[math-fun] Financial Crisis = Mathematical Malpractise ?
FYI -- According to Nassim Nicholas Taleb, the author of "The Black Swan: The Impact of the Highly Improbable", most of the blame for the current financial crisis can be laid at the feet of the "quants": the mathematicians and physicists who have been drawn to Wall Street over the past several decades. The very short version of his argument: Blinded by the elegance of Gaussian distributions, which have nice properties and some closed-form solutions, the quants ignored the actual long-tailed/fractal/hyperbolic nature of the events they were trying to model. Through ignorance or incompetence, they didn't realize that while parameter estimation for Gaussian processes is relatively easy & more-or-less stable, parameter estimation for long-tailed distributions is inherently ill-conditioned: no matter how many samples you look at, the very next sample can completely overwhelm the net impact of _all_ of the previous samples, rendering meaningless every previous calculation. "Hundred year" events seem to happen in economics with distressingly higher frequency than expected: the Latin American financial crisis in the early 1980's wiped out sum total of the entire banking industry's profits _ever_ made up until that time; the 1987 stock market crash in which Taleb made his "FU" money; the 1998 crisis which wiped out the Nobel-prize-winning firm of Long Term Capital Management and nearly caused a crisis eerily similar to today's; and, of course, the current sub-prime CDO mess. An almost-humorous example of the difference between Gaussian ("Mediocristan", see below) & non-Gaussian ("Extremistan", see below) models is his analysis of the financial performance of a world-renowned Las Vegas casino. While the returns from its _gambling_ activities were boringly predictable (due to their Gaussian behavior), the worst event in the casino's history was the loss of its major draw show due to a tiger partially eating one of the performers. The casino had insurance against the tiger eating the audience, but not against the tiger eating the performer. What's amazing to me (HB) is how such "Gaussian" thinking continues to flourish & be the mainstream curriculum at economics and business schools after Mandelbrot and all the subsequent Mandelbrot-wannabees made such a strong case for fractal patterns in economic models. Yet Black-Scholes continues to be utilized today in option pricing (e.g., for employee stock options) and "modern portfolio theory" (MPT) continues preaching that 10-15 investments will provide you with the same diversification as 100-500 investments. "For every problem, there is a solution that is simple, elegant and wrong." H.L. Mencken. ------------------------- http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2008/sep/28/businessandfinance.philosophy Profile: Nassim Nicholas Taleb The new sage of Wall Street The trader turned author has emerged as the guru of the global financial meltdown. Not only is he riding high in the bestseller lists, his theory of black swan events has become the most seductive guide to our uncertain times * Edward Helmore * The Observer, * Sunday September 28 2008 On Friday afternoon, Nassim Nicholas Taleb could be found on the veranda of a hotel bar in Louisville, Kentucky, knocking back bourbon in the warm afternoon sunlight. No wonder the Lebanese-born trader turned author feels like relaxing: his book, The Black Swan: The Impact of the Highly Improbable, has become a huge success. A book of economics and philosophy, it's found a vast audience, speaks to its time and has become something of a key text to help understand the crisis in market capitalism. Not only does the book sit high in the US bestseller lists, but as a mark of its impact, the term 'black swan' has joined 'tipping point' and 'long tail' by having a life of its own. The financial meltdown is now routinely referred to as a 'black swan event'. As influential financial website bloomberg.com noted earlier this month: 'One hears folks from New York to Ulaanbaatar buzzing about black swans.' Taleb's central thesis is that a small number of unexpected events - the black swans - explains much of import that goes on in the world. We need to understand just how much we will never understand is the line. 'The world we live in,' he likes to say, 'is vastly different from the world we think we live in.' The title refers to the medieval belief that all swans were white, hence black swan was a metaphor for something that could not exist, a metaphor that shifted into a perceived impossibility that came to pass when black swans were discovered in the 17th century. Taleb does not think of himself as an ideological or even philosophical writer, though his book contains elements from both realms of thinking; he prefers the role of mischievous intellectual whose observations stretch effortlessly from reason to superstition. In the midst of the economic upheaval, Taleb's acerbic attitude to bankers and economists has won him a new following and provided a comfort to many puzzling over the apparent unpredictability of recent events. We are, he believes, suckers. 'The tools we have to understand what's happening on Wall Street were developed over the last couple of centuries,' he told the audience at Kentucky's Idea Festival last week. 