Re: Re: Re: Re: Chossudovsky on Iraq bombing..

[Doug Henwood <dhenwood@xxxxxxxxx>]

Christian Gregory wrote:

> On the one hand, if markets are efficient (pace
> EMH), then daily stock movements are a response to publicly available
> information. In which case, it's hard to see how a "routine" bombing of Iraq
> would matter all that much in the fortunes of military-industrial
> contractors. If, on the other hand, markets are inefficient, and the
> "routineness" of the bombing is either in question or belied by other
> information that only some players have, then there's no easy way to gauge
> what the markets are saying. Perhaps they are expressing a _wish_ that the
> bombing wasn't routine, or that the routine bombings will become something
> else.

As far as I can tell, the "markets," which is an abstract word for a
few hundred thousand financial professionals, don't give a damn about
the bombing one way or the other as long as oil supplies aren't
interrupted. Every Iraqi could die from sanctions, and every African
could die of AIDS, and they wouldn't think twice about it.

Doug