5 ms·

Proper response to this: https://www.ft.com/content/01fc06b8-fb6e-3e36-acb0-a1f8b47a7271 https://www.ft.com/content/01fc06b8-fb6e-3e36-acb0-a1f8b47a7... It re

• Ma8ee 7y ago
  No. Your link is behind a paywall, but I followed the debate during they years, and their results are quite thoroughly debunked.
  • zoonosis 7y ago
    The article addresses the issues raised by OP. You don't need to read the paywalled article since it just summarizes the statement by Reinhart & Rogoff which is available here [1]. Here is an archive of the actual article if you would prefer to read that [2]. [1] https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/rogoff/files/response_to_herndon_ash_and_pollin.pdf https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/rogoff/files/response_to_h... [2] https://archive.md/2daXH https://archive.md/2daXH
    • Ma8ee 7y ago
      So before the corrections the growth was -0.1 percent for debt levels over 90 percent. After their corrections the growth was 2.2 percent. And then they try to pretend that that doesn’t really change the main conclusion of their paper, which was that high debt levels destroy growth.