You do that then laddie

I’d take lower income any day over a slow-motion impoverishment of imagination at the hands of an oligopoly of outdated institutions.

So you do that. And fuck off and leave entirely alone those who express a different preference.

12 thoughts on “You do that then laddie”

  1. “whether you can execute trades 2 milliseconds faster than the next company”

    Hahahahaha! 2 milliseconds! An eternity.

  2. A hopelessly over regulated banking system that is chronically risk averse, vicious local business rates and tax system that is intrusive and anti-employment may also have something to do with the failing entrepreneurial environment he moans about.

  3. Wow. What a load of bollocks. Where to even begin?

    “rational calculation of risk and return” – aye, a terrible thing indeed. An engineer would never take into account…oh, wait…

    Finance doesn’t tolerate failure? The best portfolio managers get it right perhaps 60% of the time, so that’s a 40% failure rate right there.

    “helps authoritarian regimes” – unlike, say, Yahoo, which helped jail a Chinese dissident? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-19432800 Viva the tech entrepreneurs!

  4. So Much For Subtlety

    Firstly, it encourages them to embrace a worldview of rational calculation of risk and return, rather than one of unlikely adventures, allowances for failure, and artistic flair.

    So one problem is that the City is too rational? Well I can see why the Left would like people to embrace illogical stupidity, but what is in it for the rest of us?

    Secondly, it pays them too much money, and in so doing removes the sense of true risk from their lives.

    And the other problem is that it is too successful?

    I have to say as flaws go, these are kind of, you know, the flaws I would like the finance sector to have.

    These people invest with their gut based on personal experience, not with spurious attempts to quantify the value of unquantifiable companies.

    Less logical thought! More irrational prejudices! Yes, this could work for Compass.

    That’s fine to start off with, but to build intuitive VCs for the future requires a decisive shift away from the financial sector now.

    WTF does this fool think he is trying to say? How can we have a thriving venture capital industry unless it is part of a thriving financial sector? Get rid of the latter and you will get rid of the former.

    The problem with Compass remains obvious – they are not just idiots, they are morally blind idiots. As can be seen by their embrace of Zygmunt Bauman. A man who worked for Stalin’s puppet Polish Army as a political officer before moving to Poland’s version of the KGB to track down his fellow Poles who resisted Soviet colonisation. This man ought to be as untouchable as someone who volunteered for the Waffen SS and the Gestapo. Although to be fair to the Left, they are consistent as they are willing to forgive that too.

    But at least they have the shame to take down their boasts that their ideas derive mainly and directly from Bauman.

  5. Well, my salary is low too. I just considered whether to change my job or not. Anyway, we should not complain .What we should do is to strive for our future.

  6. It’s not the banks that make startups happen. It’s VCs. If he put 2 and 2 together, he’d see that all those people he mentions, the Marc Anderssens of this world are often people who did their own starting up once. And the VC structure suits startups better – huge numbers of failures, but when you get a success, it’s huge.

  7. So Much For Subtlety

    Tim Almond – “It’s not the banks that make startups happen. It’s VCs.”

    I think that is his point. But my point would be if those banks did not raise a lot of capital and create a very liquid, not to mention rich, market, there would be no money for VCs either.

    He thinks he can separate good (as he sees it) lenders from bad (as he sees it) lenders and he can’t as one depends on the other.

  8. SMFS,

    I might be wrong, but I’d assumed that most VC companies were funded by either shares or from natural growth (the likes of Marc Anderssen flogging his Netscape stock, and then lending money to other companies that are successful etc).

  9. Hey Tim,

    Thanks for the comments. I never quite know what to say to you in our online exchanges, and I know you perceive yourself as a defender of the realm of free choice and a freedom fighter for market forces etc., and to be honest, I know there isn’t much point arguing with you, because we probably just have different backgrounds that lead us to different conclusions about the world. I suppose though, I could respond.

