4 ms·
Ran into this a lot myself. So far I haven't been able to get very far to consolidate all these variables. Whenever I see threads pointing to economic growth or
by IkmoIkmo 7y ago
Ran into this a lot myself. So far I haven't been able to get very far to consolidate all these variables. Whenever I see threads pointing to economic growth or decline, I'm left saying there are tons of confounding factors, but without being able to offer the right answer.
If you have any good reading to point to, please let me know. It's one of the things I'd love to have a good answer to, and that should be able to be answered to some extent, but isn't. Moreover I feel even many top economists routinely invoke extremely simplified single-variable perspectives (e.g. average wages per worker, or average household income) which indeed leaves out so many confounding factors that I've almost lost my expectation/hope that people even consider this kind of stuff... Only in academic papers which look to study something specific, are these confounders taken into account. But in general studies of economic growth or changes in or comparisons of economic wellbeing of various demographic subgroups, it seems the simple-perspective prevails. I get that many of these discussions are inherently political, thus susceptible to cherry-picking perspectives, but I'm still surprised there isn't some standard method so far that is more complex than charting 'household income for xyz'.
Any pointers to good literature is most welcome, and thanks for posting!
- hhs 7y ago> leaves out so many confounding factors Indeed, that’s one of the key problems with retrospective analysis. Fieldwork studies are promising. I find John List exploring this area and think his work is interesting: http://www.fieldexperiments.com/papers/recent/ http://www.fieldexperiments.com/papers/recent/