[RRE]pointers

From: Phil Agre (pagreat_private)
Date: Sun Jan 27 2002 - 13:56:03 PST

  • Next message: Phil Agre: "[RRE]notes and recommendations"

    Here are some more URL's.  Thanks to everyone who contributed.
    
    RRE home page: http://dlis.gseis.ucla.edu/people/pagre/rre.html
    
    Please forward this message to anyone who can use it.
    
    
    Before I try to ramp down my coverage of Enron, just a few words
    about how I find it interesting.  One angle, of course, is scandal.
    Watergate established a template for all subsequent administrations,
    with each side consciously or unconsciously using Watergate as a
    framework to interpret what the other side was doing, getting the
    taint off itself and sticking it back where (they imagine) it belongs.
    
    After a while, however, this becomes counterproductive.  The fact
    that the Watergate frame doesn't describe Enron very well is itself
    being spun, somewhat confusedly, in different directions.  But the
    important thing about Enron lies elsewhere: in the nature of markets.
    Enron was a bunch of alleged crooks who bought politicians, fine.
    But let's remember what Enron did: they manufactured markets.  That
    is, they were in the business of creating institutions that connected
    buyers and sellers.  This is an incredibly hard thing to do, and even
    economics classes do not prepare the average market participant to
    appreciate just how ugly even very efficient markets can be when you
    open the lid and watch the actual day-to-day workings of the market-
    making mechanism.
    
    The basic problem is that the market mechanism (be it the marketplace
    in the town square, the stock market, or a newly established energy
    trading system) is a public good, and with public goods there is
    always the hard question of how to pay for them.  Market mechanisms
    also exhibit network effects, which means that they often tend to
    be monopolies.  Most markets are also built on top of distribution
    systems that are themselves natural monopolies, whether the highway
    system, the phone system, or the electric grid.
    
    This is one of many reasons why, neoliberal ideology aside, markets
    are inevitably bound up with government.  Another reason has to do
    with information.  Markets require enormous quantities of accurate
    information, but producing accurate information is one of the
    hardest problems in the world.  One solution to the problem has
    been to establish professions, such as journalism and accounting,
    that legitimate their professional autonomy by producing accurate
    information.  The problem is that it's hard to keep the profession's
    long-term legitimation interests from being eroded by short-term
    competitive pressures.  That's why we now have cable and radio
    outlets that succeed in the news market by spreading distortion and
    lies (they're the ones whose advertising uses words like "fairness"
    and "truth"), and it's why we are confronting the corrupt condition
    of accounting firms, stock analysts, and other information-producers
    in the marketplace.
    
    In these ways among others, markets are inherently unstable.  That
    does not mean that markets are bad, or that we should get rid of them;
    nor does it follow that someone should pass a law declaring "let there
    be honest marketplaces".  All it means is that we have an opportunity
    to cast aside ideologies and ask what market institutions really are,
    and what their proper relation to government might be.  The answer
    is not obvious.  The fact that Enron was closely involved with the
    government is not itself a scandal, given the nature of its business.
    But the nature of that involvement will remain a mystery to us so
    long as we continue to analyze it solely in terms of either "business
    corrupting democracy" or "government interfering in the marketplace".
    
    The fact is, we don't have the conceptual foundations we need to
    analyze something like the California energy market, where everything
    depended on institutional design processes of an extremely esoteric
    sort, where spectacular market dysfunctions could be set in motion by
    very nonobvious features of market-making rules.  We don't even have
    a clear understanding of market-making on Wall Street.  Market-making
    costs money, the money has to come from somewhere, and most ordinary
    stockholders would be most unhappy to comprehend that much of the
    money comes from market-makers using their inside knowledge of the
    scheduled orders to trade against their own customers.  (This problem
    got worse last year with the introduction of decimalized trading, but
    it hardly began then; see, for example, Greg Ip, "Nasdaq market maker,
    seeing all the orders, becomes canny trader", Wall Street Journal,
    3/3/00.)  There's a lot more where that came from, and we need a crash
    now and then to make it all evident.  Perhaps the crash cycle is even
    part of the natural order of the market.
    