'We need new tools. We will have to finance the losses because of a huge misunderstanding.' That misunderstanding, he explains in his book, is partly based on our belief that bankers and financial analysts are somehow blessed with superior knowledge. While 'peasants know they can't predict the future', Wall Street bankers believe they can. 'Banks hire dull people and train them to be even more dull. If they look conservative, it's only because their loans go bust on rare, very rare occasions.' But, Taleb believes, bankers are not conservative at all. They are just 'phenomenally skilled at self-deception by burying the possibility of a large, devastating loss under the rug'. In his estimation of the scale of the disaster: 'The banking system, betting against black swans, has lost more than $1 trillion - more than was ever made in the history of banking.' When it comes to finance, collective wisdom has shown itself to be close to astrology - based on nothing. But according to Taleb, unpredictable events - 9/11, the dotcom bubble, the current financial implosion - are much more common than we think. In Taleb's coinages, most people live in 'Mediocristan,' a fake model of reality where no rare events occur, and not in 'Extremistan', the complex real world where unpredictable and devastating events can dictate the outcome. One of Taleb's favourite allegorical tales is the story of the turkey and the butcher. As previously described by Bertrand Russell, a turkey may get used to the idea of being fed but when, the day before Christmas, it is slaughtered, it will incur 'a revision of belief'. No one, he believes, is more guilty of living like turkeys in the false security of Mediocristan than economists and financial risk management analysts who rely on computer models that don't account for rare devastating events. Taleb's personal black swan event came when Lebanon was engulfed by civil war in 1975, and he spent several war years in the basement of the family home studying. The son of a wealthy, highly educated Greek Orthodox family, he received degrees at Wharton, Pennsylvania, and the University of Paris before becoming a Wall Street trader. Then came 19 October 1987 - Black Monday. The event reinforced his belief in chance events. It was a sizable black swan, he says, that 'had vastly more influence on my thought than any other event in history'. Shorting the market made him nearly $40m. A brush with throat cancer preceded the publication of his first book, Fooled by Randomness, that became a surprise hit in 2001. It established Taleb as a new thinker. The author even found his views adopted by strategic planners at the Pentagon. In February 2002, then Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld offered this hybrid of Taleb thought: 'There are known knowns. There are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we now know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we do not know we don't know.' Taleb is full of inconsistencies - happily so. 'My problem is what my mother kept telling me I'm too messianic in my views,' he concedes. He claims not to read newspapers, yet his website (www.fooledbyrandomness.com) is crammed with links to his press cuttings (he says he get news from people at parties). He's paid up to $60,000 for speaking to businessmen at conferences, yet he claims to distrust anyone who wears a tie (following the example of the Silicon Valley types he admires more, he sticks to black polo necks). And of course there is the ultimate contradiction: where he believes no one can predict black swan events, he's eager to cite instances where he alone has done so. 'One simply cannot predict history beyond a short time horizon,' he offered his audience in Louisville last week. 'It might be useful to be able to predict war. But tension does not necessarily lead to war, but often to peace and to denouement.' To establish his credentials as sage of our current predicament, Taleb frequently refers to an August 2003 article in the New York Times in which he correctly predicted the quasi-governmental US insurance giant Fannie Mae had underestimated the risk of a rise in interest rates that would destroy the value of their portfolios. 'The fact that they have not blown up in the past doesn't mean that they're not going to blow up in the future,' he said. 'The math is bogus.' (The company was taken over by the US government last month.) The footnote on page 225 of The Black Swan reads: 'When I look at their risks, [Fannie Mae] seems to be sitting on a barrel of dynamite, vulnerable to the slightest hiccup. But not to worry - their large staff of scientists deem these events "unlikely".' Even globalisation, which was supposed to make the economic machine more resilient, may be having the opposite effect, he thinks. 'Things are way too efficient, so the smallest mistake blows up. Tomorrow, if there's a problem in Bangalore, we're toast for a long time, you see? 