Goldman Sachs, Generals And New Paternalism

Very interesting read at CATO Unbound:
The Rise of The New Paternalism
It is well-established that people exhibit extremeness aversion: a tendency to avoid positions that are presented as extremes. When choosing between a low-end camera and a medium-quality camera, for instance, potential buyers split about equally between the two — but when these two options are presented alongside a high-end camera, the medium-quality camera attracts substantially more buyers. The mere presence of an extreme option makes the middle option seem better. The new paternalists, intentionally or not, have exploited this same tendency by presenting their position as a middle-ground between laissez-faire and heavy-handed paternalism.

At the same time, looking at ploys and diversions as part of the tactics to draw the attention of the opponent away from a planned point of action or to be in a better position when hit is interesting in Goldman Sachs story. Whether the market was sagely orchestrated the weeks before or the blow is functional to political maneuvers, or both, this reminds of the preparation in all details of a military campaign. What kind of battle shall we expect now? A blitzkrieg to encircle the enemy before they have time to reposition, a type of shock and awe approach that brings the enemy to rapidly lose their will to fight, or a retrenchment type of fight long and exhausting? Who are and what personalities have the generals orchestrating this campaign? Are they bold and dashing or rather pondering and shrewd? We could envision the future from this analysis because even in the era of algorithmic and high frequency trading it is still the human factor that counts.