Saturday, June 15, 2019
Groupthink and Academic Culture
Dan Klein gives a lecture on academic groupthink, tying in our joint paper and my "Heterogeneity" paper. Dan asks how groupthink can dominate entire academic disciplines.
Departmentally based decision making, collegiality, depends on majority vote. Democratic processes are eminently susceptible to conformity pressure, as de Tocqueville noticed in the 1830s.
Scholars like Irving Janis (also Milgram and Asch) have suggested that groups tend to conform. Love of people like ourselves, homophily, leads to the eradication of alternative viewpoints. Highly intelligent people are easily capable of groupthink, as Janis's book Groupthink points out with respect to the Kennedy cabinet. Klein points out that academic beliefs are more closely related to self-image than the decisions that Janis describes; the nature of academics' beliefs is closer to Jonathan Haidt's "sacred beliefs."
Klein uses the example of the ideological field of history. At the departmental level, homophily leads to groupthink. At the national level, the field's hierarchical hiring allows the elite universities to create a monotone ideological perspective. Learned societies scour non-conforming academics by keeping them from publication opportunities. "The profession answers these questions for all."
Universities are the reverse of what they appear. They do not encourage thought. They encourage mindless conformity.
Klein asks: "What if waiters worked as professors do, so each waiter job is controlled by a central waiter department?" Of course, waiters are not as inept or incompetent as professors because there is no centralized waiters' learned society.
Wednesday, June 12, 2019
Is Value Investing Dead?
Vitaliy Katsenelson,
CFA, has an excellent
post on LinkedIn: “Is Value Investing
Dead?” Katsenelson concludes that it is
not, and he is right, although there might be muted returns to value investing
for several more years.
There is a parallel between commodities and value stocks because
both are devalued by monetary creation in the early phases of a bubble market.
Something similar occurred in the late 1990s, when gold was bottoming near two hundred,
and everyone was saying that Warren Buffett had gone the way of the Brontosaurus.
In the early phases of a bubble market, low interest rates
stimulate competition. Hence, enterprises that are viable in the
long term face more competition than otherwise because the Federal Reserve banking
cartel subsidizes inefficient competitors. In the commodity sector viable mines are
forced to compete with mines that the Fed artificially makes viable with low
interest rates. The results are supply gluts.
At some point increasing competition causes bankruptcies of
the less viable manufacturers, natural resource firms, and mines. Given intensifying competition, the
subsidized interest rates are no longer sufficient to sustain the inefficient
producers. For value stocks, oil firms, and mines, subsidized output strains the least competitive firms, which
ultimately go bankrupt.
At this point in time, we see depressed value in the gold mining, oil, and value stocks. The depression in those stocks has lasted a long time because the monetary creation of the 2008-2016 period was exceptionally great. The bubble period might continue for several more years. Before it ends, I would expect higher valuations in the bubble stocks, recently known as the FAANG stocks--Facebook, Apple, Amazon, Netflix, and Google. In the 1920s radio and automobile stocks played a similar role. In the 1960s the Nifty Fifty, including American Home Products and Xerox, did. In the late 1990s the Internet stocks such as Drugstore.com and Beauty.com did.
As artificially
intense market competition ends because of supply gluts, the value stocks
survive and enter a less competitive environment; so do the most efficient
natural resource firms. In a less competitive environment, they thrive.
Hence, oil wells, miners, and value stocks are depressed in this
period, but they have a bright future. In all bubble periods, the claim
that "we have entered a new era" becomes common. The mania is fueled by the myopic definition of risk as standard deviation, which is favored by finance economists. This statistical definition overlooks longitudinal patterns and the effects of crashes on individual well being and stress.
Late-stage-bubble
buyers force up the stock prices of the favored, speculative stocks in what
Steve Sjuggerud calls a speculative melt-up. The inevitable crash
is worst for the most speculative stocks. There is some spillover to all
stocks because of panic selling, but the value stocks then outperform.
The most important characteristic to make money is patience
or persistence. Another is focus. These
are not characteristics taught or valued in American educational institutions,
which function with a win-lose, socialistic mindset and emphasize scientism at the expense of common sense.
Tuesday, June 11, 2019
Do at Least One Politically Incorrect Thing a Day
Do at least at least one politically incorrect thing a day.
Gold day: The Daily News calls you a "jerk" and other media attempt to deplatform you.
Silver day: Fake history and Black Studies professors, effete Antifa students, and other dumbed-down Democrats attack you with hate speech and hate emails.
Bronze day: Fake law professors say you have bad taste.
Runner-up day: Facebook or Twitter throws you off.
Second-runner-up day: HR or diversity department scolds or investigates you for thought crime.
Second-runner-up day: HR or diversity department scolds or investigates you for thought crime.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)