Financial Innovation Update


FINANCIAL INNOVATION UPDATE….Yesterday I passed along Dani Rodrik’s question about whether financial innovation has actually benefited the real economy. As he pointed out, it made homes available to a lot more people, but that turned out not to be such a great thing after all. Reader Brian J. then pointed me to Ben Bernanke’s take on this issue from last year:

The increasing sophistication and depth of financial markets promote economic growth by allocating capital where it can be most productive. And the dispersion of risk more broadly across the financial system has, thus far, increased the resilience of the system and the economy to shocks.

Nope, neither of those turned out to be the case either. I’m tempted to say three strikes and you’re out, but for now let’s keep it an open question.

By the way, yesterday Tyler Cowen recommended this 2006 paper on credit derivatives, so I read it last night. It was quite good, and very accessible to lay readers. I was pleased to see that the authors basically concluded that CDOs are little more than a scam that violates basic economic principles and can only work (for a short time) thanks to industrial size helpings of hooey and sales malarkey. That’s been pretty much my conclusion too. Credit default swaps are a different story, but the problem there is that, perhaps, hedging of risk might not really be such a good idea after all if it turns into an economy-wide phenomenon. After all, the people making/taking a loan (or issuing/buying a bond etc.) are the ones who are in the best position to assess the risk of the loan/bond/whatever and monitor its performance. Selling off risk to someone else often has real benefits, but it also produces incentives not to bother assessing risk properly and creates serious problems of nontransparency.

Also, it can cause the global economy to collapse via cascading counterparty defaults that send us back to the stone age. But that’s a story for another time.

DOES IT FEEL LIKE POLITICS IS AT A BREAKING POINT?

Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our newsletters

Subscribe and we'll send Mother Jones straight to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate

Share your feedback: We’re planning to launch a new version of the comments section. Help us test it.