"Over and over again, financial experts and wonkish talking heads endeavor to explain these mysterious, 'toxic' financial instruments to us lay folk. Over and over, they ignobly fail, because we all know that no one understands credit default obligations and derivatives, except perhaps Mr. Buffett and the computers who created them"
About this Quote
Dooling’s punchline lands because it refuses to flatter the reader with the pretense of comprehension. The repetition of “Over and over again” mimics the media cycle itself: the endless parade of experts performing clarity while producing only fog. That cadence isn’t just stylistic; it’s an accusation that the explanatory apparatus of modern finance is designed to fail, or at least to fail publicly, so the system can continue without democratic interference.
“Wonkish talking heads” is a neat double-swipe. “Wonkish” implies technical authority; “talking heads” implies empty punditry. Put together, the phrase suggests a class of intermediaries whose job is less to inform than to manage anxiety. The term “lay folk” sharpens the social divide: finance as priesthood, the rest of us as congregation, expected to accept doctrine we can’t verify.
The mock-solemn “ignobly fail” signals that the failure isn’t innocent. It hints at moral hazard: when products are too complex to explain, they’re too complex to police, and that complexity becomes a feature, not a bug. Dooling’s choice to invoke “toxic” calls up the 2008-era mood, when everyday language had to borrow from chemistry to describe what had been sold as sophisticated innovation.
The closer is the real barb: only Buffett and “the computers who created them” understand. Buffett stands in for old-school, human-scaled judgment; the computers represent an opaque technocracy. The subtext is bleakly funny: in late capitalism, even the architects may not fully grasp the machine, and we’re still expected to trust it with our homes, jobs, and pensions.
“Wonkish talking heads” is a neat double-swipe. “Wonkish” implies technical authority; “talking heads” implies empty punditry. Put together, the phrase suggests a class of intermediaries whose job is less to inform than to manage anxiety. The term “lay folk” sharpens the social divide: finance as priesthood, the rest of us as congregation, expected to accept doctrine we can’t verify.
The mock-solemn “ignobly fail” signals that the failure isn’t innocent. It hints at moral hazard: when products are too complex to explain, they’re too complex to police, and that complexity becomes a feature, not a bug. Dooling’s choice to invoke “toxic” calls up the 2008-era mood, when everyday language had to borrow from chemistry to describe what had been sold as sophisticated innovation.
The closer is the real barb: only Buffett and “the computers who created them” understand. Buffett stands in for old-school, human-scaled judgment; the computers represent an opaque technocracy. The subtext is bleakly funny: in late capitalism, even the architects may not fully grasp the machine, and we’re still expected to trust it with our homes, jobs, and pensions.
Quote Details
| Topic | Investment |
|---|---|
| Source | Help us find the source |
More Quotes by Richard
Add to List
