http://www.slate.com/id/2165929/pagenum/2/

Pop!
Why bubbles are great for the economy.
By Daniel Gross
Posted Wednesday, May 9, 2007, at 5:35 PM ET

If you blew the kids' college fund on Pets.com stock back in 2000, or  
dropped $800,000 last year on that spec house in Phoenix that you  
knew you could flip for $1.4 million, you probably won't believe me  
when I say: Investment bubbles are great for the economy. Yes, those  
periodic outbursts of investor insanity, which inevitably degenerate  
into venality, corruption, and searing losses—America needs them!

In my new book, Pop! Why Bubbles Are Great for the Economy, I explain  
why Americans have misunderstood the frenzies, manias, and stampedes  
that periodically seize us. In that magical world known only to a few  
economists, where resources are allocated efficiently and investors  
and consumers behave rationally, bubbles would always be  
unambiguously negative. They cause all sorts of distortions and  
silly, self-defeating behavior (buying Amazon.com at $400). But  
that's not the world in which we live, especially in the United  
States. We are not blessed with a population composed entirely of  
hyper-rational individuals. And the government doesn't control the  
deployment of revolutionary inventions. As a result, new technologies  
and ways of doing business are always rolled out in fits and starts.  
What's more, the excitement of a new technology interacts with some  
of the more unstable components of America's character—boundless  
optimism, a tendency toward entrepreneurship, a tolerance of creative  
destruction, and greed—to produce a kind of mania. So, every time a  
hot new technology comes along (whether it's the telegraph or the  
Internet), Americans collectively lose their minds—and then lose  
their shirts.

Looking back through the last 150 years, a familiar pattern emerges.  
A wonderful new technology or economic idea arrives. A few good years  
of solid growth help engender a sense that things are different and  
that new rules apply. Hype and rosy projections—from Irving Fisher's  
1929 prediction of a "permanently high plateau" to Dow 36,000 — 
justify investing at stratospheric levels. The trend, previously  
confined to the business community, crosses over into popular  
culture. Everyone's buying stock, investing venture capital,  
refinancing a mortgage, installing compact fluorescent light bulbs.  
And then, pop! The bubble bursts, heroes become goats, and  
bankruptcies spread. As corruption and venality are exposed, self- 
loathing and recriminations rule the day. (See: subprime lending,  
spring 2007.) And that's when all the moralizing narratives about the  
tragedy of bubbles get written.

But this is only half the story! After all, the process of growth and  
innovation doesn't end when a bubble bursts. The Internet wasn't  
unplugged and shut down in 2002. In fact, once you gain a little  
historical distance from bubbles, it is clear that some bubbles—some,  
not all—leave behind something that is a little bit boring but  
extremely useful: infrastructure. The bubbles that have left behind  
commercial infrastructure have been incredibly important contributors  
to America's remarkable long-term economic performance.

Simply put, bubbles are how new commercial infrastructure gets built  
in this country. In the 1840s and 1850s, European governments slowly  
strung up telegraphs from large city to large city. But in the United  
States, bubble-drunk entrepreneurs rampaged throughout the  
countryside, stringing up competing and often redundant wires way  
ahead of demand. Most went bankrupt. In the 1880s, vast competing,  
and often redundant, rail networks were built way ahead of demand. By  
1894 about a quarter of the rails were in bankruptcy. The 1990s saw  
an orgy of commercial infrastructure built for the Internet. We all  
know how that ended.

But Americans recover from failure very quickly. All that  
infrastructure wasn't torn down—it was consolidated, taken over by  
new investors with lower cost bases, and reused. The cheap, pervasive  
telegraph led to American dominance in the national and international  
market in information—and long-lasting businesses like the Associated  
Press and the Chicago Board of Trade. The cheap, pervasive national  
railroad network led to an integrated market in goods and commodities— 
and long-lasting businesses such as department stores, mail-order  
retailers like Sears, and national brands from Coca-Cola to Procter &  
Gamble. The Internet pop has left us with Web 2.0—Facebook and Skype,  
MySpace and YouTube, and, most of all, Google. Each of these  
companies either was started or gained critical mass after the  
Internet bubble burst. Each gained tremendous scale overnight thanks  
to all the cheap excess capacity built during the 1990s bubble.

During bubbles, a second type of infrastructure is built, too: the  
mental infrastructure. The money raised during bubbles doesn't just  
go into the incinerator. It is spent on marketing, advertising,  
promotion, hype, and brand awareness. Bubble-era companies, desperate  
for traffic, discount furiously, pay rebates, offer free shipping,  
and run their businesses on negative margins—all as part of a heroic  
effort to coax consumers and businesses to spend their money in  
fundamentally different ways. The telegraphs slashed per-word rates  
to compete with the mail and with each other. The railroads slashed  
freight rates to compete with canals and rivers, and with each other.  
In the 1990s, the entire e-commerce sector spent furiously to  
persuade consumers and businesses to take the leap of faith and buy  
stuff—stocks, books, airline tickets, pet food, groceries, diamonds,  
chemicals, you name it—online.

Most of the pioneering Internet bubble-era companies failed as  
businesses. But they succeeded in making millions of people believe  
that it was safe, efficient, and desirable to conduct business  
online. That mental infrastructure didn't disappear after the bust.  
People didn't suddenly stop buying things online in 2001. According  
to Forrester Research, e-commerce more than doubled between 2001 and  
2006, to $211.4 billion. Post-bust innovators were able to tap into  
both a commercial physical infrastructure (near-universal broadband)  
and a huge installed base of customers. Thus, businesses that were  
stillborn during the boom (Webvan, advertising-supported video sites)  
can thrive after the bust (FreshDirect, YouTube).

Today the services-driven U.S. economy is showing a remarkable  
capacity to blow and deflate bubbles quickly. With the assistance of  
Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan, we transitioned seamlessly  
from Internet bubble to real-estate bubble to alternative-energy  
bubble in just six years. That makes the mental infrastructure more  
important than ever. Take the housing bubble that just popped.  
Millions of people will get hurt—and hurt badly—as housing prices  
fall and ARMs are reset higher. The upsides of bubbles are always  
hardest to see when things are collapsing. (Raise your hand if, in  
2001 and 2002, you thought an Internet search and advertising company  
would be worth $146 billion in 2007.) But the mental and commercial  
infrastructure surrounding real-estate credit will remain. The  
culture of refinancing, which proved a huge boon to the economy  
throughout the 1990s and first half of this decade, will stay with  
us. So, too, will important bubble-era services like Zillow that  
empower consumers.

These efforts to make a virtue out of some of the worst tendencies in  
the American economic character may sound like a naive exercise of  
hope over experience. But in my book, experience should give us hope— 
even if the housing bubble continues to wreak damage on the economy  
and the alternative-energy space is getting bubbly. It is possible,  
even rational, to be both short-term gloomy and long-term optimistic.  
Those who believe that the nation's experience with bubbles is all  
gray cloud and no silver lining need to ask where we would be without  
the irrational exuberance. Without the disasters of Global Crossing  
and Worldcom, would we still have Google?
Daniel Gross (www.danielgross.net) writes Slate's "Moneybox" column.  
You can e-mail him at [EMAIL PROTECTED] He is the author of Pop!  
Why Bubbles Are Great for the Economy.

Article URL: http://www.slate.com/id/2165929/

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~

TELECOM-CITIES
Current searchable archives (Feb. 1, 2006 to present) at 
http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
Old searchble archives at 
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to