'Economics is a tragedy for me. Because look at how the whole world now is designed according to some ideas that have not proved adequate. The whole financial system. We don't understand economic policy, do you realise that? When Alan Greenspan lowered interest rates thinking it would help the economy, all it did was push banks to take risks-hidden risks.' Taleb is not the only author competing to provide the intellectual weight to the current confusion. This autumn, Michael Lewis, author of Liar's Poker and Moneyball, seeks to describe the collision of market forces, human idiosyncrasies and greed in Panic: The Story of Modern Financial Insanity. His thinking: risky loans and easy money almost always lead to disaster - whether it's the crash of '87, the Asian currency crisis of 1999 or the sub-prime mortgage fallout. And one might feel that with hindsight it's not hard to predict that a banking industry that drops lending standards, securitises bad loans without transparency and sells them on to massively leveraged institutions and hedge funds will end in trouble. Perhaps Taleb's black swan theory promises to be more enduring because it does not, he argues, depend on hindsight. In any case, he has his own in-built defence mechanism. 'My major hobby,' he says, 'is teasing people who take themselves and the quality of their knowledge too seriously and those who don't have the courage to sometimes say, "I don't know..."' The Taleb Lowdown Born: In 1960 into an influential Greek Orthodox Levantine family from Amioun, Lebanon. Son of oncologist Dr Najib Taleb and Minerva Ghosn, daughter and granddaughter of former Deputy Prime Ministers of Lebanon. Family influence reduced during the Lebanese civil war. Education: An MBA from the University of Pennsylvania, PhD from Paris University. Best of times: The current market crash vindicated Taleb's economic predictions, making him, according to the Times, 'the hottest thinker in the world' with a $4m advance on his next book and worldwide speaking engagements ($60,000 a pop). Worst of times: The frosty reception for The Black Swan. The American Statistician dedicated an entire issue to criticising Taleb's black swan theory. What he says 'I am interested in how to live in a world we don't understand very well - in other words, while most human thought [particularly since the Enlightenment] has focused us on how to turn knowledge into decisions, I am interested in how to turn lack of information, lack of understanding, and lack of "knowledge" into decisions - how not to be a "turkey".' What they say: 'Beneath Mr Taleb's blustery rhetoric lives a surprisingly humble soul who has chosen to follow a demanding and somewhat lonely path.' The Wall Street Journal.
On 10/6/08, Henry Baker <hbaker1@pipeline.com> wrote: [etc etc] The application of correct, or frequently incorrect, statistical methods to unsuitable phenomena, along with the accidental, deliberate or ignorant misinterpretation of the results, is so endemic that I do not suppose anyone on this list is going to disagree with the above message. All the same, a couple of things occured to me while reading it. The remark about globalisation raises an issue which I have never seen explored technically: the network aspects of financial markets. Even as crude a model as a resonant electrical circuit is sufficient to suggest that, left to its own devices, such a network is certain --- under (in)appropriate conditions --- to become unstable. An engineer equipped with a suitable model may able to design the network to avoid this development. In the situation to hand, there is (as far as I am aware) no engineer in charge. Another feature of networks [from percolation theory rather than basic physics] is that they go critical: as traffic approaches the maximum capacity, a small increase traffic precipitates sudden gridlock over a large region. As a result, a crisis arising from other causes is intensified by the inability of the participants to communicate at all. It seems a shame that we cannot make more use of the mathematics and physics we already have! And again: Mr Taleb is credited with making himself 40M$, presumably on the back of short-selling. [I'm not going to criticise him on thos grounds --- if people are permitted to profit by backing stocks to rise, then it makes no sense to forbid them to profit by backing them to fall --- at any rate, provided it's their own money they're risking.] But how should this datum be interpreted? On a personal level, if somebody you know makes a number of correct predictions, you would (very reasonably) begin to trust his judgement. On a larger scale, this strategy is no longer valid: a well-known scam involves spamming a large number of recipients with predictions of some mildly improbable event, then proceeding to swindle the small proportion for whom the random prediction happens to come true. So Mr Taleb has done very well: he's made one fortune by gambling on the market, and will doubtless make another by talking about how he did it. However, whenever people attempt to avoid having to do their own thinking by following some guru who happened to get lucky last time, they only succeed in tumbling into the next elephant trap; and when politicians pursue this strategy, the outcomes is liable to be particularly serious. Keep your guard up folks --- it ain't (never) necessarily so! Fred Lunnon
