4 ms·
Your first two sentences are very interesting. > Information asymmetries exist, not everyone with better information have the access to capital or risk profile
by aaron695 6y ago
Your first two sentences are very interesting.
> Information asymmetries exist, not everyone with better information have the access to capital or risk profile to alter the market price of an asset.
This is talked about in the article and seems to just start an argument again and not explain the unfalsifiable statement.
- vmception 6y agoSorry if that weakens the argument to you. It is a separate thought. My point is that "asset pricing" theories are too reductive, and should at least factor in undercapitalized people that do not wish to speculate that can perceive information. Or just abandon reductive asset pricing theories and focus on other things. Promote liquidity and increases in transactions, "efficiency" in that context, not "efficiency" in a "it already is and has been all the time and forever" context.
- aaron695 6y agoI think it's like the Shinichi Mochizuki mathematical proof. If they can't play the game are they really part of it? How do you know if you perceive true information? I can tell you Magic Leap is a BS company and won't make any actual money. But so can lots of people. So is that 'information', the answer is no. Real information is when it will fail.
- vmception 6y agoand that mathematical proof is much more sound than an economist's Efficient Market Theory. QED.