RSS
Breaking: Countries Act In Their Own Interests In Spite Of What's Best For Everyone Else
from the now-that-that's-settled... dept
The prisoner’s dilemma, it seems, is still a profitable mine in economic academia.
A couple of researchers at the New York Fed are out with a new paper on capital controls. In it, conventional wisdom (and the aforementioned dilemma) proves right and the contrarian view, dating from the Asian financial crisis 15 years ago, wrong.
When countries simultaneously and independently engage in such interventions in the international flow of capital, not only global but individual welfare is adversely affected….
Countries decide to restrict the international flow of capital exactly when this flow is crucial to ensure cross-border risk sharing. Our findings point to the possibility of costly “capital control wars” and thus to significant gains from international policy coordination.
But here’s the really shocking revelation:
The paper does allow that restricting capital flows can make sense from the perspective of an individual nation. It’s just that in following this path, trouble is created for the broader global financial system.
NY Fed Paper Argues Against Capital Controls [WSJ Real Time Economics]
Other posts from Dealbreaker:
I have an app...
App Developer Conversations: What Does The iPad Mini Mean For The App Economy?
How My First Game Made $28,623
I’m looking for policy...
Developers On Patents: Five Employees, Six Lawyers
Developers On Patents: Ron Garret of Awun
I have an idea...
Founders, Funders, Farmers, Fools, And Family
From Noodles And Hot Sauce To Funding In 9 Weeks, With Oomf Founder Mikael Cho
Reader Comments (rss)
(Flattened / Threaded)
Breaking News
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Link to the actual paper...
https://editorialexpress.com/cgi-bin/conference/download.cgi?db_name=CEF2012&paper_id= 396
If you don't trust the link, (and really, you shouldn't) just google the authors' names. It should be the first hit:
Bianca De Paoli and Anna Lipinska
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Nature vs Idealists
• Eco-systems are overrun by invasive (self-interested) species
• Food chains are designed in a pyramid to ensure a large base to support more specialized (self-interested) higher life
• Human desires are based on a self-interested hierarchy
“Maslow’s Esteem Needs” breaks this down nicely - all VERY self-interested
1) Thirst, Hunger
2) Security, Protection
3) Social needs, Love
4) Self-esteem, Recognition
5) Self-Actualization
Govts are run by self-interested humans, so it always “shocks” idealists (I call them fools) when people/Govts conduct themselves in a self-interested manner.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Nature vs Idealists
Most basic human instincts (programming, drives, whatever):
1) Procreation;
2) Food;
3) Clothing/shelter.
And that's where it aaaaallllll begins...
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Nature vs Idealists
Elbows and aholes, everyone's got'em...
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Nature vs Idealists
"academics" have been wrong before; and they are usually a bunch of pompous asses who will twist everything to fit their own view of the world. At least I call it like I see it, right :tard;?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Wrong title...
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Add Your Comment