Socialist Progressives
Related: About this forumThis Greek game-theory guru is the most interesting man in Europe right now
The Greek stock market exploded Tuesday with the Athens Stock Exchange General Index surging 11.3%.This comes amid rapidly evolving talks over how Greece will climb out of its debt crisis.
At the center of these dealings is Greek finance minister, Yanis Varoufakis. He's the voice and face of the Greece's economic situation today.His position on what to do about Greek's crushing debt seems to change daily, but that seems to be working to his advantage.
Varoufakis, who describes himself as a libertarian Marxist, became the finance minister after the far-left Syriza party won a resounding victory in Greek elections in January.
Before being elected to parliament, Varoufakis was an economics professor. He teaches economic theory at the University of Athens, but for the past two years he has spent time as a visiting professor at the University of Texas at Austin.
But he was probably best-known in Europe for his work at Valve, the video-game company, as the man who analyzed sales of virtual goods and micro-transactions in games like Dota 2 and Counter-Strike. Varoufakis joined Valve three years ago to oversee its Steam Market virtual economy.
He looks like a tech exec too. In photos of his negotiations with various European leaders over the weekend, he appeared with an untucked shirt and no tie. It seemed to convey a message: I don't play by your rules.
Varoufakis' academic specialty is game theory, the study of strategic decision-making. James Galbraith, a fellow UT Austin professor, told Bloomberg that Varoufakis was as knowledgeable "as anyone on the planet" and would "be thinking more than a few steps ahead" in negotiations with Greece's creditors, known as the troika (the International Monetary Fund, the European Central Bank, and the European Commission).
Read more: http://uk.businessinsider.com/yanis-varoufakis-most-interesting-2015-2?r=US#ixzz3Qlacg5fl
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)whether he is successful or not. This will be interesting. He sounds like an intelligent person who is curious and also both realistic and idealistic (at the same time). I'm just guessing but the outcome could be quite surprising I think based on reading the article.
Ichingcarpenter
(36,988 posts)Phillip Hoffman's character was a mathamatical game theorist who also
designed the revolution against the capital
Ichingcarpenter
(36,988 posts)Or did I?
socialist_n_TN
(11,481 posts)BOTH of these posts would get one from me.
Ghost Dog
(16,881 posts)The hews here (Spain) this morning is that the governments of both France and Italy support Syriza's position that the Troika should be closed down, with multi-lateral negotions taking its place.
Ichingcarpenter
(36,988 posts)Despite having Goldman Sachs CEO Lloyd Blankfein as an investor and being Bill and Hillary Clinton's son-in-law, Marc Mezvinsky (and two former colleagues from Goldman Sachs who manage Eaglevale Partners hedge fund) told investors in a letter sent last week they had been "incorrect" on Greece, helping produce losses for the firms main fund during two of the past three years. By 'incorrect' Chelsea Clinton's husband means the Eaglevale fund focused on Greece lost a stunning 48% last year and, as The Wall Street Journal reports, is impacting the overall returns of the roughly $400 million fund which has spent 27 of its 34 months in operation below its "high-water mark."
In 2013, Institutional Investor proclaimed Mezvinsky "a hedge fund rising star"...
In late 2011, Marc Mezvinsky co-founded New York-based, macro-focused hedge fund firm Eaglevale Partners with Bennett Grau and Mark Mallon, two Goldman Sachs Group proprietary traders whom he'd gotten to know when they all worked at the bank. Best known as the husband of Chelsea Clinton, Mezvinsky, 35, who has a BA in religious studies and philosophy from Stanford University and an MA in politics, philosophy and economics from the University of Oxford, has been quietly building his finance career. Before launching his own firm, the longtime Clinton family friend was a partner and global macro portfolio manager at New York- and Rio de Janeiro-based investment house 3G Capital. Eaglevale manages more than $400 million.
But, as The Wall Street Journal reports, things are not working out so well...
The hedge fund co-founded by Bill and Hillary Clinton s son-in-law suffered losses tied to an ill-timed bet on Greeces economic recovery, according to documents reviewed by The Wall Street Journal.
Eaglevale Partners LP, founded by Marc Mezvinsky and two former colleagues from Goldman Sachs Group Inc., told investors in a letter sent last week they had been incorrect on Greece, helping produce losses for the firms main fund during two of the past three years, according to the letter.
The main fund dropped 3.6% last year, far trailing the 5.7% rise for similar hedge funds tracked by HFR Inc. That followed an Eaglevale gain of 2.06% in 2013 and a loss of 1.96% in 2012, the documents show
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-02-03/chelsea-clintons-husband-suffers-massive-hedge-fund-loss-greek-investment
2banon
(7,321 posts)absolutely no sympathy.. but I am curious as to why they were investing in "Greece" .. given their economic situation vis a vis the global financial crises etc. yes, the report indicates they were betting on recovery, however it's been a tad been dicey or so i thought.
