These all are theories—i.e., hypothesis—though. Unfortunately, I cannot think of empirical research that tests these theories in the context of financial innovation. It would be a fascinating research question. I know people who contemplate this question, but it is very hard.

Coming back to your review, I think journalists and commentators are to blame more than economists. Journalists often treat economic research as physics research or engineering. Economics is not engineering (except, perhaps, Al Roth’s work, for which he was awarded Nobel prize this year), the models are stylised (even when estimated empirically), and the results have a myriad of qualifications. Academic economists realise that, but commentators tend to interpret economic models literally. Of course, one can blame academic economists who focus perhaps excessively on academic research instead of popularising existing ideas. But often, as soon as one starts popularising ideas, one somehow loses touch with the economic profession. One can construct examples of this.