The (False) Glimmer of Hope

[Communist]

sent by socialist - economics
==================================>>

The (False) Glimmer of Hope

by Barry Ritholtz on 4/23/09

Nice cover image from the Economist (http://www.economist.com/opinion/displayStory.cfm?story_id=13527685&) on the brown shoots.
Excerpt:
“But, welcome as it is, optimism contains two traps, one obvious, the other more subtle. The obvious trap is that confidence proves misplaced—that the glimmers of hope are misinterpreted as the beginnings of a strong recovery when all they really show is that the rate of decline is slowing. The subtler trap, particularly for politicians, is that confidence and better news create ruinous complacency. Optimism is one thing, but hubris that the world economy is returning to normal could hinder recovery and block policies to protect against a further plunge into the depths.”
Here’s the cover image:
http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/perils-of-optimism.jpg (http://www.economist.com/opinion/displayStory.cfm?story_id=13527685&)
Hat tip Gary
>
Source:
A glimmer of hope? (http://www.economist.com/opinion/displayStory.cfm?story_id=13527685&)
The worst thing for the world economy would be to assume the worst is over
Economist, April 23rd 2009
http://www.economist.com/opinion/displayStory.cfm?story_id=13527685&

-------------------------------------

[NecroCommie]

HAHAA!! Love the cover! :D Now to read the article.

[STJ]

Looks cool.

[cyu]

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Economist#Opinions

"The Economist generally supports free markets (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_markets), globalisation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Globalisation), and free immigration (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration), has been described as neo-liberal (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neo-liberal)."

...in other words, a bunch of assholes (not that I'm opposed to immigration, of course, but they probably just support immigration so their paymasters can get more cheap labor)...

I skimmed the article - doesn't offer anything really new. Nice cynical picture though :glare:

[teenagebricks]

It's actually a surprisingly good article for The Economist, nice to know we can rely on some publications to not be complete bastards.

[southernmissfan]

The Economist usually has very intelligent and well-sourced articles. Obviously the ideology is quite opposed to ours, but you will be more informed (even if slightly) if you read the BBC and The Economist compared to say CNN or maybe even the New York Times.

[bailey_187]

The Economists shouldn't just be disregarded because it is written by people who beleive the opposite of what we beleive.

Marx spent a lot of time reading past issues of the Economist in the British Library, a lot of his knowledge of Capitalism came from that. I'm not saying because Marx read it we should, but it is a good source of news etc.

[PRC-UTE]

thanks for posting. I read every issue of the Economist for years and learned a lot from it. It's a useful source in many ways- always good to know what the other half are thinking.

Even when you read their articles trying to denounce the Cuban Revolution for example, you'll find interesting omissions buried in it, like admitting that the revolution is still wildly popular

[ComradeOm]

The Economist usually has very intelligent and well-sourced articles. Obviously the ideology is quite opposed to ours, but you will be more informed (even if slightly) if you read the BBC and The Economist compared to say CNN or maybe even the New York Times.Indeed. Its got its obvious bias but once you accept that its probably the best mainstream current affairs magazine out there. You'll always learn something from reading it

[Rebel_Serigan]

Read everything you can. No matter the political alignment. I read Mein Kompf just to see what we going on in his head. It is good to know your enemy, in fact maybe I'll re-read the Art of War by Sun Tsu.