There are plenty of folks who share blame for the current mess. The rating agencies have gotten off very lightly, and the people writing the bad mortgages certainly knew better. I've seen perhaps a dozen suggestions for "the cause". There have been boom/bust cycles at least since the Tulip Bubble, and it's possible that they actually contribute to economic progress. It sounds as if Mr. Taleb has written some interesting books. But the notion that the real world, or the financial world, is properly measured by a gaussian distribution, has been known to be inaccurate for a long time. There's a decades old argument about whether stock prices are accurately modeled by Brownian motion. Every biostatistician knows that real people have heights and weights that include long tails. Even in the middle of the distribution, the curves can be lumpy and asymmetrical. The challenge is to figure out if using a bell curve model will still give a useful answer, and if it can be patched. One obvious problem with investment diversification is that it fails to average out correlations among your classes: If there's a recession, most things go down, and you can't beat that unless you are allowed some minus signs (short sales) in your portfolio, or make lucky guesses about the few stocks that go up. The Black Swan problem asks, in essense, "To what extent is the past a good estimate of the future?". We know the answer: It's usually a pretty good estimate, but sometimes it's wrong, because "things are different now". Deciding when things really *are* different is tough. A possible solution to the short-sale balloon problem: Only allow people to loan half the stock they own. This would limit the total amount of shorted stock. My favorite pseudo-stan was in a recent NYT editorial, perhaps by Krugman. It is of course, Richistan. Rich "A witty saying proves nothing." --V. -------------- Quoting Henry Baker <hbaker1@pipeline.com>:
FYI -- According to Nassim Nicholas Taleb, the author of "The Black Swan: The Impact of the Highly Improbable", most of the blame for the current financial crisis can be laid at the feet of the "quants": the mathematicians and physicists who have been drawn to Wall Street over the past several decades. The very short version of his argument: Blinded by the elegance of Gaussian distributions, which have nice properties and some closed-form solutions, the quants ignored the actual long-tailed/fractal/hyperbolic nature of the events they were trying to model. Through ignorance or incompetence, they didn't realize that while parameter estimation for Gaussian processes is relatively easy & more-or-less stable, parameter estimation for long-tailed distributions is inherently ill-conditioned: no matter how many samples you look at, the very next sample can completely overwhelm the net impact of _all_ of the previous samples, rendering meaningless every previous calculation.
"Hundred year" events seem to happen in economics with distressingly higher frequency than expected: the Latin American financial crisis in the early 1980's wiped out sum total of the entire banking industry's profits _ever_ made up until that time; the 1987 stock market crash in which Taleb made his "FU" money; the 1998 crisis which wiped out the Nobel-prize-winning firm of Long Term Capital Management and nearly caused a crisis eerily similar to today's; and, of course, the current sub-prime CDO mess.
An almost-humorous example of the difference between Gaussian ("Mediocristan", see below) & non-Gaussian ("Extremistan", see below) models is his analysis of the financial performance of a world-renowned Las Vegas casino. While the returns from its _gambling_ activities were boringly predictable (due to their Gaussian behavior), the worst event in the casino's history was the loss of its major draw show due to a tiger partially eating one of the performers. The casino had insurance against the tiger eating the audience, but not against the tiger eating the performer.
What's amazing to me (HB) is how such "Gaussian" thinking continues to flourish & be the mainstream curriculum at economics and business schools after Mandelbrot and all the subsequent Mandelbrot-wannabees made such a strong case for fractal patterns in economic models. Yet Black-Scholes continues to be utilized today in option pricing (e.g., for employee stock options) and "modern portfolio theory" (MPT) continues preaching that 10-15 investments will provide you with the same diversification as 100-500 investments.
"For every problem, there is a solution that is simple, elegant and wrong." H.L. Mencken. ------------------------- http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2008/sep/28/businessandfinance.philosophy
Profile: Nassim Nicholas Taleb
The new sage of Wall Street
The trader turned author has emerged as the guru of the global financial meltdown. Not only is he riding high in the bestseller lists, his theory of black swan events has become the most seductive guide to our uncertain times
* Edward Helmore * The Observer, * Sunday September 28 2008
On Friday afternoon, Nassim Nicholas Taleb could be found on the veranda of a hotel bar in Louisville, Kentucky, knocking back bourbon in the warm afternoon sunlight. No wonder the Lebanese-born trader turned author feels like relaxing: his book, The Black Swan: The Impact of the Highly Improbable, has become a huge success. A book of economics and philosophy, it's found a vast audience, speaks to its time and has become something of a key text to help understand the crisis in market capitalism.
Not only does the book sit high in the US bestseller lists, but as a mark of its impact, the term 'black swan' has joined 'tipping point' and 'long tail' by having a life of its own. The financial meltdown is now routinely referred to as a 'black swan event'. As influential financial website bloomberg.com noted earlier this month: 'One hears folks from New York to Ulaanbaatar buzzing about black swans.'
