>I'm no True Believer in markets of any sort; but you
>don't have to be in order to accept the general
>proposition that people with something at stake tend
>to give better answers than people without a quid in
>the pot.
This political stock market poll is a nice illustration of the problems with the EMH - the old joint hypothesis problem. No doubt the movement of prices quickly represents changes in opinion. But whose opinion? Do we know that the players are representative samples of the masses, or that they're particularly well-informed about what the nonplaying masses think? Seems like a good example of what Keynes wrote about in chap 12 of the GT - the game of anticipating what common opinion will be.
Doug