Preventing financial meltdowns.

[jerseycajun.livejournal.com]

It's often been said of libertarians that we only tear down in a very ideological and un-intellectual way, and to that the detractors are not entirely without a case. Patrolling the old stomping grounds on the libertarian boards yields no shortage of true believers who rely only upon the mantra and never delving into the nuts and bolts that comes with the territory of actually making a persuasive argument.

I am posting this video in an effort to make an affirmative case for an alternative attitude that doesn't fit into what I would call any ideological model (it should have things in it that are disagreeable to all comers here most likely. I know I myself have to give a lot more thought on the video before I could say I agree or disagree with some specific aspects of it).


I do not know if Tim Harford is a libertarian or not and I don't particularly care. There are some conclusions he comes to later in the video that I can certainly see some of those closer to my end of the political divide might not fully agree with. He does at least make an argument in the following video for a few solutions you don't hear talked about often and hopefully by posting it here it might generate a conversation that isn't the standard one that revolves around all those infuriating mantras and the equally infuriating snarky counter-mantras.


A few ideas I hope to generate discussion around: Things that are complex and "coupled" as the video defines them. The decoupling of complex systems, the extent coupled complexity is harmful, and what can be done to mitigate those problems that can utilize the understanding of complexity to its advantage rather than just adding layers of complexity to satiate the desire for safety, be it in the physical world or the financial one.

For my part, I think that not only decoupling, but methods and ideas the focus on that as well as decentralization and diffusion are at least worth investigating seriously. I also have a preference for the idea (preferable to the one that makes up the current popular ideas of financial regulation) that dealing on an individual level with banks to determine what their institutions' required reserves should be is better than one-size fits all, in the same way I think that dealing with individual student's issues is better than zero-tolerance policies that have zero nuance to them. Many of the complexities, as Harford notes, are there for tax purposes, not structural ones. Again, that doesn't make the financial system not-complex anymore, but it may address some of the ways we end up with dangerous systemic situations that necessarily go beyond the emotional responses to the situation, which while completely understandable, are nonetheless also completely unhelpful on their own.

*Fair warning to the mods- I am not going to be able to be around very much the remainder of the week, but I may still check in to read responses if there are any who make it through the long time the video takes to watch. -

For everyone else, I do hope at least a few of the community takes the time to watch it. It's rarely boring. Harford to my ear does have a way of keeping the listener going. You can even listen to it in the background while doing other things.

Comments

[htpcl.livejournal.com]

Just a warning: I tend to watch these in bed with my earphones on, and I'm asleep after 10 mins. The next day I watch another 10 mins. So don't expect a coherent analysis any time soon, maybe.

Sorry, I'm a slacker.

[jerseycajun.livejournal.com]

Hey, I'm just happy there are already four comments on the topic already. I figured the length of the thing would drive all but maybe ten responses total.

[htpcl.livejournal.com]

It's not the vid that matters. It's what you say underneath.

[jerseycajun.livejournal.com]

Yeah, but I didn't say anything deliberately inflammatory! How the heck am I gonna get a decent post-count without that? ;)

[htpcl.livejournal.com]

Can't help you there, I don't know anything inflammatory. 0:-)

Sorry to derail this...

...hmmm, see?

[kayjayuu.livejournal.com]

You mean a geezer. I totally do the same thing.