Ichingcarpenter
(36,988 posts)Last edited Wed Feb 4, 2015, 12:25 PM - Edit history (1)
It didn't
2banon
(7,321 posts)I wasn't watching the situation in Greece too closely, but I never had the impression that the Austerity measures the World Bank was imposing on them was going to be sustained. I was aware of huge protests/demos - a very angry population out in the streets with pitchforks in a manner of speaking.
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
(14,733 posts)Bout time we got in techies in government finance somewhere who simply aren't revolving door banksters. Let's hope the trend comes to America if Greece does well under his guidance.
Ichingcarpenter
(36,988 posts)Jason Welker
What makes oligopolistic markets, which are characterized by a few large firms, so different from the other market structures we study in Microeconomics? Unlike in more competitive markets in which firms are of much smaller size and one firms behavior has little or no effect on its competitors, an oligopolist that decides to lower its prices, change its output, expand into a new market, offer new services, or adverstise, will have powerful and consequential effects on the profitability of its competitors. For this reason, firms in oligopolistic markets are always considering the behavior of their competitors when making their own economic decisions.
To understand the behavior of non-collusive oligopolists (non-collusive meaning a few firms that do NOT cooperate on output and price), economists have employed a mathematical tool called Game Theory. The assumption is that large firms in competition will behave similarly to individual players in a game such as poker. Firms, which are the players will make moves (referring to economic decisions such as whether or not to advertise, whether to offer discounts or certain services, make particular changes to their products, charge a high or low price, or any other of a number of economic actions) based on the predicted behavior of their competitors.
If a large firm competing with other large firms understands the various payoffs (referring to the profits or losses that will result from a particular economic decision made by itself and its competitors) then it will be better able to make a rational, profit-maximizing (or loss minimizing) decision based on the likely actions of its competitors. The outcome of such a situation, or game, can be predicted using payoff matrixes. Below is an illustration of a game between two coffee shops competing in a small town.
In the game above, both SF Coffee and Starbuck have what is called a dominant strategy. Regardless of what its competitor does, both companies would maximize their outcome by advertising. If SF coffee were to not advertise, Starbucks will earn more profits ($20 vs $10) by advertising. If SF coffee were to advertise, Starbucks will earn more profits ($12 vs $10) by advertising. The payoffs are the same given both options for SF Coffee. Since both firms will do best by advertising given the behavior of its competitor, both firms will advertise. Clearly, the total profits earned are less when both firms advertise than if they both did NOT advertise, but such an outcome is unstable because the incentive for both firms would be to advertise. We say that advertise/advertise is a Nash Equilibrium since neither firm has an incentive to vary its strategy at this point, since less profits will be earned by the firm that stops advertising.
As illustrated above, the tools of Game Theory, including the payoff matrix, can prove helpful to firms deciding how to respond to particular actions by their competitors in oligopolistic markets. Of course, in the real world there are often more than two firms in competition in a particular market, and the decisions that they must make include more than simply to advertise or not. Much more complicated, multi-player games with several possible moves have also been developed and used to help make tough economic decisions a little easier in the world of competition.
Game theory as a mathematical tool can be applied in realms beyond oligopoly behavior in Economics. In each of the videos below, game theory can be applied to predict the behavior of different players. None of the videos portray a Microeconomic scenario like the one above, but in each case a payoff matrix can be created and behavior can be predicted based on an analysis of the incentives given the players possible behaviors.
more
http://welkerswikinomics.com/blog/2012/03/23/understanding-oligopoly-behavior-a-game-theory-overview/
Response to Ichingcarpenter (Original post)
Corruption Inc This message was self-deleted by its author.
canoeist52
(2,282 posts)From 2011 Richard Wolff's introduction to him is 1:20 minutes in to the video;
Ichingcarpenter
(36,988 posts)will watch it later after my walk with my dog
libdem4life
(13,877 posts)2banon
(7,321 posts)There was so much packed in it I had to listen to it twice. One of several items that really grabbed my attention was the economic situation with union workers in Germany. I had no idea they were being squeezed by a system ripped right from the playbook of Big Business here in the U.S.
I had always been confused about the structure/system of the Euro and how it actually worked. I had no idea that the value of the Euro was not equal among Euro nations. One might ask, what the hell was the point in setting that system up and agreeing to join in the first place, but we know the answer to that.
I enjoyed his humor also, I could listen to him speak again and again. I'm not sure of his conclusions with regard to another collapse at least not quite as soon as maybe he's likely thinking. When the collapse happened here in the U.S. in 2008 - with bailouts waiting to fall in place, I'm pretty much of the mind that the PTB simply will not "allow"a another collapse , in so far as they're in control of economic outcomes on a macro level, I just don't think they'd be ready to let it go there again anytime soon.
But then again, there's a hell of a lot i don't know and yet to understand.
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)"I am not an economics/science expert, but........", makes you just as good as one apparently in America.