Dear Markets,
First indications are that, following the new EU fiscal pact, you have not lapsed into your usual panic attack. The agreement, it seems, has briefly calmed you down. A good opportunity, then, while you are calm to try having a quiet little conversation with you about your likes and dislikes.
We have always known that you hate regulation, whether it seeks to protect the environment, the workers or the shareholders; we also now understand that you really don’t like uncertainty.
You dislike sacrifices, but have no qualms about demanding sacrifices from others, notably tax-payers, consumers and politicians.
Clearly, you didn’t like Signor Berlusconi, whom you managed to get rid unceremoniously, as you did George Papandreou when he started having funny ideas about referenda. Do you like any politicians? Do you like democracy?
In fact, what exactly do you like? I am aware that you like ‘freedom’, but this is not the freedom proclaimed by the French revolution, is it? You don’t like revolutions and trouble, as we now. You most certainly like money, but then who doesn’t?
And what about responsibility? Do you think that it is right for you never to have to take any responsibilities? If so, shouldn’t somebody else, government maybe, seek to ensure that you behave responsibly?
Finally - what exactly is your view of haircuts?
Finally - what exactly is your view of haircuts?
Answers gratefully received.
Yours sincerely
Nicely put, Yiannis. It reminds me of Bakan's critique of the corporation: Bakan, J. (2004) The corporation : The pathological pursuit of profit and power. New York: Free Press.
ReplyDeleteWorth a read, if you haven't got it.
Donncha
My friend Yiannis Kitromilides, as ever, a sharp economic commentator tells me:
ReplyDelete"Very legitimate questions but the understandable temptation to ‘anthropomorphise’ the market must be resisted. I also often succumb to this temptation and describe the markets as ‘ruthless’, ‘impatient’, ‘short-sighted’ and ‘irrational’. However, admirers of the market going back to Adam Smith have emphasised the ‘impersonal’ nature of market forces. These impersonal forces have no likes and dislikes, sense of responsibility, loyalty, respect for national sovereignty and general ability to distinguish between right and wrong; and so on. Ultimately what matters is the outcome of this ‘impersonal’ process. If the outcome, as the ‘invisible hand’ theory claims, reconciles individual self-interest and collective welfare then all is fine and that is all that matters. If one has doubts about the famous outcome of the ‘impersonal’ market forces then a host of additional questions become pertinent. For example: “Dear Markets, Why you do not deliver what you promise?” Addressed to governments and the electorate!"