5/ (And here I don't mean just Muslim countries: reputatational damage means the US loses cream of talent from everywhere)
Conversation
Replying to
6/ Insurance costs: "things are fine" doesn't happen by magic.Checks and balances work because some pay disproportionately to ensure they do
1
3
6
Replying to
7/ Taking time off from work to go protest, especially for low-wage workers etc. is part of how "checks and balances are working" happens.
1
1
6
Replying to
8/ There's costs to lawsuits. There's costs to civil servants taking principled stands and resisting executive orders.
1
1
2
Replying to
9/ Checks and balances are a) not free b) mostly paid for as 'insurance costs' in non-priced ways c) by people who can least afford to do so
1
2
7
Replying to
10/ And this is just micro-level issues with market-based narrative of 'everything is fine' there is the macro-level: fine compared to WHAT?
1
2
2
Replying to
11/ The counterfactual isn't just "no nuclear war, no concentration camps, haha you liberals were scaremongering"
2
1
2
Replying to
12/ Firstly, if somebody paid real but non-market costs to ensure doomsday didn't happen, your positive outcome isn't what you claim
1
1
2
Replying to
13/ Secondly, even if you leave out doomsday, right macro counterfactual is: how well *could* economy have done with a more normal POTUS?
3
1
5
Replying to
Factoring higher-than-normal doomsday scenarios is the entire game. Markets tend to rise, with periodic catastrophes in the middle.
2
Replying to
explain? do you mean some people are doing this and the market has already priced in doomsday risks, or that it should?
Replying to
if literally every big event prediction lately has been getting it wrong, why would quants be getting systemic risk right either?
1
1
7