Taleb's central thesis is that a small number of unexpected events - the black swans - explains much of import that goes on in the world. We need to understand just how much we will never understand is the line. 'The world we live in,' he likes to say, 'is vastly different from the world we think we live in.'
The title refers to the medieval belief that all swans were white, hence black swan was a metaphor for something that could not exist, a metaphor that shifted into a perceived impossibility that came to pass when black swans were discovered in the 17th century.
Taleb does not think of himself as an ideological or even philosophical writer, though his book contains elements from both realms of thinking; he prefers the role of mischievous intellectual whose observations stretch effortlessly from reason to superstition. In the midst of the economic upheaval, Taleb's acerbic attitude to bankers and economists has won him a new following and provided a comfort to many puzzling over the apparent unpredictability of recent events.
We are, he believes, suckers. 'The tools we have to understand what's happening on Wall Street were developed over the last couple of centuries,' he told the audience at Kentucky's Idea Festival last week. 'We need new tools. We will have to finance the losses because of a huge misunderstanding.'
That misunderstanding, he explains in his book, is partly based on our belief that bankers and financial analysts are somehow blessed with superior knowledge. While 'peasants know they can't predict the future', Wall Street bankers believe they can.
'Banks hire dull people and train them to be even more dull. If they look conservative, it's only because their loans go bust on rare, very rare occasions.' But, Taleb believes, bankers are not conservative at all. They are just 'phenomenally skilled at self-deception by burying the possibility of a large, devastating loss under the rug'.
In his estimation of the scale of the disaster: 'The banking system, betting against black swans, has lost more than $1 trillion - more than was ever made in the history of banking.'
When it comes to finance, collective wisdom has shown itself to be close to astrology - based on nothing. But according to Taleb, unpredictable events - 9/11, the dotcom bubble, the current financial implosion - are much more common than we think.
In Taleb's coinages, most people live in 'Mediocristan,' a fake model of reality where no rare events occur, and not in 'Extremistan', the complex real world where unpredictable and devastating events can dictate the outcome.
One of Taleb's favourite allegorical tales is the story of the turkey and the butcher. As previously described by Bertrand Russell, a turkey may get used to the idea of being fed but when, the day before Christmas, it is slaughtered, it will incur 'a revision of belief'.
No one, he believes, is more guilty of living like turkeys in the false security of Mediocristan than economists and financial risk management analysts who rely on computer models that don't account for rare devastating events.
Taleb's personal black swan event came when Lebanon was engulfed by civil war in 1975, and he spent several war years in the basement of the family home studying. The son of a wealthy, highly educated Greek Orthodox family, he received degrees at Wharton, Pennsylvania, and the University of Paris before becoming a Wall Street trader.
Then came 19 October 1987 - Black Monday. The event reinforced his belief in chance events. It was a sizable black swan, he says, that 'had vastly more influence on my thought than any other event in history'. Shorting the market made him nearly $40m.
A brush with throat cancer preceded the publication of his first book, Fooled by Randomness, that became a surprise hit in 2001. It established Taleb as a new thinker. The author even found his views adopted by strategic planners at the Pentagon. In February 2002, then Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld offered this hybrid of Taleb thought: 'There are known knowns. There are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we now know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we do not know we don't know.'
Taleb is full of inconsistencies - happily so. 'My problem is what my mother kept telling me I'm too messianic in my views,' he concedes. He claims not to read newspapers, yet his website (www.fooledbyrandomness.com) is crammed with links to his press cuttings (he says he get news from people at parties). He's paid up to $60,000 for speaking to businessmen at conferences, yet he claims to distrust anyone who wears a tie (following the example of the Silicon Valley types he admires more, he sticks to black polo necks).
And of course there is the ultimate contradiction: where he believes no one can predict black swan events, he's eager to cite instances where he alone has done so. 'One simply cannot predict history beyond a short time horizon,' he offered his audience in Louisville last week. 'It might be useful to be able to predict war. But tension does not necessarily lead to war, but often to peace and to denouement.'
To establish his credentials as sage of our current predicament, Taleb frequently refers to an August 2003 article in the New York Times in which he correctly predicted the quasi-governmental US insurance giant Fannie Mae had underestimated the risk of a rise in interest rates that would destroy the value of their portfolios. 'The fact that they have not blown up in the past doesn't mean that they're not going to blow up in the future,' he said. 'The math is bogus.' (The company was taken over by the US government last month.)
