krugman recently explained just how badly high oil and gas prices will affect U.S. consumers. Nor do I think that Europe can project the military force needed to reopen the Strait by force. Military analysts say this would require a ground invasion of Iran with a substantial likelihood of high casualties and uncertainty about being able to hold ground against Iran's million men under arms. If the U.S. is thinking twice about a ground invasion, I suspect Europe won't even consider it. So, if the U.S. leaves the theater, how many weeks before it has to return?
I think it will come down to selective passage of tankers through the Strait of Hormuz, the selection being made by Iran.
Insider trading on a global scale.
" he and his team are in way over their head"
Thank you for picking the right cliche.
Skiers of the Washoe Mountains are known to flip out when their favorite position, out over our skis, is applied to the equivalent of a Portola Hills mountaineer adventuring where he (typically) shouldn't, ending up Out, UNDER his skis. Which is the same as In, Over their head.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Carbon economy now. If you all don't like the Washoe Forests Carbon Bank, then figure out something else. There are many paths, none that do not maximize CO2 avoidance.
That's me. Out over my skis. Happy as a clam on the Ohlone beach.
Always ready to rescue gormless flatlanders.
It’s not only that Trump waited 30 days to deliver a speech about why we are at war. If he made the same incoherent recitation of grievances with a few mentions of his reasons for an attack, he would have still been wrong. Those who say, “well, at least the region’s worst bad actor has had its ability to attack neighbors degraded” confuse outcomes with approach and tactics.
Because when there are billions in Crypto, off the books, so to speak, there’s plenty of capital around to manipulate the markets with
Nothing is more ironic than President Bone Spurs telling anyone to "man up". He made his good friend Vladimir Putrid a whole bunch of money.
DONT MISS! Mick Ryan a distinguished strategist and retired Australian general, provides a detailed and balanced assessment of the Iran War and the future going ahead. 🥷🏼🥷🏻🥷🏽🥷🏽🥷🏽
https://kathleenweber.substack.com/p/after-the-fury-war-allies-and-the
This just a guess. I make prediction mathematical models. The rationality of Trump and the markets isn’t the point. The point is if what is the expected price of oil or a stock in an infinite value simulation if the war does end. The ability to move the markets, then, is based on what is expected penalty if Trump is wrong versus Trump is right. In other words, does Trump still have the ability to stop the war and, if so, what is the expected penalty for betting against this?
Then, it follows, what most likely is the case is the ability to stop the war is a geometric series with respect to time. In other words, it’s decreasing by a constant value with respect to time as the war progresses. So, just a guess, if Trump makes the same announcement in two months, that the war is going to “end soon”, the point isn’t if this is true or not, the point is that there’s been so much disruption to how oil is transported and priced, betting against the statement will be more valuable, more likely, than not. Or, the ability to calm the markets is most likely short-lived.
Also, your assumption is that the markets are moving to what Trump says, but I think it’s worth considering that many may be betting on his irrationality. Consider, the price of Brent is up 8% since Trump’s speech. That is, many predicted what he will say and many knew that it would be a series of lies and, therefore, the war wasn’t “ending soon”.
"He expected Moduro: he got Afghanistan."
Wrong country, wrong continent, wrong hemisphere, wrong history. We are finding out that a presidency is a terrible thing to waste.
Too many players who are NOT in his regime; that's his condition. Midnight repetitive blather works on them but not the world. Gather all blather up edited for last night's attempt to show dominance again. Regime bows, world - aghast and snickering - goes on, dropping an alliance with more clarity/certainty than ever.
Great post. I wish I knew how this (the war, the incompetence, etc) ends.