5 ms·
The data was also collected by a private institution who has the right to sell if it if they want. I'd love to have a Bloomberg Terminal on my desk, but they ar
by lrm242 12y ago
The data was also collected by a private institution who has the right to sell if it if they want. I'd love to have a Bloomberg Terminal on my desk, but they are sooooo expensive! The populist rage fermented by Scott Patterson and other journalists is at times quite disgusting.
- rtpg 12y agoInsider trading is a thing you know. A prerequisite to a free market is perfect information. Insider information makes markets imperfect, thus losing the sort of holy grail property of getting the "right" price for a good.
- lrm242 12y agoObviously. But the Univ of Michigan data was economic data and not collected from insiders. So it isn't insider trading. It is research. Should we make ALL research available to EVERYONE at EXACTLY the same moment? You can see how ludicrous that sounds when you consider how much research is behind some form of payment.
- rtpg 12y agoactually yes, that is exactly what should happen if your objective is to have a free market. But most people are not trying to have a free market, they're trying to get paid.
- harryh 12y agoWhy is everyone having access to all research all at the same time a requirement for a free market?
- smm2000 12y agoDoes it mean that my research (reading about HP 3D printer on hacker news today) should become public the second I make this conclusion? I just told roommate that HP has very interesting and potentially profitable product.
- pessimizer 12y agoIf you were researching by reading publicly-available research, it moots the point you're mooting, doesn't it?
- fnordfnordfnord 12y ago>Should we make ALL research available to EVERYONE at EXACTLY the same moment? You can see how ludicrous that sounds when you consider how much research is behind some form of payment. Any gov't entity ought to, when possible, Yes. For certain, the terms by which these reports are made available ought to be disclosed to all parties. No party should be arbitrarily or "accidentally given" an advantage over any other.
- bobcostas55 12y ago>A prerequisite to a free market is perfect information. So there are no free markets? Perfect information is just a theoretical benchmark used by economists, not something you'll ever encounter in real life. >Insider information makes markets imperfect, thus losing the sort of holy grail property of getting the "right" price for a good. What a load of nonsense. Just think for one second about what you wrote: not incorporating information into the price makes it "right"?
- crdoconnor 12y ago>Perfect information is just a theoretical benchmark used by economists It's not used as a benchmark. It's used as an assumption when building (largely wrong) neoclassical mathematical models of the economy.
- wavefunction 12y agoInformation can be incorrect. And yes to your larger question, there are no and have never been any free market in human history. I would challenge you to name one, if you can.
- sah88 12y agoInsider trading should generally improve pricing of securities. It is the primary argument for legalizing insider trading.
- harryh 12y agoPaying money to someone for doing research isn't insider trading.
- maxerickson 12y agoI mostly agree with you, I guess the University of Michigan is not quite a private institution though. It's somehow in between public and private; it certainly receives substantial funding and support from the state of Michigan and the federal government. I don't think it's obvious that they should be prevented from gaining financial advantage from research activities (but there are certainly people on both sides of that question).