"Carlos Tavares, que no final do ano passado assumiu funções como assessor da administração da Caixa Geral de Depósitos, concordou que, "de facto, hoje o que resta à política económica é criar os incentivos correctos ou, pelo menos, não criar os incentivos errados". E recordou que "muita da má afectação de investimento deve-se a incentivos de política e regulatórios errados e que encaminham o investimento para os sectores errados". Aliás, acrescentou, "o próprio Estado foi um grande investidor no sector não transaccionável e acumulámos uma grande dívida pública e privada para investir em sectores que não foram os mais eficientes"."Primeiro não existem sectores errados. Todos os sectores são necessários numa economia saudável.
Segundo, arrisco dizer que não existem incentivos correctos nem incentivos errados. Todos os incentivos são errados. Ponto
Terceiro, os incentivos pretendem reduzir a incerteza e as pessoas procuram "The choice for a sure bet". Resultado, vamos ter sempre um overshoot que torce e desforma o mercado. Recordar os exemplos do leite ou o das auto-estradas.
Prefiro a Via Negativa. Primeiro:
"Primum non nocere"Ou seja (recordando Nassim Taleb em Antifragile):
"what is called in Latin via negativa, the negative way, after theological traditions, particularly in the Eastern Orthodox Church. Via negativa does not try to express what God is - leave that to the primitive brand of contemporary thinkers and philosophasters with scientistic tendencies. It just lists what God is not and proceeds by the process of elimination.
...
Recall that the interventionista focuses on positive action - doing. Just like positive definitions, we saw that acts of commission are respected and glorified by our primitive minds and lead to, say, naive government interventions that end in disaster, followed by generalized complaints about naive government interventions, as these, it is now accepted, end in disaster, followed by more naive government interventions. Acts of omission, not doing something, are not considered acts and do not appear to be part of one’s mission. ... I have used all my life a wonderfully simple heuristic: charlatans are recognizable in that they will give you positive advice, and only positive advice, exploiting our gullibility and sucker-proneness for recipes that hit you in a flash as just obvious, then evaporate later as you forget them.
...
in practice it is the negative that’s used by the pros, those selected by evolution: chess grandmasters usually win by not losing; people become rich by not going bust (particularly when others do); religions are mostly about interdicts; the learning of life is about what to avoid. You reduce most of your personal risks of accident thanks to a small number of measures.
...
So the central tenet of the epistemology I advocate is as follows: we know a lot more what is wrong than what is right, or, phrased according to the fragile/robust classification, negative knowledge (what is wrong, what does not work) is more robust to error than positive knowledge (what is right, what works). So knowledge grows by subtraction much more than by addition—given that what we know today might turn out to be wrong but what we know to be wrong cannot turn out to be right, at least not easily."
Trecho inicial retirado de "Daniel Bessa: "Não há razão nenhuma para não ser corrupto em Portugal""
Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário