Welcome guest, is this your first visit? Create Account now to join.
  • Login:

Welcome to the Online Debate Network.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 21 to 24 of 24
  1. #21
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Louisiana
    Posts
    9,171
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: If Everyone Were Honest, How Much Lower Would the Cost of Living Be?

    Quote Originally Posted by LIBRE
    Yes, I agree it's an oversimplification. However, the main point I'm trying to make is that EVERYONE would be doing inside trading. They would know everything pretty much about every company. There would be very little guess work.
    With this kind of inside info any stockbroker would be able to easily project out every company to a high degree of accuracy. Thus, even IF nothing big happened, you would still have stock brokers telling you... okay, you can make 20% on this company or 15% on this one. And provided there were no unexpected disasters those percentages would almost be guaranteed.
    Yes, I get the part about how some buy stock when it goes down. However, the reason why people do that is because there is a chance the company might have a plan or something to turn everything around... thus, if it bounces back then you stand to make tons of money.
    In this world though you would know whether they had such a plan. You might not know what that plan actually is but you would know if it at least existed. And if it did exit then it's earnings wouldn't have dropped to below the other company to begin with.
    Sure, there would still be a time period where the company could still bounce back. However, I think it would be SIGNIFICANTLY shorter than it is here. Here you can lead people on a bit and stuff like that to buy time.
    I think you are very wrong in this whole scenario. There is no such knowledge as you are speaking of. In such a world there would be no "insider trading" or much less.
    first because it would still be illegal, but also more people would get caught.
    What you call insider trading is actually properly or reasonably valuing a company.
    In that world no broker could honestly tell you that you are going to make 15% on anything.

    Quote Originally Posted by LIBRE
    I agree with you that companies would try a LOT harder not to mess up. I think they would have a lot more ability to keep from messing up also since everyone THEY deal with are being honest also.
    What I'm saying is that no matter how hard you try, it is bound to eventually happen. And when it does you probably now have one less business.
    I disagree, and remember this is not a zero sum game. More businesses can be created.

    Quote Originally Posted by LIBRE
    And yes, sometimes a new business will emerge to try to take it's place. However, that would happen a LOT less often I think since the degree of expertise and professionalism needed at that level of the game would be so much higher than it is here.
    I disagree, every company that fails would leave unemployed professionals that were capable of learning from the loss and performing at the required level.

    Quote Originally Posted by LIBRE
    Bottom line, sometimes when it comes to making complex decisions a lot of information is good... however, an unlimited amount of info is very bad. In a world like this you would probably have entire buildings dedicated to just the people that collected the available data. Another building to analyze it.
    NOw I think you are over-complicating it. Business could operate similar to now, only they would have a net higher amount of accurate information.
    The unlimited info problem already exists, only now you must analyze it for lies. So that world would have a less complicated analysis process(if one was needed at all in this world or that).


    Instead, think about all of a companies reports being truthful. How much more productivity could that create in all companies? Bad companies could be improved more quickly.


    A company doesn't have to process the entire internet in order to make business decisions. At worst the problem would be faced by investors, and even then more truth is better for them as well.
    You can't fairly blame a truthful world for the information explosion.
    To serve man.

  2. #22
    Banned Indefinitely

    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    351
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: If Everyone Were Honest, How Much Lower Would the Cost of Living Be?

    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post
    I think you are very wrong in this whole scenario. There is no such knowledge as you are speaking of. In such a world there would be no "insider trading" or much less.
    first because it would still be illegal, but also more people would get caught.
    What you call insider trading is actually properly or reasonably valuing a company.
    In that world no broker could honestly tell you that you are going to make 15% on anything.
    K, I think you are missing the point or maybe I said it wrong. I didn't mean there would be actual insider trading. I was pointing out that all the info you got would be similar to what WE consider to be insider trading. In other words there wouldn't be much they could keep from us. Thus, all the stockbrokers and stuff would have info most in our world could only acquire via insider trading.
    My only point in all of this is to show that the investors would have a LOT more info to base decisions on than they do in our world... and LOTS of it would no doubt be very sensitive.
    I think you could easily predict stock outcomes in advance. Would it be 100% accurate? No, maybe 95% though. They could easily tell customers the 15% figure... they would just have to give how accurate it was.
    Think of it like predicting the weather. Our world is the equivalent of back before doppler radar and all the high powered computer computations. Back when the weather man would often tell you it would be warm and sunny and at the same minute you look outside and it is snowing and cloudy.