The footnote on page 225 of The Black Swan reads: 'When I look at their risks, [Fannie Mae] seems to be sitting on a barrel of dynamite, vulnerable to the slightest hiccup. But not to worry - their large staff of scientists deem these events "unlikely".'
Even globalisation, which was supposed to make the economic machine more resilient, may be having the opposite effect, he thinks. 'Things are way too efficient, so the smallest mistake blows up. Tomorrow, if there's a problem in Bangalore, we're toast for a long time, you see?
'Economics is a tragedy for me. Because look at how the whole world now is designed according to some ideas that have not proved adequate. The whole financial system. We don't understand economic policy, do you realise that? When Alan Greenspan lowered interest rates thinking it would help the economy, all it did was push banks to take risks-hidden risks.'
Taleb is not the only author competing to provide the intellectual weight to the current confusion. This autumn, Michael Lewis, author of Liar's Poker and Moneyball, seeks to describe the collision of market forces, human idiosyncrasies and greed in Panic: The Story of Modern Financial Insanity. His thinking: risky loans and easy money almost always lead to disaster - whether it's the crash of '87, the Asian currency crisis of 1999 or the sub-prime mortgage fallout.
And one might feel that with hindsight it's not hard to predict that a banking industry that drops lending standards, securitises bad loans without transparency and sells them on to massively leveraged institutions and hedge funds will end in trouble.
Perhaps Taleb's black swan theory promises to be more enduring because it does not, he argues, depend on hindsight. In any case, he has his own in-built defence mechanism. 'My major hobby,' he says, 'is teasing people who take themselves and the quality of their knowledge too seriously and those who don't have the courage to sometimes say, "I don't know..."'
The Taleb Lowdown
Born: In 1960 into an influential Greek Orthodox Levantine family from Amioun, Lebanon. Son of oncologist Dr Najib Taleb and Minerva Ghosn, daughter and granddaughter of former Deputy Prime Ministers of Lebanon. Family influence reduced during the Lebanese civil war.
Education: An MBA from the University of Pennsylvania, PhD from Paris University.
Best of times: The current market crash vindicated Taleb's economic predictions, making him, according to the Times, 'the hottest thinker in the world' with a $4m advance on his next book and worldwide speaking engagements ($60,000 a pop).
Worst of times: The frosty reception for The Black Swan. The American Statistician dedicated an entire issue to criticising Taleb's black swan theory.
What he says 'I am interested in how to live in a world we don't understand very well - in other words, while most human thought [particularly since the Enlightenment] has focused us on how to turn knowledge into decisions, I am interested in how to turn lack of information, lack of understanding, and lack of "knowledge" into decisions - how not to be a "turkey".'
What they say: 'Beneath Mr Taleb's blustery rhetoric lives a surprisingly humble soul who has chosen to follow a demanding and somewhat lonely path.' The Wall Street Journal.
_______________________________________________ math-fun mailing list math-fun@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/math-fun
Malpractice in any profession is defined as the violation of the professional standards of that profession. Given the logically fallacious foundations that underlie most of modern economics, it's questionable whether there can even be such a thing as economic malpractice. Economics, like mathematics, is an axiomatic system. In mathematics, the axioms certainly seem to be true, especially when applied to the real world. However, the axioms of economics, especially free-market economics, are false and are known by economists to be false. (For example, they assume that in a market, there are no large actors that can individually affect the overall market, and that everyone has perfect knowledge). Irrespective of the falsity of the assumptions, economists don't hesitiate to build an entire intellectual edifice based on those false assumptions. As math people, you all know what happens when you try to derive conclusions based on assumptions that are false. In the 1800's, economists wanted to make their field more scientific. So, they adopted the equations of physics, changed the names of the variables, and started putting the new equations into economics books. "Railroading Economics" by Michael Perelman talks about this. It gets worse. Even when real-world data contradicts economic theories, it it often the theories that prevail. "Naming the System" by Michael Yates talks about this. It is no wonder economics is called the dismal science. On a related note: On Bill Moyers Journal on Oct. 10, George Soros was talking about how economists assume that things will average out and self-correct. This is, of course, false. Instead, there seems to be a tendency for self-reinforcing feedback loops to occur (in both positive and negative directions), which cause exponentially fast changes to occur. Unforunately, that's often too fast for society or the political system to react. ------------------------------- rcs@xmission.com wrote:
There are plenty of folks who share blame for the current mess. The rating agencies have gotten off very lightly, and the people writing the bad mortgages certainly knew better. I've seen perhaps a dozen suggestions for "the cause". There have been boom/bust cycles at least since the Tulip Bubble, and it's possible that they actually contribute to economic progress.
