Best of the Week
Most Popular
1. TESLA! Cathy Wood ARK Funds Bubble BURSTS! - 12th May 21
2.Stock Market Entering Early Summer Correction Trend Forecast - 10th May 21
3.GOLD GDX, HUI Stocks - Will Paradise Turn into a Dystopia? - 11th May 21
4.Crypto Bubble Bursts! Nicehash Suspends Coinbase Withdrawals, Bitcoin, Ethereum Bear Market Begins - 16th May 21
5.Crypto Bubble BURSTS! BTC, ETH, XRP CRASH! NiceHash Seizes Funds on Account Halting ALL Withdrawals! - 19th May 21
6.Cathy Wood Ark Invest Funds Bubble BURSTS! ARKK, ARKG, Tesla Entering Severe Bear Market - 13th May 21
7.Stock Market - Should You Be In Cash Right Now? - 17th May 21
8.Gold to Benefit from Mounting US Debt Pile - 14th May 21
9.Coronavius Covid-19 in Italy in August 2019! - 13th May 21
10.How to Invest in HIGH RISK Tech Stocks for 2021 and Beyond - Part 2 of 2 - 18th May 21
Last 7 days
AI Stocks Strength vs Weakness - Why Selling Google or Facebook is a Big Mistake! - 14th Jun 21
The Bitcoin Crime Wave Hits - 14th Jun 21
Gold Time for Consolidation and Lower Volatility - 14th Jun 21
More Banks & Investors Are NOT Believing Fed Propaganda - 14th Jun 21
Market Inflation Bets – Squaring or Not - 14th Jun 21
Is Gold Really an Inflation Hedge? - 14th Jun 21
The FED Holds the Market. How Long Will It Last? - 14th Jun 21
Coinbase vs Binance for Bitcoin, Ethereum Crypto Trading & Investing During Bear Market 2021 - 11th Jun 21
Gold Price $4000 – Insurance, A Hedge, An Investment - 11th Jun 21
What Drives Gold Prices? (Don't Say "the Fed!") - 11th Jun 21
Why You Need to Buy and Hold Gold Now - 11th Jun 21
Big Pharma Is Back! Biotech Skyrockets On Biogen’s New Alzheimer Drug Approval - 11th Jun 21
Top 5 AI Tech Stocks Trend Analysis, Buying Levels, Ratings and Valuations - 10th Jun 21
Gold’s Inflation Utility - 10th Jun 21
The Fuel Of The Future That’s 9 Times More Efficient Than Lithium - 10th Jun 21
Challenges facing the law industry in 2021 - 10th Jun 21
SELL USDT Tether Before Ponzi Scheme Implodes Triggering 90% Bitcoin CRASH in Cryptos Lehman Bros - 9th Jun 21
Stock Market Sentiment Speaks: Prepare For Volatility - 9th Jun 21
Gold Mining Stocks: Which Door Will Investors Choose? - 9th Jun 21
Fed ‘Taper’ Talk Is Back: Will a Tantrum Follow? - 9th Jun 21
Scientists Discover New Renewable Fuel 3 Times More Powerful Than Gasoline - 9th Jun 21
How do I Choose an Online Trading Broker? - 9th Jun 21
Fed’s Tools are Broken - 8th Jun 21
Stock Market Approaching an Intermediate peak! - 8th Jun 21
Could This Household Chemical Become The Superfuel Of The Future? - 8th Jun 21
The Return of Inflation. Can Gold Withstand the Dark Side? - 7th Jun 21
Why "Trouble is Brewing" for the U.S. Housing Market - 7th Jun 21
Stock Market Volatility Crash Course (VIX vs VVIX) – Learn How to Profit From Volatility - 7th Jun 21
Computer Vision Is Like Investing in the Internet in the ‘90s - 7th Jun 21
MAPLINS - Sheffield Down Memory Lane, Before the Shop Closed its Doors for the Last Time - 7th Jun 21
Wire Brush vs Block Paving Driveway Weeds - How Much Work, Nest Way to Kill Weeds? - 7th Jun 21
When Markets Get Scared and Reverse - 7th Jun 21
Is A New Superfuel About To Take Over Energy Markets? - 7th Jun 21
Why Tether USDT, Stable Scam Coins Could COLLAPSE the Crypto Markets - Black Swan 2021 - 6th Jun 21
Stock Market: 4 Tips for Investing in Gold - 6th Jun 21
Apple (AAPL) Summer Correction Stock Trend Analysis - 5th Jun 21
Stock Market Sentiment Speaks: I 'Believe' We Rally Into A June Swoon - 5th Jun 21
Stock Market Russell 2000 After Reaching A Trend Channel High Flags Out - 5th Jun 21
Money Is Cheap, Own Gold - 5th Jun 21
Bitcoin and Ravencoin Cryptos CRASH Bear Market Buying Levels Price Targets - 4th Jun 21