    The pretend world would be like after doppler and the computers. I don't know about you but these days I would be more than willing to make bets that the weatherman's prediction are going to be pretty darn accurate. I might loose a bet here and there but a VAST majority of the time I would score big time.
    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post

    I disagree, and remember this is not a zero sum game. More businesses can be created.

    I disagree, every company that fails would leave unemployed professionals that were capable of learning from the loss and performing at the required level.
    Yes, but when a company goes down it's customers and sometimes even it's employees and other resources are often swallowed up by a competitor.
    The higher fail rate would increase the odds of only one large competitor being left behind. YES, new businesses can be created... but it would be like someone trying to create a company to overtake Microsoft. Sure, it's possible but would you bet everything you have on it? Especially if the people doing the startup are honest and tell you straight up they don't have that great of a chance of success?
    Sure, there would still be people willing to make that gamble. However, would it be enough to overtake a company that big? Doubtful.
    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post

    NOw I think you are over-complicating it. Business could operate similar to now, only they would have a net higher amount of accurate information.
    The unlimited info problem already exists, only now you must analyze it for lies. So that world would have a less complicated analysis process(if one was needed at all in this world or that).


    Instead, think about all of a companies reports being truthful. How much more productivity could that create in all companies? Bad companies could be improved more quickly.


    A company doesn't have to process the entire internet in order to make business decisions. At worst the problem would be faced by investors, and even then more truth is better for them as well.
    You can't fairly blame a truthful world for the information explosion.
    I disagree. Seriously, how much info do you think we know about companies like Microsoft? The bigger the company in our world the more secrets they have and the better they keep them. In Microsoft's case a lot of those secrets are probably about illegal things they have done. However, not all companies keep secrets for just that reason. They keep them because they can. Yes, the investors are going to want to know if your CEO is thinking of leaving the company... but your company may not benefit by them knowing. Better to wait until the CEO is sure, then announce. Otherwise you just created a downward flux in your stock for no reason. Stuff like that.

  3. #23
    Super Moderator

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Louisiana
    Posts
    9,171
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: If Everyone Were Honest, How Much Lower Would the Cost of Living Be?

    Quote Originally Posted by libre
    K, I think you are missing the point or maybe I said it wrong. I didn't mean there would be actual insider trading. I was pointing out that all the info you got would be similar to what WE consider to be insider trading. In other words there wouldn't be much they could keep from us. Thus, all the stockbrokers and stuff would have info most in our world could only acquire via insider trading.
    My only point in all of this is to show that the investors would have a LOT more info to base decisions on than they do in our world... and LOTS of it would no doubt be very sensitive.
    I think you could easily predict stock outcomes in advance. Would it be 100% accurate? No, maybe 95% though. They could easily tell customers the 15% figure... they would just have to give how accurate it was.
    Think of it like predicting the weather. Our world is the equivalent of back before doppler radar and all the high powered computer computations. Back when the weather man would often tell you it would be warm and sunny and at the same minute you look outside and it is snowing and cloudy.

    The pretend world would be like after doppler and the computers. I don't know about you but these days I would be more than willing to make bets that the weatherman's prediction are going to be pretty darn accurate. I might loose a bet here and there but a VAST majority of the time I would score big time.
    Right, such a world basically destroys the problem of insider trading. Because insider trading is a form of cheating.
    It is based on an unfair advantage given to a few for the purpose of personal gain. As everyone would have the same information there would be no unfair advantage.
    There is nothing wrong with the information itself.

    Quote Originally Posted by LIBRE
    Yes, but when a company goes down it's customers and sometimes even it's employees and other resources are often swallowed up by a competitor.
    The higher fail rate would increase the odds of only one large competitor being left behind. YES, new businesses can be created... but it would be like someone trying to create a company to overtake Microsoft. Sure, it's possible but would you bet everything you have on it? Especially if the people doing the startup are honest and tell you straight up they don't have that great of a chance of success?
    Sure, there would still be people willing to make that gamble. However, would it be enough to overtake a company that big? Doubtful.
    Chance of success is an estimation, not a fact. They would tell you what they figure their chances to be, which would be good enough for them to invest everything they have into it (apparently).
    So I think you are treating some information with more respect than it desreves.

