So I was catching up on some Boethius the other day, the whole reconciling divine omniscience and free will which is pure stupidity, but it spurred me to resume rambling on the nature of freedom and how that goes into our short VIX pocket-
I would argue on a more macro level that more freedom equals more volatility. This is before even getting into S&P options/ black scholes and actual VIX, but the human concept of volatility- wider standard deviations for actual events, higher chances for corner case probabilities. Lets look at an even simpler example- Checkers vs Chess:
On turn one you have 7 possible Checkers moves, whereas Chess has 20, and grows exponentially to 400 possibilities on White's 2nd turn, including the possibility of a turn 2 win. To me that is real world volatility- more options, more chance for advantage and loss.
Lets mosey back to finance and markets, where macro freedom trends can now inform our market view.
Do you see the total space of finance/economics to be growing freer or more constrained?
I think this is a legitimate two sided discussion with arguments for each side, and that is why we have counterparties. The ultimate point, however, is that if you think the universe that is finance and markets is on the trajectory of constraint, then that would lend to short volatility as fewer options and less freedom would lead to less total market action and movement which should be visible in the options prices and thus the VIX. Furthermore, actual implementations such as market breakers, capital controls, etc all put us ever so slightly on that constraining trajectory.
One important bulletpoint to insert at this point is the argument that if we go the China route of full capital control and the market fully collapses leading to higher volatility. I agree that we would have higher volatility, but if it is high enough that the USD collapses, then no other boring S&P investments matter anyways!
I'm bringing some of this up due to the recent action in cryptocurrency and the ICO explosion with potential SEC oversight/regulation. Going back to my 1st article on Bitcoin, asking the Bitcoin original purist/ libertarians if Bitcoin even can do what it sets out to (anonymous/decentralization), I again bring up the shadow of government on the areas where the blockchain code ends and enforcement begins- at the exchanges, ICO companies, and services. You may disagree but I think the last few months of action show that the original vision of crypto has been lost, and the bulk of the silicon valley new investors don't remotely care about the anonymity and decentralization, instead caring about and even using words like "governance." That right there should be the glaring warning light and death blow if you didn't see it before.
Ok ok this is about the actual VIX though-
The point of the crypo contraction and oversight is that we got a glimpse of what expanding economic/financial freedom would look like, and that door got slammed in our face, almost from within the crypto community before government has truly stepped in. Kudos to Janet and the rest of SPECTRE as they realized they would only need to take action if it didn't implode internally first.
A blockchain can definitely exist, but there will be no real disruptive freedom attached to it, and thus it will just be less efficient than a central database. More importantly, the ideological crushing of this outlet to more freedom and options will in a small way contain some price action in actual markets (either to the upside with AMD, NVDA cards now that mining payout will theoretically go lower, or to the downside in that a possible disruptive technology was neutered and markets will chop along as usual.)
Crypto is just one example here, who knows what will come next but the point is the systems are already in place (central banks, US military) that can crush innovation if it truly has the potential for disrupting the financial status quo (if those new industries don't implode internally first)
I've been going in circles just muttering but the real takeaway here is my last point "if they don't implode internally first" and to me that is an issue of human nature. For a technology or idea to be freeing, it has to let go some amount of security- and on a human nature level I think this is something that will almost never happen, and why Janet et al. can just sit on their hands and wait for these things to blow up.
People don't really want freedom. The original idea of an anonymous/decentralized crypto meant real freedom for the few believers, but as it reaches larger adoption, people will give up every drop of freedom the second something goes wrong. "The exchange took my money, ETH dropped by 50%, my transaction isn't going through, call the SEC!" This goes way past crypto into every other area where government regulation just multiplies like slime in a little petri dish- net neutrality, driverless cars, recreational drones.
If you agree that it is in human nature to cooperate, and ultimately give up freedom for security, then it follows there will be that slight amount of fewer options, which ultimately bleed into financial markets and prices, and ultimately the VIX.
Just a reminder- YES there still will be corrections and crashes. I am talking about a long term trajectory and core position which will ride out the storm of volatility. Prices will always go up and down, but if there is even one less far corner option, then that price movement is that 1 cent less exaggerated.
Yes- this is all dark, we are somewhat going back into Plato's cave year by year while we swipe on instagram on our iphone 10's all day. As investors, the least we can do is factor in these macro issues into our core position and make a few bucks as we are on the way to our North Korea work camp gulag tombs singing And the land of the freeeeee