Finance
Emotions, Ego, & Envy: Avoid Financial Failures With “Clear Thinking”
One of the best books of 2023—and one sure to land on my list of Advisor Resources for Financial LIFE Planning—was published near the year’s end. I’ve been following Shane Parrish’s work for years as the creator and curator of the Farnam Street blog and newsletter, so his new book, Clear Thinking, was in the cue.
One of Parrish’s greatest gifts is simplifying the realm of behavioral science to the point that it becomes, uh, clear, and perhaps more importantly, actionable. So, while you can peruse through a nearly comprehensive list of the 188 cognitive biases to which we may fall prey, you could also just read Clear Thinking and examine the four defaults Parrish suggests are “the enemies of clear thinking.”
Clarify your thinking
In this post, I’ll review each of the four and suggest four companion lessons to apply in pursuit of better financial decision-making:
1) The Emotion Default: “We tend to respond to feelings rather than reasons and facts.”
While emotion is too often used as a pejorative synonym for foolishness in the realm of personal finance, it is undeniable that, as Parrish suggests, “Emotions can multiply all of your progress by zero.”
Indeed, emotions often lead to rash decisions because they are centered in our System 1, in Daniel Kahneman’s Thinking, Fast and Slow parlance. While our System 2 is the processor in our brain that is slower, deliberate, and seemingly more rational, our System 1 is our source of fast, autonomic, and yes, emotional thinking and reacting.
That’s why we can find ourselves doing and saying things when we’re emotionally charged as though there is no gap between our feelings and actions. And while it would be nice if we could choose which of our Systems to use in the face of financial decision making (System 2, please!), the fact is that 80% or more of our decisions are driven by System 1, by our emotions.
Lesson: Money is inherently emotional.
This is where the financial industry has served us so poorly. From investment managers to gurus and advisors, most of us are taught to insist that consumers, followers, and clients separate themselves from their emotions. The only problem is that it’s a biological impossibility. Money, in particular, is inherently emotional, so we need to deal with those emotions rather than suppress or ignore them.
Of course, retailers and social media companies are well aware of this conundrum and seek to capitalize on it daily. Therefore, the best we can do when we experience emotion is to sloooooow the process down. Acknowledge the emotion, process it, discuss, decide, and then in the best-case scenario, harness the power of your System 1 to harden your better-informed resolve. Emotion need not be the enemy, and it can be part of the solution.
2. The Ego Default: “We tend to react to anything that threatens our sense of self-worth or our position in a group hierarchy.”
Nothing threatens our sense of self-worth more than others’ perception of our net worth. Even those who’ve destroyed every relationship in life are still often viewed as successful simply because they are rich. And their riches may only be a matter of perception, especially when we consider that most visible signs of wealth are evidence that someone has parted with their money in pursuit of a depreciating asset.
Lesson: “Comparison is the thief of joy,” and the modern world is wired to create comparisons everywhere we turn.
In The Gap and the Gain, co-authored by Strategic Coach founder Dan Sullivan and Dr. Benjamin Hardy, the authors suggest that the world we live in is designed to perpetually convince us that we are “in the gap”—that we are conditioned to compute our circumstances based on what we lack and how far we are from our ideal state—rather than “in the gain,” acknowledging how far we’ve progressed from the starting point of our goal pursuit.
3. The Social Default: “We tend to conform to the norms of our larger social group.”
Have you ever been in an environment where you quickly realized that your opinions or worldview were in the minority? Have you ever lived in a neighborhood or been part of a group at work, school, church, your kids’ extracurricular activities, or online where the larger group’s apparently unanimous deviation from your belief or preference applied an enormous pressure that challenged your belief and shifted your preference?
Although I live in Charleston, South Carolina, I’m from Baltimore, and when I meet someone else from Charm City (that’s Baltimore, IYKYK), the first question they usually ask is, “Where did you go to school?” They don’t mean college. They want to know which of the uber-elite private schools I went to. They’re sizing me up. I can’t tell you how much I love telling them I was a public school kid :-), but the condescension is powerful, and I’d be lying if I said I’d never wished my answer could be, say, Gilman.