Market Oracle FREE Newsletter

How to Protect your Wealth by Investing in AI Tech Stocks

Mark-to-Market: From David Hume to Adam Smith…From Ludwig von Mises to Hiroshima

Economics / Economic Theory Apr 19, 2012 - 09:40 AM GMT

By: Andrew_Butter


Best Financial Markets Analysis ArticleFrom Daniel James Sanchez of the Mises Institute (somewhat condensed):

According to Ludwig von Mises, the notion of money as a measure of value is an artifact of the "classical economics" of Adam Smith, David Ricardo, and John Stuart Mill, who, by and large believed that value was an objective attribute of “goods”. Economic actors, according to classical theory, only exchanged goods if the respective values were equal.

Mises had another theory which he called the subjective-marginal-utility theory of value, where value is derived from utility and valuation is a matter of preferring one set of goods over another, according to the goods' respective utilities.

These days the musings of the philosophers distills down into the debate between “mark to market” and what is sometimes called “fundamental value” which is what International Valuation Standards calls “other than market value”…which is sometimes called “mark to fantasy”…which is another way of saying that such a valuation has little more than “subjective-marginal-utility”.

Mark to market is the cornerstone of modern accounting practice and is the preferred (realistically the only) method of valuation mandated by Basel II and Basel III and other banking regulators for working out capital adequacy. That is “classical economics” which says goods only exchange if their values are equal, or in other words that money paid for something, or something comparable, confirms its value.

That works great unless of course one person pays too much and another get’s paid too much and that transaction gets used as a benchmark by the marks, which is what happens when the Wall Street types take over, and they corrupt that idea into the quip, “value is what you can sell something for, to someone dumber than you”.  But don’t worry, the economists have bolted on a caveat for that, they say that only happens when markets are in disequilibrium, which is something very rare.

They say that luckily, disequilibrium never lasts long because eventually markets revert to the mean, in fact some versions of efficient market hypothesis say markets revert to the mean in a blinding flash of light that is for all intensive purposes, instantaneous, and the chance of sighting one of those in a lifetime is as rare as the sighting of a Higgs Boson.

Of course the proponents of the theory of the blinding flash of light that magically makes markets efficiently benchmark true-value forgot all about the Scottish philosopher David Hume who both Adam Smith and Albert Einstein cited as an important influence for their thinking. He who once remarked (in 1751) that, “…a statement or question is only legitimate if there is some way to determine whether the statement is true or false.”

Put that another way, did anyone ever take a photograph of that blinding flash of light that magically causes markets to become efficient? Because if they didn’t, well according to Hume, who is rumored to be doing cartwheels in his grave as we speak, that would mean the theory is not “legitimate”.

I looked on Google Images under…“Blinding Flash of Light Efficient Market”; this was the first image that came up:

All I can say about that is the Geeks-at-Google must be pretty darn good at their algorithms, plus it’s very reassuring to know someone took a photograph of the instantaneous return to equilibrium of the market-place…in a blinding flash of light, that proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that mark-to-market is always a prudent way to do a valuation.

But hang on a minute!! I think I’ve seen that photo before, I wonder where? It’s on the tip of my tongue…thinking now…I got it!!! Isn’t that a photo of the mushroom cloud after they dropped an atomic bomb on Hiroshima?!!

Well I’ll be darned!! Perhaps that proves that when regulators and market-participants fall slavishly in love with one version of efficient market theory or another, what you end up with is something catastrophic like Hiroshima?