It sounds as if Mr. Taleb has written some interesting books. But the notion that the real world, or the financial world, is properly measured by a gaussian distribution, has been known to be inaccurate for a long time. There's a decades old argument about whether stock prices are accurately modeled by Brownian motion. Every biostatistician knows that real people have heights and weights that include long tails. Even in the middle of the distribution, the curves can be lumpy and asymmetrical. The challenge is to figure out if using a bell curve model will still give a useful answer, and if it can be patched.
One obvious problem with investment diversification is that it fails to average out correlations among your classes: If there's a recession, most things go down, and you can't beat that unless you are allowed some minus signs (short sales) in your portfolio, or make lucky guesses about the few stocks that go up.
The Black Swan problem asks, in essense, "To what extent is the past a good estimate of the future?". We know the answer: It's usually a pretty good estimate, but sometimes it's wrong, because "things are different now". Deciding when things really *are* different is tough.
A possible solution to the short-sale balloon problem: Only allow people to loan half the stock they own. This would limit the total amount of shorted stock.
My favorite pseudo-stan was in a recent NYT editorial, perhaps by Krugman. It is of course, Richistan.
Rich
"A witty saying proves nothing." --V.
1. "Mark-to-market". One of the new elements in the current crisis is the requirement of banks to "mark to market". This new requirement is in response to Enron and the Japanese banking problems of the 1990's. While this requirement is well-intentioned, it has the unfortunate effect of shackling the banks together with chains, like slaves, so that when one drowns, it pulls the rest of them down, too, like dominos. When one bank is forced to sell securities at firesale/pawnshop prices, all the other banks have to mark similar securities down to the same value. If those other banks are then "under water" with respect to their required capital ratios, then those banks are forced to sell the same securities, thus driving the market down further & faster. Like the famous electrical power blackouts of the 1960's and 1970's, which took out significant portions of the United States, there are no "circuit breakers" to isolate the failure, so the crisis continues spreading until the entire system goes down. On the other hand, not eventually forcing a writedown is also bad, as the Japanese banks proved in the 1990's, because banks with truly worthless assets do need to be shut down, and any delay in their shutdown simply extends the malaise possibly for years until they are finally shut down. 2. "Collateralized Debt Obligations"="CDO's". According to last weekend's Wall Street Journal, the price of insuring Lehman debt the day before Lehman went under was $8 annually for each $100 debt outstanding. This implies that the buyers of this debt had an 8% expectation that the debt would go bad within 1 year of its purchase. The insurers (not necessarily insurance companies, but typically large financial institutions) had to put up only 10% margin on each $100 of insurance that they wrote. Thus, somone with $100 in assets could sell insurance on $1000 of Lehman debt. When Lehman went under, it triggered all of these CDO's, and apparently, nearly all of the Lehman debt _was_ insured! So, although Lehman itself was wiped out, those holders were able to transfer the losses to holders of the CDO's, who themselves may have been writing CDO's on other institutions. This is why Warren Buffet called CDO's "weapons of mass financial destruction". Late last week, CDO's on Morgan Stanley debt were selling for $16 for every $100 of debt, and the margin requirement was raised to ~20%. So writing CDO's has gotten only a little bit less risky. The interesting thing about Lehman & AIG is that Paulson shot himself (actually all of us!) in the foot (or some part of the anatomy a bit higher). The moment he took down Lehman, he guaranteed himself a much larger meltdown in other institutions -- e.g., AIG! In pre-mark-to-the-market days, this probably would not have happened with such speed & ferocity. 3. Gaussian distributions. Yes, rcs is correct, academic economists have long known about long tails. But those financial engineers in banking & commerce are still using Gaussians on a daily basis. The Black-Scholes option pricing model is a pure Gaussian model, and is calculated trillions of times a second in the supercomputers on Wall Street. This is the most classic example of "looking for your keys under the street lamp, because that is where the light is brightest". Since any other calculation is harder than Black-Scholes (hereinafter called "BS"), and since some calculation is considered better than no calculation, BS is still almost universally used. If you own stock in a publicly traded company with employee stock options outstanding, check the SEC filings; the "non-cash" stock option expenses are almost certainly computed using BS. 