    If any Bush administration officials broke any laws, then sure,
    send them to jail.  And the analogy between Enron's deception about
    its books and the Bush administration's systematic deceptions about
    the budget is most certainly the sign of a shared culture.  But
    the real story here is about our lack of comprehension of markets.
    There's a reason why historically the economy does worse under the
    "pro-business" party -- it's because "pro-business" doesn't mean
    "pro-market".  You can see this in the contrast between Clinton-era
    SEC head Arthur Levitt, who made his career protecting investors,
    and Bush-era SEC head Harvey Pitt, who made his career resisting
    Levitt's reforms by representing, among others, Arthur Andersen.
    Those reforms are back on the table, and we will see whether the
    voices in Congress who are taking responsibility for resisting reform
    are matched by voices in the administration.  Enron, for its part,
    supported politicians for a good reason -- they needed to engage
    with the government in order to build new marketplaces -- and they
    disproportionately supported Republicans for a bad reason -- they
    had a fiduciary interest in ensuring that those new marketplaces
    were designed in the way that produced the maximum return on their
    shareholders' investments.  And there is no sign that anyone on
    the Republican side spent ten seconds knowing or caring about the
    difference.  If you want a scandal, look there.
    
    Enron ended up shooting itself because it underestimated the forces
    that any new market mechanism sets into motion.  Modern market
    mechanisms only operate because they are integrated with second- and
    third-order markets that allow market participants, including most
    importantly the market-makers themselves, to manage risk, for example
    through derivative contracts.  Nobody understands how those things
    work, and Enron certainly didn't.  Derivative trading is the economic
    equivalent of plutonium, and the new markets that Enron created
    didn't have remotely the institutional framework that was required
    to contain the stuff.  That framework includes audit and regulation,
    none of which was on the job.  Audit was off the job because the
    accounting industry has become totally corrupt, and regulation was off
    the job because regulatory systems are established reactively at best.
    That's why Enron ended up stuffing debt into offshore, off-the-books
    "entities", and that's why people got hosed.
    
    The necessary reforms are profound, but they won't happen so long as
    our understanding of markets remains primitive.  Primitive theories
    of markets were alright in the old days when markets themselves were
    primitive.  But the Internet changes that.  It is now technically and
    economically feasible to build marketplaces of tremendous complexity,
    that engage in real-time dynamics that are very hard to understand.
    The traditional economic equilibrium models, still unfortunately
    taught in school, are based on an economic theory in which markets are
    literally made by magic.  What Enron shows us is that the very human
    non-magic of market-making will only become more obtrusive at the rate
    we're going.
    
    Please by all means send me URL's that relate to this more fundamental
    dimension of the problem.
    
    
    war
    
    America's Chaotic Road to War
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A42754-2002Jan26.html
    
    How Bin Laden Network Spread Its Tentacles
    http://www.observer.co.uk/islam/story/0,1442,636449,00.html
    http://www.observer.co.uk/islam/story/0,1442,587375,00.html
    http://www.observer.co.uk/islam/story/0,1442,640079,00.html
    http://www.observer.co.uk/islam/story/0,1442,577943,00.html
    http://www.observer.co.uk/islam/story/0,1442,577971,00.html
    http://www.observer.co.uk/islam/story/0,1442,576688,00.html
    
    long article on Mohamed Atta
    http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/asection/la-000006940jan27.story
    
    Pentagon Plans New Command For US
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A42765-2002Jan26.html
    
    CIA's New Celebrity Exposes Its Failings
    http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/opinion/la-000006738jan27.story
    
    WTC Fresh Kills Investigative Site
    http://cryptome.org/wtc-fk/wtc-freshkills.htm
    
    Out of the Rubble, Artifacts of Anguish Saved for Posterity
    http://www.nytimes.com/2002/01/27/nyregion/27STEE.html
    
    
    civil liberties
    
    crisis in detention centers for asylum-seekers in Australia
    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2002/01/item20020127121525_1.htm
    http://www.smh.com.au/news/0201/27/national/national1.html
    http://www.spareroomsforrefugees.com/
    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2002/01/item20020127121525_1.htm
    
    Powell Asks Bush to Reverse Stand on War Captives
    http://www.nytimes.com/2002/01/27/politics/27DETA.html
    http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20020126-76636371.htm
    
    Milosevic War Crimes Case Faces Collapse
    (I have less and less confidence in the Independent, though)
    http://news.independent.co.uk/world/europe/story.jsp?story=116523
    