Like the housing bubble-bust in America when mark-to-market valuations (they call them appraisals over there), were done to provide a basis for assessing the prudent LTV (Loan to Value) of houses prior to writing mortgages collateralized by the houses. The idea there was that in the event the borrower didn’t pay the money back (with interest), the lender could sell the house for more than what he had lent (with interest), and so his risk in the transaction was contained.

But there were two problems; the first was that no one specified that the valuation or appraisal should be an estimate of the minimum price the house could be expected to sell for at some indeterminate date in the future , as in knowing what you could have sold that must have-condo in Detroit five years ago is kind of academic after you got the keys back via jingle-mail;  and second, there was no consideration of utility, as in the long-term, value should reflect utility, regardless of market shenanigans.

And what happened? Well, in the event, when push came to shove many houses couldn’t be sold for anything like what they had been valued for, five years before, and then in a blinding flash of light there was something which inflicted more damage on the economy of America that what would have happened if some deranged terrorists had dropped a hundred Hiroshima-type bombs.

In fact more, leaving aside the loss of life, which economically is a minimal cost arising from early cash-ins of insurance, by anyone who was insured; because if they had gone with the bombs rather than synthetic collateralized debt obligations and credit default swaps as their choice of instruments of economic mass-destruction, there would have been fewer houses and the prices of the remaining houses would have gone up. That’s one area where “classical economics” and the musings of Ludwig von Mises are totally aligned, if you halve the number of houses the utility of what’s left goes up, assuming of course that more people than houses survived; the classicists call that “supply and demand”.

There is no consideration of utility in a mark-to-market valuation, by the same token, if mark-to-market is not possible, in the absence of  seller’s and/or buyers, then according to IASB and other accounting standards, the asset under consideration is considered “impaired”; which implies that “value” is impaired.

 Which is nonsensical, a house or a piece of equipment that can’t be valued mark to market, still has whatever utility value it had prior to being classified as “impaired”.

De facto Mises didn’t agree with any of that, although he wasn’t very helpful coming up with a practical alternative. Outside of George Bernard Shaw’s quip on “the price of everything and the value of nothing” and Warren Buffet’s remark “price is what you pay, value is what you get”, the world had to wait until the Year 2000 for progress to be made in that department. That happened when International Valuation Standards re-invented or re-discovered the idea that there are two sorts of value, market value and other than market value.

Where broadly market value is mark-to-market, and other than market value is the “fundamental” utility value. And by definition, when those two values are the same the market is working properly, in other words mark to market returns a valid benchmark for the utility value.

I can’t help thinking that if the experts had listened a bit more to what Ludwig von Mises said, and tested their clever theories like David Hume said they should, to check if they were any more legitimate than a theory about how many angels you can fit on the end of a pin, then a lot of the recent nonsense might not have happened.

What disturbs me is that the new banking regulations which are supposed to help deliver the world from the bust that occurred when the old ones catastrophically failed to deliver, and herald a Brave New-New World Order of peace and prosperity, are even more in love with the ideas of mark-to-market and efficient market theories, than the previous ones were.

As in trying the same thing over again, and expecting a different result. Wasn’t it Albert Einstein who had some famous thought on the mental health of proponents of that idea?

All I can say on that is in my prayers these days I start off with, “Please God, forget about evil, deliver us from lunatics”.

By Andrew Butter

Twenty years doing market analysis and valuations for investors in the Middle East, USA, and Europe. Ex-Toxic-Asset assembly-line worker; lives in Dubai.

© 2012 Copyright Andrew Butter- All Rights Reserved
Disclaimer: The above is a matter of opinion provided for general information purposes only and is not intended as investment advice. Information and analysis above are derived from sources and utilising methods believed to be reliable, but we cannot accept responsibility for any losses you may incur as a result of this analysis. Individuals should consult with their personal financial advisors.

Andrew Butter Archive

© 2005-2019 - The Market Oracle is a FREE Daily Financial Markets Analysis & Forecasting online publication.

Post Comment

Only logged in users are allowed to post comments. Register/ Log in