Financial Innovation_The Economist Debate. Stiglitz sways the field advocating a more cautious regulatory approach. CASE for MASS TORTS?

Levine vs Stiglitz: A Case for The TORTS LAWERS?

The debate is summarised in 4 Points, by The Economist's Zanny Minton Beddoes, head of global economic coverage and ex-IMF economist, (cf full summary in reference below)

I. -Both Ross Levine and Joseph Stiglitz agree that financial innovation can boost economic growth.

-Both acknowledge that some innovations have caused harm.

THE FOCUS OF THE DEBATE
They differ—and hence where the discussion focused—is in their assessment of whether the financial innovations of the past 30 years have, on balance, been beneficial; and on how best to minimise "bad" innovation while promoting the good sort.

II. Mr Stiglitz is sceptical of the benefits of much recent innovation. He focuses on the many misaligned incentives within finance, and advocates strong regulation with a precautionary focus. Mr Levine sees greater benefits from modern finance, and is concerned with government failures, especially regulatory failures. These differing perspectives are reflected in the debaters' policy prescriptions. Mr Stiglitz wants to create a "Financial Product Safety Commission" to assess the safety and effectiveness of new financial innovations. Mr Levine suggests a new independent agency to watch over today's financial regulators.

III. At the beginning of our debate a small majority (54%) supported the motion. Now a slightly larger majority (57%) oppose it.

MY COMMENTS AND REFERENCES
That's a big swing in electoral terms but there are still 43% against Stiglitz prescription. These are the numbers but where does the balance of power lie, most likely with those with most money - remember this is an educated persons debate and intelligence is not all. ]

These considerations remind me of a powerful minority call by top management (union) for improved self regulation on pay, "performance related" bonus, free stock options, etc...
Here we see daily with what diligence power puts its machine into motion to solve recognised issues.

->RELATED POSTS

INNOVATION -THE WORTHWHILE PROJECT-Conversational styled, review of science's powerful tool "The Experimental Method" in politics and humanities

Sidewiki REf (en référence à) :

"At the beginning of our debate a small majority (54%) supported the motion. Now a slightly larger majority (57%) oppose it."
- Economist Debates: Financial innovation: Decision ( afficher sur - on Google Sidewiki)

My Serious Foresight Ommission -IPCC Climate Change Senario Work:Unfinished From ommissions to => O-missions and E-missions, JOBS

From GHG-CO2 Emissions and Climate Change, longstanding amnesia and ommissions to =>

O-missions and E-missions. ( ROI-Return on Innovation, fair distribution via Jobs cf. for example: Green Jobs - Good Jobs approach by Appollo Alliance of USA )

Be part of the solution not part of the problem.

I simple wish to record one of the most important foresight works to date, the practically incontestable uncovering of man's role in climate change and global warming by the excellant work in progress by the UN_ IPCC International Panel on Climate Change. I have added 2 links to my foresight links.
1. IPCC-online reports.
2. IPCC-report on Emission sources

More reports...

And since nothing is as simple as it appears, Quirin Schiermeier of Nature has launched a debat

along the lines entitled:

The "Claim that the challenge of cutting emissions has been underestimated is debated."[Link-html]

Most constructive informative comments may be viewed at the above link

3 Myths of Innovation from G. A. Moore

"To innovate forever…is a design specification. It is not a strategy; it is a requirement."

quoted from G. A. Moore in his book, "Dealing with Darwin: How Great Companies Innovate at Every Phase of their Evolution"

From the simple belief that one and all can, improve, do better, do one's very best -work for the better (cf my essay various posts or on ChemWeb archives) many of my blog posts are concerned with Innovations and to the belief that they contribute to good job creation, and lasting profit. Innovation to me is the essence of Durable Development (DD) - Sustainable Development (SusDev) Here I shall share some recent reflections and conversations on Innovation defined as "ROI" return on investments or conveniently, return on innovations brought to my attention by an associate Vern Burkhardt at Idea Connection, like my blog spot, an associative web platform concerned with innovation -new (and improved) solutions to real problems.

Innovation is valuable only if it helps a company attain economic advantage.

Myths about innovation:
· Innovation in and of itself is valuable.
· Innovation becomes less necessary and possible as a product or service matures.
· The essence of innovation is the same in all companies.

Poppy Design in steelmaking slag

There are many fairly good sense insights into Innovation: the aim (why) the object of innovation(what) the procesesses (how) taken from Moore's book. In short I shall close with this "reminder to myself" quote:

Innovation, to create a return, must focus on what the customer values.

and since

"To innovate forever…is a design specification. It is not a strategy; it is a requirement."

I am pleased to undeline that, initiated properly, my early premise that Innovations are surely an un-ending source of jobs and revenu still holds!

Focus for common good (4Good): Carbon Capture and Sequestration - CCS example of process analysis in the steelmaking industry.