Zeitgeist analysis, 15 March 2009

This week's economics zeitgeist has quite a few moves at the top. Interesting developments:

Government has fallen to its lowest level so far, down four places to 7.

Financial in turn is up four places to 2. Market up two places to 3, and people up one to 6. US is up twenty places to number 9, and U.S. up twenty-two places to 15. Perhaps the relationship between the US government and private sector is losing focus and bloggers are focusing on its relationship with other countries instead. Global is up 24 places at 49, China up 157 to 93 and trade up 107 to 132, giving some support to this theory.

Money, price and rate have all fallen, by five, thirteen and fifteen places respectively. So have prices, interest and credit. Bank is up three and banks up twelve. Oddly enough banks (position 13) is much more popular than bank (position 30).

Policy is up eighteen to 32, and economy down 11 to 33 (economic is unchanged at number 8).

Maturity is a regular appearance in the top ranks, and this week is up 29 places to 39. Big jump in assets, 125 places up to number 54, and capital up 72 to 62. Crisis is resurging, up 24 to 55 and cost up 88 to 66. Unemployment is down 120 to 267, which surprised me.

Obama keeps losing places, down another 63 to 103. Growth, markets, energy, rates, oil, companies and business are all down substantially. Investors, future, Treasury are all up. Water, climate, carbon and health are each up between 60 and 150 places.

As for people, Cramer has appeared at 494 and Stewart at 754 (at least Cramer is winning at something). Madoff is back in the list at 542.

Lehman has made an appearance but AIG is down a lot. No other companies in the top 800 except media - WSJ, Bloomberg and of course the Daily Show.

In summary:
  1. monetary issues are less prominent this week
  2. asset values are becoming more important - both bonds and equity (but perhaps surprisingly stock and mortgage both well down)
  3. international issues are receiving a lot of focus
  4. environment and health topics are starting to get coverage
  5. government, stimulus, budget and other public spending issues are down
  6. the focus on macroeconomic performance is reduced - recession, GDP and unemployment all down
Come back next week or subscribe at the right if you'd like to be notified of new analyses.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Is bad news for the Treasury good for the private sector?

An intriguing post from Robert Peston raising the spectre of the Treasury failing to sell all the bonds it wanted to sell yesterday. Is this, as he implies, plain bad news for the government because their funding is getting more expensive? Or is it good news for private lenders - implying that investors are fed up with their "flight to quality" and are now considering private sector investments instead? The answer is dependent on two further questions: is investors' money switching to foreign investments, UK private lending or UK equities? are investors actually running out of money to invest - the infamous savings trap, where people in aggregate try to increase their savings but fail to do so, because the attempt to save reduces total income in the economy and available savings are reduced too? Hopefully we can find out. How could we figure it out? by looking at total UK savings this month - this is not an exact science but we should hopefully be able to see if the tren
Read more

What is the difference between cognitive economics and behavioural finance?

This question was posed in an interesting LinkedIn discussion group (Behavioural Finance: Theory and Practice) by Kerry Pechter. I dashed off a quick answer which ended up being 500 words long. So I thought it might be useful to post on here. Can anyone tell me the difference between cognitive economics and behavioral finance? Cognitive economics is not yet a widely used phrase, though Marco Novarese and I have been using it as a name for a more microfounded version of what's typically called behavioural economics. So I'll answer the question based on how I use the term. The first difference is between "economics" and "finance". Economics is a broader field, including the trading of any kind of goods or services, whereas finance specifically focuses on investment and the value of financial instruments. Indeed I consider economics very broadly to be the study of how resources are allocated (by individuals, and across society). The more fundamental
Read more

Dead rats and dopamine - a new publication

My new paper, coauthored with Yohan John , Dakota McCoy and Oliver Braganza , is out in Behavioral and Brain Sciences. " Dead rats, dopamine, performance metrics and peacock tails " is about the universal emergence of proxy failure. When you measure and incentivise performance by a single metric (a proxy), the proxy will always become a worse measure of performance than it was before you added the incentive. This effect is also known as Goodhart's Law  in economics, and by other names in other fields - but the same underlying process drives the effect across multiple domains. Our paper studies it in management, economics, biology, neuroscience and other areas. Recent concerns about AI alignment are closely related to this phenomenon. The paperclip problem is a good example - if a sufficiently clever AI is given a single goal, to produce as many paperclips as possible, it may eventually destroy all of humanity and take over the whole universe in its efforts to maximise o
Read more