Listen to my recent radio interview with the ‘Political Misfits’ show on this past week’s awarding of the Nobel Prize in Economics to two Stanford University profs for their latest version of nonsense about ‘efficient markets’ theory. A variation on the theme that private market prices benefit everyone the most–buyers, sellers, government, taxpayers–the Stanford profs received the prize in Economics from the Nobel Committee this past week for their arcane Game Theory math creation on how to structure auction markets. Hidden beneath their theory, however, is the policy proposition that the government can earn more revenues from privatizing (selling off) public goods (like wireless spectrum) by allowing the ‘markets’ to set the price for investors who buy government wireless spectrum. And if markets provide the ‘best’ price, for investors and government alike, then the taxpayer benefits in turn. Privatization is thus the hidden agenda behind the theory.
It isn’t the first time the Nobel Committee has awarded its economics prize to economists who argue ‘markets are efficient’ and government price setting in privatizing public goods should allow markets to set the price for selling off public goods or services. The latest Nobel prize is just a continuation of that Nobel tradition.
To hear more of why the prize awarded last week is for work that is more economic ‘ideology’ than economic ‘science’…
GO TO:
https://www.spreaker.com/user/radiosputnik/what-work-gets-recognized-for-a-nobel-pr
Nobel Economics Prize Again Awarded for ‘Efficient Markets’ Nonsense–audio
October 17, 2020 by jackrasmus
Mr Rasmus,
The recent economic Noble laureates’ seem to be using a subset of the “language game” that could be considered “language vacuum.”
Even conceding (reluctantly and only for sake of discussion) the proposition of existence of totally efficient auctions/markets/exchanges, to suggest that this “fact” alone compels the government sell assets is to simply ignore any examination of WHY government holds items of value (at lease “market” value) in the first place.
That is, simply because an economic actor MAY efficiently sell assets, does NOT imply they do so solely, or ever, for that reason.