3 ms·

because of a temporary swing You only know it is a temporary swing retrospectively. It is impossible to know if it is a temporary swing. It seemed more likely

because of a temporary swing You only know it is a temporary swing retrospectively. It is impossible to know if it is a temporary swing. It seemed more likely a year ago that we would still be waiting for a vaccine in 2021. If someone was trying to guess the future and massage the market, they just as likely might have assumed even less demand and subsidized shutting down more mill capacity to reduce virus spread which seemed like a bigger problem than lumber prices.

dcow 5y ago
You can know that the rate of change of a given commodity over some window is higher than an acceptable threshold and tax/subsidize it using funds collected from all transaction made on the market or something until that window passes or until the commodity’s price stabilizes (is no longer unacceptably volatile), whichever is shorter. The idea I’m trying to capture is to specifically not apply arbitrary human sentiment and planning to the daily operations of the market and instead have the impetus to keep e.g. prices stable built into the market itself (and only in scenarios where a less volatile economy is desirable) so that the market remains like an AI but just operates a little better for the given problem it is solving. I think it’s fair to treat markets like software that can be changed and improved over time in order to better solve the problems they’re deployed to address. Maybe a more volatile market is better for some other set of goods or services? I think it is up to humans to determine the parameters and desired outcomes of the market they want governing the exchange of goods and services in different areas of society.