4 ms·

"This time it's different" is literally the last things always said right before the next recession kicks in. A nice, 500 page overview: https://press.princeto

by zukzuk 8y ago

"This time it's different" is literally the last things always said right before the next recession kicks in. A nice, 500 page overview: https://press.princeton.edu/titles/8973.html https://press.princeton.edu/titles/8973.html

WalterGR 8y ago
Blind link goes to page for: This Time Is Different: Eight Centuries of Financial Folly by Carmen M. Reinhart & Kenneth S. Rogoff (2009)
- ahelwer 8y ago
  Aren't those the economists who managed to turn a spreadsheet bug into disastrous worldwide accepted economic policy?
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - Analemma_ 8y ago
    It was even worse than that: the paper had multiple problems, of which the Excel bug was one, but they also chose an outrageously dumb sampling method. Basically, if a country had data for five years, it was weighted five times as heavily as a country that had that data for only one. Which, conveniently, lined up perfectly with overweighting countries whose development matched their hypothesis and underweighting countries that contradicted it. Frankly I will never be convinced that it wasn't outright academic fraud in order to generate the conclusion they wanted, and I'm angry that they still have jobs.
    - TAForObvReasons 8y ago
      The benefactors desired a conclusion, and the authors delivered it for them. They served their purpose. That "academic integrity" was not a purpose reflects the state of affairs in economics.
      - mistermann 8y ago
        And people are using it today as "proof" to support their preferred flavor of an economic system. Anyone who's been even an armchair observer of economics for 20+ years should know well how silly these conversations can get. Just as one unimportant example: Bond vigilantes used to be a term you'd encounter regularly, when's the last time you heard it now?
        fjsolwmv 8y ago
        Is that because the concept is bad, or because the conditions for it haven't been present in a while? https://www.cnbc.com/2018/02/09/bond-vigilantes-saddled-up-and-ready-to-make-a-comeback-ed-yardeni.html https://www.cnbc.com/2018/02/09/bond-vigilantes-saddled-up-a...
        mistermann 8y ago
        Those are two possibilities. Another is that the government is the biggest player in the bond market and has unlimited funds at their disposal that they can categorize as Other. But of course, that's illegal, so it would never happen would it. But at the same time, you and me will never, ever, hear from the bond vigilantes again.
    - skygazer 8y ago
      I coming to this topic from utter ignorance, but if longer term data might be considered more reliable, then might it also be reasonable to preferentially weight the more reliable, longer term data, all else being equal?

by zukzuk 8y ago

WalterGR 8y ago

Blind link goes to page for: This Time Is Different: Eight Centuries of Financial Folly by Carmen M. Reinhart & Kenneth S. Rogoff (2009)

ahelwer 8y ago
Aren't those the economists who managed to turn a spreadsheet bug into disastrous worldwide accepted economic policy?
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- Analemma_ 8y ago
  It was even worse than that: the paper had multiple problems, of which the Excel bug was one, but they also chose an outrageously dumb sampling method. Basically, if a country had data for five years, it was weighted five times as heavily as a country that had that data for only one. Which, conveniently, lined up perfectly with overweighting countries whose development matched their hypothesis and underweighting countries that contradicted it. Frankly I will never be convinced that it wasn't outright academic fraud in order to generate the conclusion they wanted, and I'm angry that they still have jobs.
  - TAForObvReasons 8y ago
    The benefactors desired a conclusion, and the authors delivered it for them. They served their purpose. That "academic integrity" was not a purpose reflects the state of affairs in economics.
    - mistermann 8y ago
      And people are using it today as "proof" to support their preferred flavor of an economic system. Anyone who's been even an armchair observer of economics for 20+ years should know well how silly these conversations can get. Just as one unimportant example: Bond vigilantes used to be a term you'd encounter regularly, when's the last time you heard it now?
      - fjsolwmv 8y ago
        Is that because the concept is bad, or because the conditions for it haven't been present in a while? https://www.cnbc.com/2018/02/09/bond-vigilantes-saddled-up-and-ready-to-make-a-comeback-ed-yardeni.html https://www.cnbc.com/2018/02/09/bond-vigilantes-saddled-up-a...
        mistermann 8y ago
        Those are two possibilities. Another is that the government is the biggest player in the bond market and has unlimited funds at their disposal that they can categorize as Other. But of course, that's illegal, so it would never happen would it. But at the same time, you and me will never, ever, hear from the bond vigilantes again.
  - skygazer 8y ago
    I coming to this topic from utter ignorance, but if longer term data might be considered more reliable, then might it also be reasonable to preferentially weight the more reliable, longer term data, all else being equal?