4 ms·

This is the kind of thing I fear. While most of us are rightly afraid of a Soviet-style central planning, we were blind to private central planners like this c

This is the kind of thing I fear. While most of us are rightly afraid of a Soviet-style central planning, we were blind to private central planners like this controlling our economy. We're nowhere near the level of dystopian control that Soviet central planners had, but the trend is leaning closer to that than farther away, what with companies listening to their investors before their customers.

ihsw2 9y ago
Did you read the article? The article mentions that control may be more centralized than before but its impact is limited to simply favoring stocks that are perceived to exist for an extended period of time and consistently tick upward in price. Furthermore the article specifically mentions that its impact is limited because index funds are more "hands-off" than anything else. This implies there is not more central planning, and (more to the point) there is no planning -- just a reflexive response to stock price movement. This is the purest expression of the "invisible hand of the market."
- usrusr 9y ago
  I don't think that they are mutually exclusive: they could be perfectly hands-off regarding strategy, but still be stuffing the board with people who are prone to playing personal favor-swapping games with individuals in the fund management.
- dang 9y ago
  Please don't insinuate that someone hasn't read an article. "Did you even read the article? It mentions that" can be shortened to "The article mentions that." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
IsaacL 9y ago
"Private central planning" is a contradiction. Nothing stops people creating competing funds, investing their savings in said funds, or investing directly in companies. I.e. in the private sector there's always the threat of competition, which changes the dynamic completely. Granted it is a problem that 3 firms are so dominant.

ihsw2 9y ago

Did you read the article? The article mentions that control may be more centralized than before but its impact is limited to simply favoring stocks that are perceived to exist for an extended period of time and consistently tick upward in price. Furthermore the article specifically mentions that its impact is limited because index funds are more "hands-off" than anything else. This implies there is not more central planning, and (more to the point) there is no planning -- just a reflexive response to stock price movement. This is the purest expression of the "invisible hand of the market."

usrusr 9y ago
I don't think that they are mutually exclusive: they could be perfectly hands-off regarding strategy, but still be stuffing the board with people who are prone to playing personal favor-swapping games with individuals in the fund management.
dang 9y ago
Please don't insinuate that someone hasn't read an article. "Did you even read the article? It mentions that" can be shortened to "The article mentions that." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

IsaacL 9y ago

"Private central planning" is a contradiction. Nothing stops people creating competing funds, investing their savings in said funds, or investing directly in companies. I.e. in the private sector there's always the threat of competition, which changes the dynamic completely. Granted it is a problem that 3 firms are so dominant.