Glob: Library

Economics demystified (for the developed world only)

Harford is a mecro-economist, a bridge between macro and micro economics. Harford explains macro-economic phenomena such as retail pricing, stock market behavior, taxation, health-care, environment, and licensing air-waves; by one-by-one getting inside the heads of each stake-holder on that poker table and dissecting their behavior in accordance with the first principles of economics: scarcity and choice. However, the insights only go as far as the developed world does. In the last 3 chapters where Harford tries to similarly explain the woes of the poor and developing worlds with examples of Cameroon, Belgium and China; his views quickly appear shallow and cliche, lacking the same wisdom as the rest of the book. 70% of the book is therefore a 5-star, and the rest is a 2-star.

With the Undercover Economist, Tim Harford de-mystifies the wiggling jelly of economics (where you cannot kill farm-destroying birds without suffering population explosion of farm-destroying insects and so on). What sound like conundrums are actually logical explanations of common-sense causal chains. For example, he explains that "more rational the behavior of stock market investors, the more erratic the behavior of the stock market becomes." I try to summarize: rational investors would buy shares today if it was obvious that they would go up tomorrow, but then everyone would buy today driving the price high enough so that it cannot go higher tomorrow. Rationality would obviously and consistently second-guess rationality, implying rationality cannot lead to predictable behaviour. The only thing left then is unpredictable news, which is a random event. This means that shares would behave like random walks. But if this was absolutely true, it would be a paradox, since rational investors would not invest in shares and only invest in predictable alternatives. The balancing point then lies somewhere in between. Harford then goes on to draw parallels with supermarket queues and how everyone tries to predict the fastest one, and a game of poker with players analyzing the outcome based on fundamentals yet betting based on their understanding of what the other players are thinking.

Discovery of India (independence onward)

If Nehru were to pick his choice of a historian to chronicle Indian history starting where he left off with his Discovery of India letters to Indira from 1942-46; he would probably have lived a decade longer in his excitement after finding Ramachandra Guha. Never before has a historian (or any human being for that matter) undergone the momentous task of uncovering and articulating the history of the world's largest democracy the way Guha has with India After Gandhi. Leave opinion, judgment, agenda, and agency aside; it is little doubt that Guha is the most aware Indian alive.

I had the good fortune of spending hours listening to Ram in person earlier this year, and was amazed at the wisdom-per-second spewing out from head-to-mouth impromptu. It is one thing to collect, select and organize information in chronological order; and it is another to hold that infinity in the back of your mind and retrieve, synthesize and present it on demand. It reflects passion, experience, genius, and wisdom. The series of talks were a follow-on to his controversial article in The Outlook about seven reasons why India will not be a Superpower, and why that is a meaningless goal to aspire towards.

Fooled by Probabilities

The ideas in this book have created more controversy than they deserve, and it might have something to do with the title of the book. Given the number of people who equate "random" with "equiprobable", "Fooled by Probabilities" would have been a more appropriate title for the book, though not as provocative as "Fooled by Randomness". There is a finite chance that there is a black cat in every dark room, but when you switch the light on, there is no black cat in the room. Both are correct statements - mathematically and practically. This book must be read in the same light.

It seems to me that the transition from an average to good investor (probabilistically speaking) happens as soon as you internalize the concept of expected values and invest by it. My favorite story from the book is where Taleb is asked which way the market is expected to go next week, and he says slightly up with a high probability (70%). Then someone intervened that Taleb had just made a big bet on the S&P going down next week, and he said that indeed he did. The one lesson this book teaches is that the two statements are not inconsistent with each other. 70% chance of a +1% change and 30% chance of a -10% change sums upto -2.3, a strongly negative expected value. Good investors always shadow the expected value (trend and magnitude), although market sentiments are always driven by either the expected trend of upward or downward movement, or expected magnitude of upward and downward movement.