Similarly, a friend of mine from the U.K. was an elementary school teacher across the pond, and she told me that on the first day of class, all of the kids insisted on knowing “Which football team do you pull for?” By “football,” they meant soccer, and by soccer, my friend told me what the kids really wanted to know was if she was Catholic or “Proddy” because there was such a clear division depending on which jersey she might wear. (She told me she decided she would choose to respond by mentioning the worst team in the league, which threw the kids off track and resulted only in jeers for supporting such an abysmal football squad.)
The powerful force of groupthink is one of life’s most persuasive.
Lesson: Be cognizant of the influences of your social groups.
We are social beings and benefit so much from our social connections that the lesson here is hardly to be a hermit. The lesson is to be aware of our surroundings and our circles and question the apparent norms. The chances are extremely good that most of the parents on your kids’ lacrosse team have houses, cars, and take vacations with price tags with a standard deviation below 25%.
Some sub-groups, especially in personal finance, reach levels of pressure that are downright cult-ish. For example, if you follow Dave Ramsey, you’ll likely be looked at with evident disdain if you pull up to your Total Money Makeover class in “the ultimate driving machine.” You’ll similarly get an eye roll if you put less than 20% down on your house or have a mortgage with a term of more than 15 years. Meanwhile, you won’t even be able to get into a pickleball game at your country club if you’re not driving a luxury vehicle.
Just remember that personal finance is more personal than it is finance, and so, too, are the best financial decisions. There’s nothing morally right or wrong with driving or living in whatever you choose (that you can afford), having a mortgage or not, or sending your kids to private school or public. The question is, What’s right and wrong for you and your family?
4. The Inertia Default: “We’re habit forming and comfort seeking. We tend to resist change, and to prefer ideas, processes, and environments that are familiar.”
As we have learned from Charles Duhigg, James Clear, and others, humans are creatures of habit—whether we like it or not. Even the things we don’t think are habits usually are, so the inertia that Parrish refers to is often not even conscious. Therefore, one of the best ways to acknowledge our habits, for good and ill, is to pause long enough to ask, “Why am I doing this?”
The challenge is that it is exceedingly difficult to stop doing something habitual. Therefore, the best way to stop a bad habit is to replace it with a new one. Recognize the cue that leads to the behavior, then replace the behavior with something preferable.
Lesson: Become familiar with the habits and processes that are likely to lead to financial success.
There are no guarantees in life, and especially money. But there are foundational principles that will make you much more likely to be financially successful. Thankfully, we see several of those principles illuminated in the companion lessons to counter the previous three defaults:
Know thyself. Become aware of your emotions around money by slowing down the process between idea (or, more often, feeling) and action. Better yet, plumb the depths of your emotions to reveal what it is in life that is most important to you—not what is most important to those in your social circles. Then, with a better understanding of your values, motivations, needs, and wants, establish the habits that will facilitate the pursuit of those goals, all while appreciating how far you’ve come rather than fixating on the distance between you and the ideal.
Finance
Bank Regulation and Risks to Financial Stability | The Regulatory Review
Scholars examine bank and cryptocurrency regulation and assess potential risks to financial stability and resilience.
Federal banking regulators recently proposed rules to implement the Basel III Endgame framework. Global banking regulators developed the Basel III framework after the 2008 financial crisis to strengthen bank regulation, supervision, and risk management through a set of international standards. The final set of rules to implement the framework has been dubbed “Basel III Endgame.”
Although regulators originally planned to finalize and implement the Basel III accord by the beginning of 2023, countries have repeatedly delayed implementation while tailoring the framework to national interests and as banks and policymakers around the world increasingly embrace a more deregulatory approach.
The updated proposal follows a 2023 proposal from the Biden Administration that drew criticism for threatening to impose burdensome capital requirements on U.S. banks that could reduce lending and credit availability. Regulators argued that strengthening risk-based capital requirements for large banks would promote financial stability and resilience, but critics contended that the proposal could instead restrict banks’ lending capacity and push lending and traditional bank activity into more lightly regulated shadow banking sectors, such as private credit.
The latest proposal departs significantly from the 2023 proposal and would reduce the regulatory burden on large banks. The banking industry has applauded the recent deregulatory push, but critics warn that this approach risks weakening bank regulatory infrastructure only a few years after several major bank failures revealed ongoing gaps in bank supervision. Silicon Valley Bank’s collapse in 2023 marked the third-largest bank failure in U.S. history and required major emergency intervention. Although U.S. bank regulators largely contained the fallout and prevented contagion risks, the episode highlighted ongoing systemic risks to financial stability.
