pull down to refresh

Here's a cool little nerdy piece, courtesy of Tim Harford (who, for some reason, the algos don't think I like to read anymore?? Never see him anymore...)
It features my two favourite things: FINANCIAL BUBBLES and FINANCIAL HISTORY, wrapped in the current AI fad.
Jeff Bezos, one of the world’s richest men, sought to draw a distinction between financial bubbles (bad) and industrial bubbles (less bad, maybe good). Bezos, after all, built one of the 21st century’s great businesses, Amazon, in the middle of a bubble that turned contemporaries such as Webvan and Pets.com into a punchline.
Pluz, bubbles are wasteful:

"The most obvious lesson of the railway manias is not that bubbles are good, but that hope springs eternal and greedy investors never learn."

Of course, what's missing in all of this is that nobody knows there's a bubble until afterwards... That's sort of THE POINT with financial markets (#1275237), prodding, trying, evaluating, and ultimately predicting the future (the collective, money-weighted best guess we have).
Pets.com was, infamously, partly owned by Amazon and it wasn't obvious beforehand that selling books online would become the world's largest company, whereas selling dog food online was an obvious and stupid bubble (my 2021 article "From the Land of Financial Bubbles" comes to mind).
and here's a standard anti hate-the-rich objection... actually, the rich benefit you more than themselves:
The economist and Nobel laureate William Nordhaus once tried to estimate what slice of the value of new ideas went to the corporations who owned them, and how much went to everyone else (mostly consumers). He concluded that the answer — in the US, between 1948 and 2001 — was 3.7 per cent to the innovating companies, and 96.3 per cent to everyone else. Put another way, the spillover benefits were 26 times larger than the private profits.
oh, and this bit was fabulous:
Hudson, alas, is not a man to emulate. He kept his finances looking respectable by making distinctly Ponzi-like payments, funding dividends for existing shareholders out of freshly raised capital, and he defrauded his fellow shareholders by getting companies he controlled to buy up his personal shares at above-market prices.
Maybe that sounds uncomfortably like someone we know...?
Financial bubbles are a problem because they're an effect of artificial credit expansion, a distortion working its way through the economy.
Industrial bubbles sound more akin to market discovery processes. Is that how I should think about the distinction?
reply
That makes sense to me. An industrial bubble just sounds like a high froth of creative destruction which could be a good thing
reply
Market actions are only known to be welfare improving ex ante.
Since we can always be mistaken about how things will work out, ex post reality isn't always better.
reply
thats a good summary right there, methinks
reply
The AI bubble is Americas desperate last ditch gamble to try to stay ahead of the Chinese mercantile juggernaut. On just one metric alone it is very clear that the USA will lose this gamble upon empire. Electricity Generation Capacity. The USA cannot build enough new electricity to power the already planned AI data centres. And what it can build is hugely expensive and uncompetitive. Its all talk, all froth, hoping to perpetuate the image and fraud of empire a little longer. Good luck with that.
reply