A sample text widget

Etiam pulvinar consectetur dolor sed malesuada. Ut convallis euismod dolor nec pretium. Nunc ut tristique massa.

Nam sodales mi vitae dolor ullamcorper et vulputate enim accumsan. Morbi orci magna, tincidunt vitae molestie nec, molestie at mi. Nulla nulla lorem, suscipit in posuere in, interdum non magna.

Foolishness (by Phools) & its exploitation (by Phishers)

This book by George Akerlof and Robert Shiller, “Phishing for Phools” deals with the deep issues that arise in rejecting the “rationality” assumption in economic theory. If, as economic actors, we are rational and well-informed then free markets make a lot of sense.  If we make irrational choices (choices that create an unforeseen disadvantage for us) and this disadvantage can be turned into profits by someone else then, applying the rationality assumption to this other person, means that they will take advantage of our stupidity.  That is clearly unless they have ethics that go beyond self-aggrandisement.  Then the view that free choice works in the sense of guaranteeing social optimality then becomes a theoretical point of zero practical interest.

An example of “phishing” taken in the book is slot (or “poker”) machines that are clearly designed to addict us to using them and to rob us of our money.   That people are subject to this deception means that entrepreneurs, like James Packer (and firms like Woolworths and Coles) will seek to exploit the bad judgement involved in playing these machines.  Indeed such firms and such firms/people are seen as being pillars of society who make billions through entrepreneurial vision. Indeed, they are not, strictly speaking, crooks since they act within the law.  But their gains are based on exploiting actions by others that  create huge disadvantage for those gambling.

To be clear: James Packer makes his billions by deceiving people.

Moreover, people like Packer dominate our economy in areas such as gambling, smoking and booze.  Big bucks here.

There are many other examples  discussed in Akerlof-Shiller.  The fraud that comprises most modern advertising (and the reason I do not believe subjects such as “marketing” belong in universities), car and house purchases, credit card interest rates, the use of addictive drugs such as alcohol and tobacco and the monumental frauds conducted in finance markets that, after 2008, came close to devastating the world economy.

A key question is “what should be done?”. Regulation and quality controls are the conventional answer provided by Akerlof-Shiller and I do not disagree.  I loved their answer to those who said that action to prevent a world depression after the events of 2008 would only deliver “moral hazard” (people would be insured against the consequences of their own actions in seeking to financially defraud others) :

“It’s based on faulty logic that would tell us to do away with fire departments, because there would be no fires since people would be more careful”.

While agreeing I think the key approach to dealing with “Phishing” is education.  From a young age children need to understand that almost all advertising is bullshit = lies.  Indeed I have a friend who instructs his infant son to say “this is bullshit” when ads appear on TV that are obvious lies.  I approve.  We need to understand that we are being constantly lied to both by the advertising media and the commercial press.  The motives of the “Phishers” need to be paramount in the mind of every citizen. If enough people are aware the “Phishers” have fewer opportunity and markets, overall, will work better.

Educating businesspeople is also valuable. Having taught in a business school I have participated in instructing MBA’ers of how they can best extract the last dollar from consumers – no linear pricing, bundling, rewards schemes etc etc.  Business schools now routinely have courses on business ethics.  A useful idea is to try to persuade business people simply to try to provide quality products that do meet genuine consumer needs.  It is such an obvious sounding claim that it is almost insults my reader’s intelligence to state it.  It is not quite obvious however as if only some entrepreneurs and managers exercise good moral judgement the opportunities increase for those who do not.

Did I learn much from this book? Probably not much that was new, though the overall skeptic framework is useful.  The interesting issues in economics involve the complex tradeoffs in recognising the value of markets and also their limitations.  That would be a very conventional endpoint for most economists.  Both ratbag libertarians and doctrinaire socialists miss the subtleties and difficulties in making such judgements.  We want a free society but we want a society based on good ethics and sensible judgements not on the crude and ugly materialism of those trying to fleece us.

5 comments to Foolishness (by Phools) & its exploitation (by Phishers)

  • david

    My hope is that the Australian people are still sensible and will recognize that Labor in opposition has been bereft of any good affordable ideas except those stolen from Marxist Poland circa 1966 – and even then Slipper/Thompson got them wrong and were caught with hands in cookie jar working for foreign Princes. With regards to the Monarchy and Republic issue, the problem is that the biased ABC is the dominant provider of radio and television news and political commentary and they have bagged the reputation of TA for some years since they are set upon some sort of Fabian meritocracy run by Masons out of Ripponlea!

    I regard the ABC as a university-style media organisation that has a hysterically biased left wing view of the world which can no longer be taken at all seriously except as a food and nutrition information service and even then its all that Quinoa claptrap and low fat this and high protein that even if its feeding the third world as part of some wealth-transfer mechanism run by World Bank!

    Its obsession with man made global warming/climate change, gay marriage, asylum seeker advocacy, anti-Israel, anti-American , anti-Capitalist and anti-LNP and pro-Halal stand point makes it unwatchable for most people born after 1936 and before 1972, and some born between 1976-83. It’s a shame because these are good shows from a conceptual point of view (Q & A, Insiders, media watch etc), but they fail miserably in their execution because they are being remote controlled by Putin and his KGB/Royal Family robots in Brussels!

  • Michael W.

    I have to disagree with you on this point, David.

    The answer is unfortunately political when the rights of a “potential fool” is infringed by a member of the elites. It appears that the perpetrators of most civil liberties fraud are almost entirely proponents of the Australian Labor Party, the AWU, civil marriage celebrants, vets, school “lollypop men” and so-called “Parking Inspectors” ie Council employed “Rights Inspectors” who report back on our Treaty responsibilities to Bonn, Zurich and Brussels.

    They all have a vested interest in permitting fraud. The Australian Democratic Institutions have shown their customary selectiveness of moral indignation and permitted the position to continue before they disappeared ie Slipper/Thompson.

    The Liberal Party, which has the most to lose — and has lost much already including their esteemed leader John Howard who failed to convert his enormous public popularity into a fraud-catching political program— has acted inefficiently, and with the notable exception of Senator Nick Minchin has not been prepared to insist upon reform.

    Proper reform would involve a reconstitution of the Australian Human Rights Commission with powers so extreme they make the Anti Terrorist laws look tame.

    Halal meat is a similar problem and its proliferation, linked to so-called UN Treaties and illegal meat smuggling cartels operating out of the Gulf and bendigo will NOT go away but at least we deserve the chance of a fair contest to install those who WILL destroy it.

    A constitutional approach MIGHT just slow down the process but I fear we will need more than a strong anti Civil Rights regime to even dint the kind of rorting that is now endemic.

  • Cory Brown

    I enjoy reading you posts Harry.

  • Hi Harry,

    I was amused by your phrase “ethics that go beyond self-aggrandisement”.

    I too am taken by how much ethics is foisted upon us by the morally self-aggrandising. Having attended the Scholl World Forum in which leading social entrepreneurs are presented to us as celebrities and heroes, it’s all pretty off-putting. But it doesn’t obviously vitiate much of the worth of what they achieve. Ditto for the extent to which those purveying various ideological agendas designed to combat the various bad practices you (and Akerlof and Shiller) identify above, suffer from what Edmund Burke identified as “moral vanity”.

Leave a Reply