3 ms·
This is an obvious and accurate criticism. But it's also worth considering that large financial firms are both the best equiped and most motivated to obscure th
by jasonwatkinspdx 13y ago
This is an obvious and accurate criticism. But it's also worth considering that large financial firms are both the best equiped and most motivated to obscure their transaction activity, so I don't think it should be dismissed trivially.
The question is: how could one find evidence that justifies or refutes the idea that the scale of firms does in fact fit zipf and that measure is being obscured at the tail?
Also, I'd point out that the original post did not differentiate between financial and non financial companies in the way you do between points 1 and 2, so your characterization of what fields are related or "semi-related" is your own creation and not part of the original claim.
- gee_totes 13y ago> The question is: how could one find evidence that justifies or refutes the idea that the scale of firms does in fact fit zipf and that measure is being obscured at the tail? Well, I think to find that evidence, you would have to take a measurement of the amount of shadow banking from one of these firms. Objectively, you can't do that, since there is no agreed upon definition of what the term shadow banking means.