This was a interesting angle on climate analysis and quite shocking that those determining the viability of huge investment sums should be quite so accepting of obviously underestimated risk assessments. There is, though, something quite comforting about the actuarial world which has no axe to grind and, as Ian Edwards was hoping, would, if given the appropriate information, alter its behaviour to reduce the risks its aware of. Those risks could, of course, be introduced in the form of a carbon tax or a legal necessity to take financial account of what they currently call externalities. While we are building a consensus for a world that values people over money we may have to play the game.
Many thanks for this podcast. When you spend time thinking about and researching these issues there are always areas that appear intangible, grey, or basically just vague - especially, if like me, you're not an economist. I've always struggled to understand how policy makers can appear so immune to the CEE. It's as if they live in a seperate world in a seperate consciousness. Sandy was so wonderfully eloquent, his metaphors so useful and apt. He has helped me to realise how that false consciousness is maintained and perpetuated. Our human capacity for self delusion is truly terrifying. The fact that we are only imprisoned by our own concepts, though, gives me hope. Thanks again.
Good to hear from someone *in* the financial services sector explain why the financial sector is so disconnected from the real world that it must inevitably fail. Reminds me of Robert Devine's observation: 'It's not that the market doesn't prevent or correct market failures, it's that it can't.' I liked the 'average river depth' analogy, that's a good sticky one to take away for future use. Thanks Rachel!
This was a interesting angle on climate analysis and quite shocking that those determining the viability of huge investment sums should be quite so accepting of obviously underestimated risk assessments. There is, though, something quite comforting about the actuarial world which has no axe to grind and, as Ian Edwards was hoping, would, if given the appropriate information, alter its behaviour to reduce the risks its aware of. Those risks could, of course, be introduced in the form of a carbon tax or a legal necessity to take financial account of what they currently call externalities. While we are building a consensus for a world that values people over money we may have to play the game.
Dear Rachel and Sandy,
Many thanks for this podcast. When you spend time thinking about and researching these issues there are always areas that appear intangible, grey, or basically just vague - especially, if like me, you're not an economist. I've always struggled to understand how policy makers can appear so immune to the CEE. It's as if they live in a seperate world in a seperate consciousness. Sandy was so wonderfully eloquent, his metaphors so useful and apt. He has helped me to realise how that false consciousness is maintained and perpetuated. Our human capacity for self delusion is truly terrifying. The fact that we are only imprisoned by our own concepts, though, gives me hope. Thanks again.
Good to hear from someone *in* the financial services sector explain why the financial sector is so disconnected from the real world that it must inevitably fail. Reminds me of Robert Devine's observation: 'It's not that the market doesn't prevent or correct market failures, it's that it can't.' I liked the 'average river depth' analogy, that's a good sticky one to take away for future use. Thanks Rachel!