    Big Brother Awards France
    http://www.bigbrotherawards.eu.org/2001/presse.html
    
    
    the Bush scandals
    
    Appearances Count in Conflicts of Interest
    (in this case, at the EPA)
    http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/opinion/la-000006739jan27.story
    
    Bush's Nomination of Pickering Deserves Rejection
    (of all the people he could choose, this guy really tells you something)
    http://www.freep.com/voices/editorials/ejudge26_20020126.htm
    
    Enron's Run Tripped by Arrogance, Greed
    http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/asection/la-000006925jan27.story
    
    Enron Operated Amid a Financial Maze
    http://inq.philly.com/content/inquirer/2002/01/27/national/ENRON27.htm
    
    Enron's Culture Fed Its Demise
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A42770-2002Jan26.html
    
    Enron Spread Influence Far and Wide
    ("Enron operated in a way that was reminiscent of tobacco companies")
    http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/story.hts/special/enron/1226925
    
    Powerful Figures Behind Firm's Rise -- and Crash
    http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/asection/la-000006664jan26.story
    
    The Scandal That Has Left the Credibility of American Politics in Shreds
    http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/story.jsp?story=116215
    
    Bush Is Indebted To Enron's Professional Abettors, Too
    http://www.tpj.org/Lobby_Watch/andersen.html
    
    jargon watch: study the Cheney quote starting in the fourth paragraph
    (breaking the issue down into vague concepts for purposes of exaggeration)
    http://dailynews.yahoo.com/htx/ap/20020127/pl/enron_cheney_1.html
    
    Poll Finds Enron's Taint Clings More to GOP Than Democrats
    (jargon doesn't always work, but the jargoneers are rarely accountable for it)
    http://www.nytimes.com/2002/01/27/business/27POLL.html?pagewanted=print
    
    When They Say It's Not About Politics
    http://www.arktimes.com/dumas/012502dumas.html
    
    Enron Death Perplexes Investigators
    ("the subcommittee had been very interested in speaking with Mr. Baxter")
    http://www.msnbc.com/news/694040.asp
    
    Baxter Death Ruled Suicide; Probe Goes On
    http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/asection/la-000006977jan27.story
    
    Enron Debacle Shakes Up Congress' Agenda; War Now Shares Spotlight
    http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/asection/la-000006975jan27.story
    
    What Did Ken Lay Know on August 20th?
    (I'd rather know what his board's audit committee knew)
    http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/jan2002/nf20020124_5842.htm
    
    Questionable Accounting Practices Led Fellow "Big Five" to Ignore Enron Case
    http://www.public-i.org/story_01_012502.htm
    
    Enron-Type Accounting Problems Widespread, ex-SEC Chief Says
    http://www.msnbc.com/news/693330.asp
    
    more on Harvey Pitt versus Arthur Levitt (from last month)
    http://www.thenewrepublic.com/121701/chait121701.html
    
    Drip, Drip, Drip: Eroding the Barriers to Corporate Crime 
    http://www.commondreams.org/views02/0126-01.htm
    
    1999 Deal Failed After Scrutiny of Enron Books
    http://www.nytimes.com/2002/01/27/business/27DEAL.html?pagewanted=print
    
    Report: Enron Spent at Least $1.8 Million on Texas Politicians
    http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/story.hts/special/enron/1226916
    
    White House Changed Draft Plan to Help Enron: Lawmaker
    http://abcnews.go.com/wire/Politics/reuters20020126_97.html
    
    Army Secretary Takes on Afghan, Enron Wars
    http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/asection/la-000006665jan26.story
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A43944-2002Jan26.html
    
    Media Missed Clues to Enron's Troubles
    http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/asection/la-000006635jan26.story
    
    A Feeling of Disbelief and Betrayal in a City Known for Boom and Bust
    http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/asection/la-000006666jan26.story
    
    
    everything else
    
    A Riddle: Why Does Netscape Still Exist?
    ("answer: so that AOL can sue Microsoft")
    http://www.business2.com/articles/web/print/0,1650,37401,FF.html
    
    The Paradox of the Best Network
    (dumb networks are the best for society, but they aren't profitable)
    http://www.netparadox.com/
    
    end
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sun Jan 27 2002 - 14:02:30 PST