    I’m interested in what makes people respond to things. It’s clear you read an article I write, and something I say makes you flinch and get angry. I’m imagining in the case of my Compass article, it’s perhaps the implicit suggestion that someone ‘shouldn’t be working in finance’, and you perceive this as an attack on freedom etc. (e.g. ‘how dare you tell someone what to do’). Alternatively, it’s a broader reaction against my lack of belief in the efficiency of your imagined rational agents freely interacting in a market, and my implicit suggestion that the market hasn’t ‘allocated resources efficiently’ etc. And yes, if you have that as your base level assumptions, indeed my musings make little sense to you.

    I though, have different base level assumptions. For a start, I think there are few people who work in industries merely because they are ‘expressing their preferences’. For example, the automotive workers in Detroit to you were presumably in their because they had some intrinsic preference to be there, rather than little other choice, or that my Tesco purchase of baked beans is me expressing my identity via consumption choices, rather than me being too poor to buy anything else, like ‘here I am, expressing my identity via my market choices’.

    It seems your standard thought-structure is A) someone always has a defined personal identity that B) they then express through their rational choices in some kind of cultural vacuum and C) this leads to efficient outcomes. From my experience of financial markets though, I’d say many people leave university with A) a partially formed and unstable personal identity at best, and subsequently B) make rather arbitrary choices to enter the industry because they don’t know what else to do, or they dad told them to, or their friends are, or their are jobs available, or because they’re part of a cultural system that ascribes value to certain professions, and C) this then actually feeds back into their identity-formation process and they come to believe themselves to be ‘financial professionals’, rather than say ‘entrepreneurs’.

    At the heart of my concern is whether this process is actually rather intellectually oppressive and whether you need countervailing forces to present alternatives to graduates.

    I’m imagining at the heart of your concern is that this seems to imply that maybe the government should ‘force’ people to be entrepreneurs or something, but I’ve actually never said this. I’m in agreement that I’d rather have people blindly being sucked into an industry they have little love for than people being forced to do something a government tells them.

    A startup community though, does not just emerge from people blandly ‘expressing their preferences’, it emerges from a culture where people are encouraged to be like that. I for one would like to do my part to present that alternative vision for graduates.

    Cheers

  10. my Tesco purchase of baked beans is me expressing my identity via consumption choices, rather than me being too poor to buy anything else, like ‘here I am, expressing my identity via my market choices’.
    ___

    Being “poor” is part of ones identity….as is their level of skill and capability which shapes their out come of job/product. They make not “like” the job or products in question yet the current development of their identity is what created that out come, which is something solid..almost every one on earth would “rather” otherwise known as day dream of something better, sadly few take a step towards it.

    From my experience of financial markets though, I’d say many people leave university with A) a partially formed and unstable personal identity at best.
    ___

    You worked in a low key position for two years lol and of course they leave uni with that level of identity, its called being YOUNG, people have to have expereince of life to know what they want.

  11. So Much For Subtlety

    Brett Scott

    At the heart of my concern is whether this process is actually rather intellectually oppressive and whether you need countervailing forces to present alternatives to graduates.

    It is oppressive to offer people well paying jobs? No one is forced to take those well paying jobs. I can look around my circle of relatives and friends and see some who went to the City, some who went into the Law and some who preferred other things. Mainly teaching as it happened, but also the UN and some NGOs. No one forced them. The modern economy offers young people a vast number of choices. The fact that many makes choices you do not like is not proof of oppression.

    But you are right. You do come from a different place and so are unlikely to find much agreement here. Welcome to planet Earth. It is not too late to rejoin the reality based community.

  12. “Countervailing forces to present real alternatives to graduates”

    Look, I can only echo Tim Worstall; you do whatever you want with your alternatives. By all means spend your life trying to find those countervailing forces and real alternatives, which BTW look to me actually to mean restricting choice. We can get on with our alternatives, which might mean taking well paid jobs, regardless of your disapproval.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *