Markets aren’t efficient. They are robust, redundant, complex, and highly adaptive.
They are what is needed to survive and respond to changes in the real world. That isn’t efficiency, it’s anti fragility.
Nod to Bitcoin is Venice
#[0] & Sacha Meyers
Chapter 2 really changed how I think about the concept
Are you recording the audio book now? Can't wait for that to come out. Thanks for reading all them others.
Trust me bro! It’s not efficiency 😁🤙
That’s so true. Very well articulated.
I had an epiphany when I realized the amount of computation a market produces is orders of magnitude more than central planning could ever marshal. Which is exactly why markets distribute resources so much more effectively.
Nature isn’t efficient. Imagine how many apple trees you can grow out of the seeds from just one tree? What a waste! We need Klaus to make it right!
It's fair to say that they are efficient—but efficient in the real world, where there are transactions costs, information asymmetries, etc. The problem is not with the claim that markets are efficient, but with the narrow context of the model of "perfect competition" in which the claim is usually made. This is an important distinction because, given that the PC model assumes away all the problems that markets solve, government planning is also "efficient" in the context of that model, even though anyone with half a brain knows it's not so in the real world.
"Let us take a given individual. Since his own ends are clearly given and he acts to pursue them, surely at least his actions can be considered efficient. But no, they may not, for in order for him to act efficiently, he would have to possess perfect knowledge—perfect knowledge of the best technology, of future actions and reactions by other people, and of future natural events. But since no one can ever have perfect knowledge of the future, no one’s action can be called “efficient.” We live in a world of uncertainty. Efficiency is therefore a chimera."
Rothbard
