Jump to Navigation
Home

Main menu

  • Home
  • News
  • Markets Map
  • Sentiments
  • Topics
  • Data
  • Comments
  • Images
  • Blog
  • About

Secondary menu

  • Latest News
  • Top Rated
  • Most Popular
  • Archive
  • Discussions
  • David Dayen: FSOC Annual Report Shows Continued Interest...
  • Phaneesh Murthy may face court in iGate sexual harassment
  • $500 mn US fine: Daiichi may sue Ranbaxy's ex...
  • China’s Economic Outlook Just Keeps Getting Worse
  • 33% Indians co-founded tech startups in US
  • China HSBC flash PMI hits 7-month low, fans growth fears
  • Japanese Stocks Plunge 1000 Points - Biggest Drop In 26...
  • Asia stocks slide as China factory output slips
  • Liveblogging World War II: May 23, 1943
  • Stealth Recession Leading Indicators Disconnected

    Money-Making Speculators Must Stablize Markets; Only Money-Losing Speculators Can Destabilize

    Mon, 05/16/2011 - 10:37 EDT - Dr. Mark J. Perry
    • RDF10

    "People who argue that speculation is destabilizing seldom realize that this is largely equivalent to saying that speculators lose money, since speculation can be destabilizing in general only if speculators sell when the currency (or commodity) is low in price and buy when it is high." ~Milton Friedman, Essays in Positive Economics (p. 175) The chart above illustrates Friedman's point. The blue line above represents commodity (or currency) price movements over time in a market WITHOUT speculators (due to a government ban on futures trading, e.g. onions), and the red line represents that same market WITH the fictional destabilizing speculators (as portrayed by the media and politicians) now being allowed to trade. For speculators to destabilize that market, they would have to make prices more volatile over time, and that is what the red line illustrates - there are greater price swings, and greater price volatility (both up AND down) WITH speculators compared to price movements over time WITHOUT speculators. But saying that speculators destabilize the market above is also the same thing as saying that destabilizing speculators must BUY when the market prices are at a HIGH point (driving them up even higher) and must SELL when the market prices are at a LOW point (driving them even lower). And as we all know, buying HIGH and selling LOW is a sure way to lose money, and speculators can then only be destabilizing if they are LOSING money, as Friedman points out, and therefore the chart above can NOT represent reality. Conversely, if and when speculators are making money, they have to be buying low and selling high, which would be the same thing as saying that they are stabilizing markets and reducing price variability. And the more "excessive speculation" and "unfair profiteering" they are accused of, the GREATER the role speculators play in stabilizing prices and markets. Bottom Line: If speculators are making money, they MUST be stabilizing markets. If speculators are losing money, they MUST be destabilizing markets (fictional chart above). But speculators can NOT make money and destabilize markets at the same time.

    • Original article
    • Login or register to post comments
     

    Related

    • In Celebration of the Speculators, Who Bless Society With Signifcant Benefits

      1. "Nothing sparks spasms of poor economic commentary like rising oil prices. From left to right, pundits and politicians outdo each other at accusing evildoers of hurting good people. This week, a Democratic congressional committee held a hearing on the issue of high gas prices and excessive oil speculation.

    • Speculators and Instability

      MarcK asked in the requests thread about commodity speculators: “I would like to hear more about the commodities market and how banks like Goldman have been manipulating the prices. No one seems to focus on these speculators when the price of oil and even copper goes up for no good reason.”

    • What Would Milton Friedman Say?

    • I'll Side with Mises: Would Friedman's Logic Lead Us to QE2?

      |Peter Boettke| For some of the reasons that have been supported here by Steve and George, a WSJ editoral argues that Milton Friedman's monetary policy analysis could be used to defend QE2 in our current economic context.

    • Kimberly-Clark: Low Valuation, High Yield

      Chuck Carnevale submits:Dallas-based Kimberly-Clark (KMB) is one of the world's leading manufacturers of personal care and hygiene products. Kimberly-Clark operates under four major business segments:1. Personal Care Segment - is their biggest contributing over 40% of total revenues. Major brands include Huggies, Pull-Ups, Kotex, Depend and Poise to name just a few.2.

    • When speculation fails

      Tim Worstall’s defence of oil speculators is an immaculate exposition of neoclassical thinking. It is also deeply questionable.  He says:

    • Oil prices and trading mechanics

      A report from Reuters (hat tip: Felix Salmon) attributes the wild commodity price moves last week to algorithmic stop-loss trading. Jim Brown offered these details on the oil trading:

    • High Frequency Trading

      High frequency trading is rightly criticized. It isn’t bad because rich people are getting richer. It is bad because of the manipulation of markets. Those being

    • Was the commodity sell-off good news?

      WAS the sharp sell-off in commodities that took place yesterday good news for the global economy? It potentially could be, given that higher resource prices act as a tax and sap consumer disposable income. But whether they ought to greeted with a smile or frown depends on the nature of decline. If prices fall due to a weakening growth outlook, that's bad; the impact of slower growth may more than offset the benefit from falling prices. If prices drop because of new supply or innovation, that's clearly good. It's also good news if prices fall due to the collapse of a speculative bubble.

    • Sharp Reduction in Corn Stocks Halts Downtrend, But Sets Up Market for Option Strangles

      James Cordier submits:As I watched stocks collapse to new 2010 lows last week, I was amused to observe all of the TV “analysts” from daytime fund managers to nighttime TV stars talk about which stocks are at good “value” levels now and where you should be buying. Buy low and sell high. It all seems so 1990’s in today’s investment environment. Buy low and sell high only works if asset values are moving up.

    Latest

    Police unable to identify woman who died in Toronto subway station after suspect stole her purse
    Police unable to identify woman who died in...
    Amazon to Turn Fan Fiction into a Money Maker with Kindle Worlds
    Amazon to Turn Fan Fiction into a Money Maker...

    User login

    • Create new account
    • Request new password
    • Click on the icon to sign in with your social network login or enter your Bullfax.com login

    Our Blog

    • ICBC/Goldman Sachs: farewell
    • Japan’s budget deficit, Rolls-Royce, Raytheon and Sony in Our Daily Round-Up for 05/22/2013
    • Apple chief Tim Cook defends tax practices and denies avoidance

    Markets Map

    Markets Map

    Follow Us

    Follow Us on Facebook, Twitter, Google Plus and RSS LinkedIn Facebook Twitter Google Plus RSS
    S&P 500: 1655.35 -0.83% FTSE: 6840.27 0.53% Nikk.: 15206.32 -2.77% DAX: 8530.89 0.69% HSI: 22827.869 -1.9% FX: EUR/GBP: 1.1708 USD/EUR: 1.285 JPY/USD: 102.545 Commodities: Gold: 1370.40

    Bullfax.com - Market News & Analysis 2008-2011
    Contact Us | About Us | Terms & Conditions

    Follow Us on Facebook, Twitter, Google Plus and RSS LinkedIn Facebook Twitter Google Plus RSS .

    Secondary menu

    • Latest News
    • Top Rated
    • Most Popular
    • Archive
    • Discussions