Alan Greenspan was on the daily show. He just said “all people, when faced with uncertainty, pull back” - He’s wrong. I’ve got data to back this up. I’m not saying that I am smarter than Greenspan, his claim is hyperbolic.
Vindauga is the blog of Light + Glass Studio. The gallery here represents a broader sampling of our glasswork and photography, including older works, and works in progress. Write us at vindauga[at]gmail.com.
Categories
Links
Mississippi Artist Resources
Mississippi Artists
Archives
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
- May 2006
- April 2006
- March 2006
- February 2006
- January 2006
- December 2005
- November 2005
- October 2005
- September 2005
- August 2005
- July 2005
- June 2005
- May 2005
- April 2005
- March 2005
- February 2005
- January 2005
- May 2004
Why would anyone assume you are smarter than Greenspan simply because you took note of something he said that is inaccurate?
He also said repeatedly in an interview with Terry Gross that he was in no way responsible for the sub-prime mortgage crisis, which I would say is wrong.
Terry Gross? You mean on FRESH AIR? I wish I could accurately symbolize dragging out the “fresh” part. I missed that interview. I suspect that I would agree with your assessment though.
Why would someone think I was getting uppity? I don’t know, because often people think that when you correct them or someone they support. Because if someone were really a fan of Greenspan they would likely hit me with “he was the chairman of the Fed, he’s got PhD.’s and experience out the wazoo, what do you have”, which is pretty much why I said that I have data to back it up.
Thinking about it though, he was probably referring to how values in the negative realm are subjectively weighted more heavily than values in the positive realm. Tversky and Kahnemann did work in this area that shows that as you approach zero changes in objective value (say, a $1 change) vary subjectively based on distance from zero (or any anchor point really). So that a change from $1 to $2 dollars is subjectively weighted more than a change from $9 to $10. This tends to make people risk averse as you approach zero.
But again, there are other conditions that affect this. Tversky Kahnemann’s later work makes this clear (re: The Asian Disease Problem).