apologies if this is a little undercooked, i was having fun riffing
I think this is quite an amount of hogwash. The WSB-types have now started doing on real financial markets the thing which they have done with impunity in crypto-land, i.e. market manipulation. None of those economists/thinkers have incorporated this into their models. So let me cut to the chase: you can’t make gold out of shit. But you can certainly sell a lot of shit as gold to stupid people. And you can obviously write articles about it.
A word to the wise. Since the crazy-crowd cannot be reined in by regulators, but the traders can, guess which one’s gonna be it.
In order to have predictive power, though, wouldn't any model that accounts for recent events involving Gamestop have to include information about preferences? I don't think it's enough to simply say that market participants will naturally seek exploitable features of the market; that alone doesn't explain why *this* feature of the market is being exploited at *this* particular time, when the same feature of the market wasn't exploited in the same way at previous times, and other features of the market (presumably) continue not to be exploited by the same cohort that is responsible for these events. A "window into men's souls", in this context, is really just a pejorative way of saying "a model that can correctly infer the existence of at least two distinct classes of market participants, each of which has distinct motivations and capabilities". By simply asserting that this kind of event can happen and should be anticipated, we're really just fitting a model that involves preferences in our minds and then using the fitted parameters as a given set of priors later on.