Debate over U.S. banking regulation also coincides with financial innovation and the rise of cryptocurrency, which have upended traditional financial services. The proposal comes less than a year after Congress passed the GENIUS Act, which established a baseline framework for stablecoin issuance. The GENIUS Act represented a significant regulatory breakthrough in a rapidly developing industry but left open many questions about its implementation and the future of cryptocurrency and stablecoin regulation. Federal regulators recently proposed rules to begin implementing the GENIUS Act framework, which will take effect in January 2027.
In this week’s seminar, scholars explore and offer competing views on current risks to the banking system and financial stability and identify potential regulatory vulnerabilities, including new payment systems tied to cryptocurrency.
- In a National Bureau of Economic Research working paper, Stephen Cecchetti and co-authors advocate implementation of the Basel III Endgame standards and higher U.S. capital requirements for large banks. They argue that criticisms of the 2023 proposed regulations are not supported by data and that heightened capital requirements do not reduce bank lending. The authors warn that failure to align U.S. regulations with the international Basel III standards could start a deregulatory race to the bottom that would undermine global banking stability.
- In an article in the University of Illinois Law Review, American University Washington College of Law Professor Hilary Allen explains that financial stability risks can arise from often-overlooked sources beyond the traditional banking sector, such as venture capital. Using the venture capital industry as a case study, Allen contends that speculative sectors such as cryptocurrency can pose risks when regulatory oversight is weak. She argues that effective banking regulation of emerging risks requires a more proactive, systemwide approach, including increased monitoring of risks arising from venture capital investment and more aggressive securities law enforcement against cryptocurrency activities.
- In a Stanford Law Review article that predates the GENIUS Act, Gabriel Rauterberg and Jeffrey Zhang argue that shadow banking, including stablecoin issuance, should fall under securities regulators’ oversight. Shadow banking covers a broad range of activities that resemble banking but fall outside the traditionally narrow bank regulatory perimeter and lack banking regulation. As a result, shadow banking receives significantly less regulatory oversight, creating vulnerability and instability in the financial system. The authors contend that many shadow banking activities fall within securities law’s purview and that securities regulation should promote systemic stability by working with traditional bank regulation.
- Financial regulation has not kept pace with the financial system’s rapid changes, University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School Assistant Professor of Finance Yao Zeng asserts in the International Monetary Fund’s Finance & Development quarterly publication. Zeng frames stablecoins as innovative in form but economically familiar in function and financial vulnerability. He argues that although stablecoins promise faster, cheaper, and more accessible payments, their bank-like economic functions and lack of protections such as deposit insurance and lender-of-last-resort support create familiar risks to financial stability. Zeng proposes that regulation should depend more on function than label: if stablecoins perform bank-like monetary functions, they should provide similar safeguards.
- In a Delaware Journal of Corporate Law article, Arthur E. Wilmarth argues that the GENIUS Act institutionalizes nonbank stablecoin issuance, a practice that carries severe economic risks and lacks offsetting benefits. Wilmarth contends that nonbank stablecoin issuance undermines traditional banking and allows nonbank entities, such as tech firms, to perform bank-like functions without proper regulatory safeguards. He argues that the resulting ecosystem carries significant risks for financial stability and maintains that stablecoin issuance should be limited to FDIC-insured banks to ensure that adequate protections safeguard depositors’ money.
- In a recent article in the Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Roanoke College’s Zane Mullins addresses common critiques of stablecoins and pushes back against the view that stablecoins pose risks to the financial system. Mullins proposes a narrow stablecoin framework that would allow stablecoin issuers to settle payments with common central bank reserves. He argues that this framework would mitigate credit and liquidity risk by giving all stablecoin issuers similar access to a common settlement medium. Mullins contends that the framework would also address interoperability concerns, promote a level playing field among issuers, and mitigate counterparty risk.
Finance
Evoke Entertainment Closes $35 Million Production Financing Facility Backed By Major Private Credit Fund
EXCLUSIVE: Evoke Entertainment has closed a senior secured production financing facility of up to $35 million backed by a multi-billion-dollar private credit fund.
