What we’re reading (9/4)
“SoftBank’s Bet On Tech Giants Fueled Powerful Market Rally” (Wall Street Journal). A few days ago, I pointed out that it looked like August’s big gains for the market were driven by the S&P 500’s biggest four stocks (AAPL, MSFT, AMZN, FB). The question is, why? Reportedly, at least one massive investor had its proverbial foot on the gas. “Investors watching the vertigo-inducing rise—and this week’s fall—of technology stocks are buzzing about a single trade, a giant but shadowy bet on Silicon Valley big enough to pull the market up with it. The investor behind that trade, according to people familiar with the matter, is Japan’s SoftBank Group Corp., which bought options tied to around $50 billion worth of individual tech stocks. Investors and analysts, aware of the activity but in the dark as to who is behind it, say it has turbocharged the tech sector, whose sheer size drives broader market moves.”
“Worries Grow Over A K-Shaped Economic Recovery That Favors The Wealthy” (CNBC). I’m not exactly sure what “K-shared” looks like on a line chart, but I certainly share the general underlying unease.
“A Society Of Tinkerers” (Epsilon Theory). A interesting kind of macro-social thought piece noting how vapid certain aspects of today’s “culture of entrepreneurship” are. Not the first time this has been observed, and I saw it first-hand living in Silicon Valley for two years. The punchline: we need more “tinkerers,” but not just any tinkerers, tinkerers that want to tinker with stuff that’s actually important. “There’s got to be a way to help humans help humans that’s compatible with making money, or we’re doomed. Herein lies our chance to establish a different enterprising mindset. We need new ways to explore problems that matter. We need to share hands-on knowledge with society so that anyone who wants to tinker with problems can tinker with problems.We need an alternative to the zero-sum speculation that poses as celebration of entrepreneurship.” Note: the author seems have something against “speculation,” which is exactly what Stoney Point is about…still digesting that part.
“Jimmy Lai vs. China” (The Daily). An episode from the New York Times’s wildly popular podcast The Daily this week covered an interview with billionaire Hong Kongese liberal (in the classical sense) activist and entrepreneur Jimmy Lai, discussing his rags-to-riches story and his decades-long fight against the Chinese Communist Party’s ruthless authoritarianism. I can’t get enough of it. Here’s a guy who could sit quietly and enjoy his billions in total comfort basically broadcasting to the world he’s willing to die (that’s not hyperbole) to move the needle an inch in the interest of freedom. What a hero.
“Can You Control Your Happiness? New Study Gives A Scientific Backed Answer” (Forbes). “The study found that control over our happiness changes as we age, and no differences in gender were noted. Namely, the amount of control we have over our happiness decreases in our mid-life and increases as we grow older again. This finding corresponds with the well-researched U-curve in happiness (e.g., Professor David Blanchflower at Dartmouth College). In general, this curve indicates that happiness generally decreases from age 18 and reaches peak unhappiness at approximately age 47. From there, the happiness levels gradually increase again. Respondents in the current study indicated that they feel less in control of their happiness when they are between 30 and 60 years old. Control over happiness increases at an older age again. Since control over happiness is linked to higher happiness levels, this result matches the U-curve of happiness that is observed around the world. The common interpretation on the perplexing happiness U-curve is that as we age our focus turns away from social competition and toward social connection, and life becomes more precious, fragile and fleeting.”