4. Modern portfolio theorists utilize mathematical tools like correlations to "optimize" their portfolios. If the price of one thing seems decorrelated with the price of another thing, then various financial engineering tools can be used to isolate the differences. A simple example would be choosing a single stock out of an index. Suppose you think that stock X will "do better" than its peers. You then purchase stock X and short an index fund of its peer stocks (which will have a certain amount of stock X in it). You are thus protected from movements of the index as a whole, and can focus on the single bet that "X will do better than its peers". So far, so good. But when someone constructs an "optimized" portfolio using historical data from 2004-2006 (say), one finds that the useful dimension of the space is perhaps only 15 or so, leading one to have only 15 items in the portfolio. Unfortunately, this theory doesn't take into account the possibility that the company constructing the index fund may go under, or that the market may close for a day or a week or a month (check out some exchanges like Russia, for example). And in a truly bad market, as rcs has pointed out, _everthing_ is correlated (because of massive forced sales of even "good" assets, e.g.), so your carefully constructed portfolio can be doubly screwed. Taleb teaches that with long-tailed distributions, you may need to place hundreds of bets, not just a dozen or so, in order to get a decent amount of diversification. Except that Taleb doesn't attempt to call it diversification -- he calls it being exposed to "serendipity". You may not be protected on the downside, but t he upside from some obscure investment (Youtube?) could grow exponentially to dominate your portfolio. At 02:15 PM 10/11/2008, Robert Baillie wrote:
On a related note: On Bill Moyers Journal on Oct. 10, George Soros was talking about how economists assume that things will average out and self-correct. This is, of course, false. Instead, there seems to be a tendency for self-reinforcing feedback loops to occur (in both positive and negative directions), which cause exponentially fast changes to occur. Unforunately, that's often too fast for society or the political system to react.
[Scholes's LTCM disaster first, now his Platinum Grove failure. Fool us once, shame on you. Fool us twice, shame on us. So much for mathematical economic genius. Perhaps the Nobel Prize in Economics should be given posthumously, to avoid additional embarrassment. Paul Krugman is next at bat...] http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aWQVwbD5Hfxw&refer=home Scholes's Platinum Grove Fund Halts Withdrawals After Losses By Saijel Kishan Nov. 6 (Bloomberg) -- Platinum Grove Asset Management LP, the hedge-fund firm co-founded by Nobel laureate Myron Scholes, temporarily stopped investor withdrawals from its biggest fund after it lost 29 percent in the first half of October. The decline left Platinum Grove Contingent Master fund with a 38 percent loss this year through Oct. 15, according to investors. Funds employing a similar approach of exploiting differences in the value of related securities fell 14 percent last month and 30 percent this year, according to data compiled by Chicago-based Hedge Fund Research Inc. ``The suspension is necessary given current market conditions,'' Ryebrook, New York-based Platinum Grove said in an e-mailed statement today. ``Platinum Grove will use this period to consult with its investors and counterparties, determine their future intentions and manage the assets of the fund accordingly.'' Hedge funds are reeling from the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression, losing an average of 20 percent this year, according to Hedge Fund Research. A surge of investor redemptions forced firms such as Blue Mountain Capital Management LLC and Deephaven Capital Management LLC to freeze funds to stem the tide of withdrawals. Scholes, 67, winner of the 1997 Nobel Prize in economics, was a founding partner in Long-Term Capital Management LP, the hedge fund that lost $4 billion a decade ago after a debt default by Russia. He started Platinum Grove in 1999 with Chi-fu Huang, Ayman Hindy, Tong-sheng Sun, and Lawrence Ng, who had all worked at Long-Term Capital. $4.8 Billion Platinum Grove managed as much as $4.8 billion as of Aug. 31, according to investors, while its Platinum Grove Contingent Master fund oversaw $3.75 billion. Investors worldwide may pull as much 25 percent of their money from hedge funds by the end of the year, Morgan Stanley said in an Oct. 24 report. Combined with investment losses, industry assets may shrink to $1.3 trillion, a 32 percent drop from the peak in June, the New York-based bank said. Hedge funds are private, largely unregulated pools of capital whose managers can buy or sell any assets, bet on falling as well as rising asset prices and participate substantially in profits from money invested. To contact the reporter on this story: Saijel Kishan in New York at skishan@bloomberg.net Last Updated: November 6, 2008 15:47 EST
participants (4)
-
Fred lunnon -
Henry Baker -
rcs@xmission.com -
Robert Baillie