#AI #OpenAI #ChatGPT: Instead of for providing answers, have any Nobel Prize in Economics been awarded for raising a question?

I asked ChatGPT:

Instead of for providing answers, have any Nobel Prize in Economics been awarded for raising a question?

ChatGPT answered:

While Nobel Prizes in Economics are generally awarded for providing answers—often in the form of theories, models, or empirical findings—some laureates have been recognized for posing fundamental questions that reshaped economic thinking. These cases typically involve identifying key problems or paradoxes that forced the discipline to evolve.

Some notable examples:

1. Robert Lucas (1995) – His work on rational expectations was not just about providing answers but also about questioning how economic agents form expectations and whether traditional Keynesian models were adequate.

2. Ronald Coase (1991) – His famous paper, The Problem of Social Cost, posed the fundamental question: Why do firms exist, and how do transaction costs shape economic organization? This question transformed fields like law and economics.

3. Herbert Simon (1978) – He challenged the assumption of perfect rationality in economics by asking how decision-making actually works under real-world constraints, leading to the concept of bounded rationality.

4. Paul Samuelson (1970) – While known for providing answers, his questioning of equilibrium stability and the foundations of welfare economics pushed the field in new directions.

5. Elinor Ostrom (2009) – Her work on common-pool resources stemmed from questioning the conventional wisdom that such resources must either be privatized or regulated by governments.

Would you say these count as prizes awarded for raising questions, or do they fall into the category of answering them?

I said: Though these questions were followed up with some kind of answer, this reads like a well balanced answer. Thanks!

It said: You're very welcome! I appreciate your thoughtful perspective on the distinction between raising and answering questions in economics. Let me know if you'd like to explore similar nuances in other fields.

Note: The answers here are copied exactly from those given to me by OpenAI

#AI ChatGPT OpenAI: Why do journalist not ask regulators “Do you know enough about risks to impose risk weighted bank capital requirements?”

 I asked OpenAI:

"When highly reputable financial sector journalists hear about risk weighted bank capital requirements, what might hinder them from asking the regulators: Do you really know enough about the risks in our banking system to do so?"

OpenAI answered:

"There can be several factors that might hinder highly reputable financial sector journalists from asking regulators whether they truly know enough about the risks in the banking system when imposing risk-weighted bank capital requirements. Here are a few potential reasons:

1. Lack of access to regulators: Journalists may not always have direct access to regulators or may face challenges in obtaining interviews or responses to their inquiries. Limited access can make it difficult to ask specific questions directly to regulators and receive timely and accurate responses.

2. Time and resource constraints: Journalists often face tight deadlines and limited resources. They may not have sufficient time or resources to thoroughly investigate and question the regulators' understanding of risks in the banking system. In-depth analysis and research are necessary to frame the question properly and present a well-informed inquiry.

3. Information asymmetry: Regulators typically have access to detailed data and information that may not be readily available to journalists. Journalists may feel they lack the necessary expertise or access to relevant data to challenge the regulators' knowledge effectively. This information asymmetry can create a hesitancy to question regulators' understanding of risks without having comprehensive information themselves.

4. Fear of repercussions: Journalists might be concerned about potential backlash or negative consequences for their professional reputation or access to information if they confront regulators directly on their understanding of risks. Challenging powerful institutions or individuals can carry risks in terms of future access, relationships, or potential legal implications.

5. Assumption of competence: Journalists may generally assume that regulators possess the necessary expertise and knowledge to make informed decisions. They may not immediately question regulators' understanding of risks, particularly if the regulators are widely regarded as reputable and knowledgeable in their field.

These factors can collectively contribute to a reluctance or hindrance in journalists asking regulators probing questions about their understanding of risks. However, it is essential for journalists to uphold their role as watchdogs and critically assess the actions and decisions of regulatory bodies to foster transparency and accountability in the financial sector."

Note: The answers are copied exactly from those given to me by OpenAI

Here my many other questions to ChatGPT – OpenAI on bank regulations

Friends, if you ever get a chance to talk with a bank regulator ask him this, and then you’ll know they don’t know

Sir, by using risk weighted capital requirements you allow banks to leverage assets differently, something which influences differently the banks' risk-adjusted returns on equity. Don’t you think this could dangerously distort the so vital efficient allocation of bank credit to the real economy?

Sir, we see you have set a risk weight of only 20% for private assets rated AAA to AA; and one of 150% for those rated below BB-. Do you really believe that what is rated below BB- is more dangerous for the bank system than what is rated AAA to AA?

And when you then see him evading the issue by answering something else, then you have the right to know, as I do, that he and his colleagues have no idea about what they are doing… and are running scared people will find out.

PS. If you want further details on the bank regulatory monstrosity you can go HERE