While we verified the deal with the lender, they spoke with Deadline on the condition of anonymity, per company policy. The revolving production facility is designed to support Evoke’s expanding slate of independent features, television movies, streaming films, and series — significantly increasing the company’s already high-volume production output across major studios, networks, and streaming platforms.
More from Deadline
Structured around contracted revenue streams, distribution agreements, tax incentives, and the value of Evoke’s existing library and historical production performance, the facility provides the company with flexible, scalable production financing across multiple genres and platforms. Evoke’s lender comes to the partnership with extensive experience in structured finance, asset-backed lending, and entertainment-related investments.
The deal was spearheaded by Evoke Entertainment CEO Stan Spry, who told us, “This financing marks a transformative moment for Evoke. The backing of a major institutional private credit partner gives us the ability to substantially scale our production operations while continuing to focus on commercially driven, cost-efficient content for the global marketplace.”
The first projects to be financed under Evoke’s facility include a large slate of TV and streaming movies including a Christmas film for Hallmark, a survival thriller for Lifetime, alongside the independent feature films Suburban Kings, Homesick, and Bali Hai.
Founded in 2011, and formerly known as Cartel Entertainment, Evoke Entertainment is a full-service management, production, and finance company that produces more than 20 films and series annually across major platforms including Netflix, Hallmark, Lifetime, Tubi, NBC/Peacock, AMC, and Great American Media. Notable past projects include Creepshow (AMC), Day of the Dead (Syfy), Twelve Forever (Netflix), and the upcoming Breaking Bear for Tubi, to name a few.
Best of Deadline
Sign up for Deadline’s Newsletter. For the latest news, follow us on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram.
Finance
Livestock Methane in India: Aligning Livelihoods, Systems, and Finance – CPI
Background
India is home to the world’s largest livestock population of 536.76 million, which produces 25% of the world’s milk1. This increase in livestock population leads to increased methane emissions, primarily from enteric fermentation and manure management. As a result, livestock contributes to 58% (BUR 4, 2020) of India’s agricultural methane footprint. However, unlike crop-based emissions, livestock methane is diffuse, biologically driven, and more complex to measure and manage, making it less visible within existing climate finance frameworks.
Current research and policy discussions indicate that while technical mitigation solutions exist through feed improvements and manure management, evidence of their effectiveness in maintaining dairy productivity, animal health, and protecting farmers’ incomes is scattered. This leads to heightened risk perceptions among dairy producers when considering methane mitigation measures. Furthermore, even where the evidence is compelling, the fragmentation of dairy producers precludes their aggregation. Additionally, there is a lack of robust, affordable, and scalable monitoring, reporting, and verification (MRV) systems at the grassroots level. These barriers prevent the development of a clear, scalable, and financeable pipeline of livestock methane abatement in India.
The Government of India has actively supported dairy development and livestock health through various schemes and programs introduced by the Department of Animal Husbandry and Dairying. At the same time, livestock systems in India are deeply embedded within rural livelihoods and socio-economic structures, making the sector a critical component of rural resilience. Consequently, interventions must be context-aware and farmer-centric, with a strong focus on livelihood security and alignment with local values and practices.
With this background, CPI is organizing a roundtable to explore how livestock methane can transition from a technically understood challenge to actionable opportunities on the ground, including both animal feed and manure management. The forum would bring together dairy producer organizations, nodal agencies, think tanks, ecosystem enablers, and financial institutions. It will deliberate upon possible projectized solutions and accompanying financing mechanisms that could be scaled up to address the twin objectives of methane abatement and farmers’ income security.
-
Texas3 minutes agoUSC squanders late lead, falls to Texas State in NCAA regional opener
-
Utah10 minutes agoDHHS issues emergency actions against Utah behavioral school attended by Paris Hilton
-
Vermont13 minutes agoVermont’s only theme park opened in the 50s. How Santa’s Land got its start
-
Virginia18 minutes ago‘I didn’t know I could go that fast’: Virginia pizza maker breaks record – WTOP News
-
Washington25 minutes ago
Washington Lottery Mega Millions, Cash Pop results for May 29, 2026
-
Wisconsin28 minutes ago
Wisconsin Lottery Mega Millions, Pick 3 results for May 29, 2026
-
West Virginia33 minutes agoYSS offers West Virginia’s first transitional living recovery programs for young adults
-
Wyoming40 minutes agoAlbany County sheriff reports inmate death at detention center