I did not like the implication that you don’t have to learn Bayes rule

The other outcome that I've seen - when there are so many As students at the very top can't distinguish themselves through their classwork. Going really deep on a class and writing a truly superb paper won't change grade --> increased incentive to distinguish through extra curriculars.

Nash-in-Nash bargaining implies the existence of Rubinstein-in-Rubinstein bargaining: the parties exchange alternating offers that must be confirmed via email

I think filling the top ranks of our education system with people who got there in part by abusing a system designed to help disabled people will select morally deficient people for leadership positions in our society and is worth taking steps to avoid bsky.app/profile/padr...

ok so now I understand why Shaheen and gang were so desperate to end the shutdown

If they cave, it reinforces my sense that the real problem with the democrats is not “wokeness,” but the fact that they don’t stand for anything and are willing to fight for nothing. It’s worse than being useless; it is collaboration.

Q: How many applied microeconomists does it take to change a light bulb? A: Exploiting a unique natural experiment in which the Earth’s orbit and rotation induce plausibly exogenous variation across time and place in the availability of a close substitute to light bulbs, we find

My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings. Just a gentle reminder to look on my works at your earliest convenience. Thanks!!

I used to be nonplussed when people did this but now I’m nonplussed

Job market candidate: “Other papers have found high labor-market returns to studying economics, but no one has looked at subfields. My JMP estimates the returns to microeconomic theory.” Interviewer: “Do you look at mechanisms?”

I used to joke that computer science would also catch a lot of “critique” if there were “computer scientists” on cable TV and in government, many of whom were merely undergrad CS majors with business careers, arguing that “the algorithm is efficient” therefore efforts to improve things won’t work

not the main issue here but i'd really appreciate it if democratic politicians spoke out in support of big-city life and culture with the same energy and reverence that all politicians have for small towns los angeles is "real america" and so are all the other big cities the president hates

Three things made the US a rich and powerful nation: the rule of law, its science & innovation system, and openness to foreign talent. Remarkable how Trump has taken a sledgehammer to all three. No enemy of this country could do more.

This is the stuff of authoritarian regimes. There isn't even the pretense that this is anything but persecution, unbound by law.

Modeling the conclave? You’ll need cardinal utilities

How come in academia “no one understands” means “I personally don’t understand” but “I don’t understand” means “you don’t understand”?

To anyone who is not clear: The First Amendment protected Rumeysa Ozturk when she published her op-ed. The same way it has protected me. Rule of law means that we should be treated equally.

Me arguing with economists: the right model is one that captures the key features of the situation for the question at hand. It need not be a competitive model with 1 or 2 “frictions”. The Q “what’s the market failure” is not-even-wrong. Me arguing with non-economists: “what’s the market failure?”

It's fascinating watching Democratic Party politicians who are behaving as if careerism remains a viable strategy with a long-term future under authoritarianism when you are on the losing side.

The institutional Democratic Party is guided by an almost pathological level of conflict avoidance in almost every direction. “What can we do to make the least number of people mad?” is just a bankrupt way to operate.

SCHUMER (paraphrased): “what President Trump is doing is terrible. We Democrats do not APPROVE of it at all. But we will COLLABORATE with him. Yep, vaguely disapproving collaborators. That’s us. The leadership of the opposition party.”

The farce that this is to protect Jews is beyond offensive and insulting. Cancelling grants, threatening deportation of students based on their speech does not make me feel either safe or supported as a Jew. No admin in my life has made me feel *less* safe. Disgusting. www.ed.gov/about/news/p...

Michael Sandel: the important things—-life, love, friendship—are not commensurate to dollars. Economists have no account of this truth. Economists:

If you live in New York State and think Gov. Kathy Hochul should remove the corrupt mayor of NYC, give her a call or send her a letter.

Anyway here's how it played in the press last time anything went this far, just for reference

This is very good

I realize this is not the most pressing issue at the moment, but when did “general equilibrium” come to mean “any type of equilibrium” and partial equilibrium “no price changes at all”?

Question for those teaching undergrad IO: how much empirics do you teach

Thrilled to announce this friendly reminder at your earliest convenience out of an abundance of caution

decision theorists are people who derive utility from axioms

Some correct takes: 1. “Probability is like area” is more intuitive than whatever we tell undergrads about long run frequencies, and 2. The literal definition of a measurable function is *much* more intuitive than saying a r.v. is a variable that “takes” different “realizations”

Writing tip: anticipate readers’ objections. Incomplete: “It’s raining tacos from out of the sky.” Better: “…Tacos. No need to ask why”

There will be two kinds of IO talks: the kind that are contestable and the kind where people draw Gumbel shocks before deciding whether to go

I’d go further than this. Seminar norms should match the talk’s contents. For example, if it’s about rational inattention, not only can folks leave, they can make the speaker go through slides in any order

Less is more implies at most one amount where it is what it is

In equilibrium, economists use math. therefore, by economic intuition, math is efficient

Much of what we colloquially call “beliefs” are closer to preferences than to Bayesian beliefs

Does the “model based” vs “design based” distinction make sense outside of the Rubin causal model?

People are always complaining about selecting on the dependent variable but honestly it’s worked out great for me

If the data could speak, we would not understand it