    Second, they don't have to overtake microsoft, all they have to do is produce a return that is superior to microsoft.
    Also, I wonder if Microsoft would even exist if everyone had to tell the truth in it's creation

    Quote Originally Posted by LIBRE
    I disagree. Seriously, how much info do you think we know about companies like Microsoft? The bigger the company in our world the more secrets they have and the better they keep them. In Microsoft's case a lot of those secrets are probably about illegal things they have done. However, not all companies keep secrets for just that reason. They keep them because they can. Yes, the investors are going to want to know if your CEO is thinking of leaving the company... but your company may not benefit by them knowing. Better to wait until the CEO is sure, then announce. Otherwise you just created a downward flux in your stock for no reason. Stuff like that.
    Not being able to lie, doesn't mean there would be no secrets.

    If I ask you a sensitive question a truthful answer could be.
    "I am not going to answer that question".
    To serve man.

  4. #24
    Banned Indefinitely

    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    351
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: If Everyone Were Honest, How Much Lower Would the Cost of Living Be?

    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post
    Right, such a world basically destroys the problem of insider trading. Because insider trading is a form of cheating.
    It is based on an unfair advantage given to a few for the purpose of personal gain. As everyone would have the same information there would be no unfair advantage.
    There is nothing wrong with the information itself.
    Again, I wasn't trying to say there would be "insider trading". Just was trying to point out that ALL that stuff that we normally don't have access too we would now have access too... legally.
    That said, think about your comment above. You say that insider trading is cheating? Why is it cheating? It's because if you are doing insider trading you have access to info that others don't have... and that info allows you to better predict what is going to happen with that company/stock... right? THAT is my point...lol. You would have access to all this info which would allow you to predict stocks and stuff to a MUCH greater degree. In that world when your stock broker told you a company's stock is most likely going to tank because of this or that news/info then you are going to take that warning MUCH more seriously. And since stock brokers know people take news/info so much more seriously they would factor that into their equations when giving the warnings.

    It would be a lot like thermal runaway. Minor changes of course might not heat things up enough and the system would recover. However, a medium to major scale thing would cause things for a company to exponentially run out of control.
    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post

    Chance of success is an estimation, not a fact. They would tell you what they figure their chances to be, which would be good enough for them to invest everything they have into it (apparently).
    So I think you are treating some information with more respect than it desreves.

    Second, they don't have to overtake microsoft, all they have to do is produce a return that is superior to microsoft.
    Also, I wonder if Microsoft would even exist if everyone had to tell the truth in it's creation
    Oh, I agree about Microsoft probably not existing in such a world. But THAT just supports my point...lol. One of the world's strongest companies probably couldn't have come to be in this new world and we are to believe all the other companies would have no problem... and would actually do better? You talk like Microsoft is the only company that has dirty secrets. The spotlight is just on them more than others.
    Quote Originally Posted by MindTrap028 View Post

    Not being able to lie, doesn't mean there would be no secrets.

    If I ask you a sensitive question a truthful answer could be.
    "I am not going to answer that question".
    Yes, but if there is any chance that info might be relevant to the strength of the company, it's products, etc, then you would be obligated to give it. If you weren't required to do that then this whole debate is pointless... you would just have the exact same thing we have now... in fact you could still even have the illegal stuff going on. All you would have to do is make sure you didn't learn anything about the law. Plausible deniability. And if you found out later that you broke the law you just say you aren't going to answer the question.

 

 
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2

Similar Threads

  1. A few honest questions
    By ShadowKnight in forum Politics
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: November 13th, 2008, 04:46 PM
  2. If Politicians Were Honest..??
    By Scarlett44 in forum Politics
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: January 8th, 2008, 11:21 AM
  3. Why the birthrate of males to females is lower during times of hardship
    By Meng Bomin in forum Shootin' the Breeze / Off-Topic
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: January 24th, 2006, 07:11 AM
  4. The Honest Barkeep
    By PerVirtuous in forum Logical Riddles & Puzzles
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: September 10th, 2005, 08:49 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •