wouldnt it be true that, basically, every boom bust cycle is "caused" in part by 'traditional' investments having low returns which makes investors look for something with higher returns? which by definition is probably riskier?
the 'cheapness of capital' seems to me to be relative to the times that one lives in, in that the cheapness is only cheap in comparison to what investors believe they can profit from it.
the 'cheapness of capital' seems to me to be relative to the times that one lives in, in that the cheapness is only cheap in comparison to what investors believe they can profit from it.