30 August 2009


In recent years, he argues, “the whole efficient market theory, Washington consensus, free market deregulation system” was so dominant that it was somewhat like a “religion”. This gave rise to “regulatory capture through the intellectual zeitgeist”, enabling the banking lobby to swell in size and power.
Or confusing ends with means? I used to work adjacent to a bunch of pointy-heads in an area of economic policy where this was exactly the issue: policy purity for its own sake, not for what it could deliver. And with the benefit of hindsight, what it failed to deliver. Naysayers didn't exist as they would never have been allowed through the door, critical or inquiring comments branded you an economic illiterate and therefore beneath contempt.

So I get just a very little feeling of schadenfreude when I read articles like the one above. In fact, I may get even a little bit sort of orgasmic. Yes!

And even moreso with
this one.

Hat tip
Peter Martin, noting that I would have used a social networking tool as required by the FT, but I don't got none.

1 comment:

Marshall-Stacks said...

ANZ and the short-term money market:

I used to do the pay for 80 people in a St.Kilda Rd office a few doors from the bank at 420, and was able to get statements on anything.
This enabled me to see that the payroll cheque had been through the company account on the day I wrote it, but my own pay was not in my account.
Where is the money if I haven't got it and the company doesn't have it either?

They looked at me blankly.

About Me