Economists who adhere to rational-expectations models of the world will never admit it, but a lot of what happens in markets is driven by pure stupidity - or, rather, inattention, misinformation about fundamentals, and an exaggerated focus on currently circulating stories.
Interpretation
Market behavior is often influenced by irrational factors, including misinformation and inattention.
In this quote, Robert J. Shiller emphasizes that despite the rational theories often cited by economists, the reality of market dynamics is frequently driven by irrational behaviors. He points out that factors such as misinformation, distraction from fundamental values, and a fixation on prevailing narratives significantly influence market outcomes, highlighting a contrast between theoretical models and the actual psychology of market participants.
In practice
In a discussion about stock market fluctuations during a presentation.
Those on the downside of rising economic inequality generally do not want government policies that look like handouts. They typically do not want the government to make the tax system more progressive, to impose punishing taxes on the rich, in order to give the money to them. Redistribution feels demeaning. It feels like being labeled a failure.
Speculative markets have always been vulnerable to illusion. But seeing the folly in markets provides no clear advantage in forecasting outcomes, because changes in the force of the illusion are difficult to predict.
That's the world we live in: when it comes to economics, people have emotions; it's not like chemistry or physics.
Money management has been a profession involving a lot of fakery - people saying they can beat the market, and they really can't.
We should not be focusing on quick solutions. The really important concern for policymakers everywhere is to prevent disasters - that is, the outlier events that matter the most.
If we wait until income inequality is much more severe, we will have a whole class of new superrich who will probably feel entitled to their wealth and will have the means to defend their interest. That's already gone far enough. We shouldn't let it become more extreme.
Economists specialize in pointing out unpleasant trade-offs - a skill that is on full display in the health care debate. We want patients to receive the best care available. We also want consumers to pay less. And we don't want to bankrupt the government or private insurers. Something must give.
What many economists fail to understand is that poor people are no less concerned about improving their lot and that of their children than rich people are.
Why does a public discussion of economic policy so often show the abysmal ignorance of the participants?
My agency in promoting the passage of the National Bank Act was the greatest financial mistake of my life. It has built up a monopoly, which affects every interest in the country. It should be repealed, but before that can be accomplished, the people will be arrayed on one side and the banks on the other, in a contest such as we have never before seen in this country.
Large corporations, of course, are blinded by greed. The laws under which they operate require it - their shareholders would revolt at anything less.
Economics is haunted by more fallacies than any other study known to man. This is no accident. The inherent difficulties of the subject would be great enough in any case, but they are multiplied a thousandfold by a factor that is insignificant in, say, physics, mathematics or medicine - the special pleading of selfish interests.
Subscribe for the occasional hand-picked quote. No noise.