10 ms·
A First Lesson in Econometrics (1970) [pdf]
- imtringued 5y agoHonestly, the first lesson in economics should be that there is no such thing as endless exponential growth. This is a nice video that gets the point across: https://youtu.be/UI2Zs3QfzEI https://youtu.be/UI2Zs3QfzEI
- MichaelRazum 5y agoAre you sure about it? I mean so far you could describe the success of capitalism with exponential growth. Now you could argue that the earth resources are limited, but who knows if we gonna stay here forever. The universe is quite big...
- imtringued 5y agoWhat I am really getting at is the dependence on growth. It's fine to have it but not to force it.
- maccam912 5y agoWas pleasantly surprised to find it a short humorous paper. If you want to learn econometrics, this will do more to prepare you for reading other papers than teach you anything.
- hkc 5y agoYou're right! It was a fun paper that I discovered while studying Econometrics in undergrad.
- rluoy 5y agoIt seems that ! is missing in equation (12).
- hkc 5y agoRight! Here's an updated version with corrections: https://www.latrobe.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/251869/2013.02.pdf https://www.latrobe.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/25186...
- lelandfe 5y ago> The principle in question might best be described as Occam's yeast. It makes the obvious, but often overlooked, point that when something is expressed as simply as possible, it is often too terse to be easily understood
- Pietertje 5y agoAnd the power to delta
- lowkeyokay 5y agoThis was made me laugh. So many times I read ‘it should then be obvious that…’ What the?! No it isn’t. Text book authors must hate students.
- kurthr 5y agoIt is obvious to the "_most_ casual observer"... you need to get quite a bit more casual!
- xtiansimon 5y agoIsn’t there a thing about how mathematicians and scientists in the 19th century would carefully explain as if the intended audience we’re laypeople. Where as in the 20th century academic writing and popular science writing diverged such that an academic writer could say such and such is obvious and be speaking to a very niche audience?
- AnimalMuppet 5y agoI heard of a prof who in a lecture said "It's obvious that..." and a student challenged him on it. "Is that really obvious?" The professor looked at the board for a minute, then left the room. 45 minutes later, the professor came back and said, "Yes, it's obvious!" You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means...
- xtiansimon 5y ago“…would you say I have a plethora?”
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- bachmeier 5y agoMy monetary economics professor in grad school was teaching a paper and told us that when the authors claim it's obvious, that means it's not obvious. So he wrote out the derivation over the weekend and gave us a four-page, single-spaced handout with all the equations behind that single "obvious" result.
- ElDji 5y agoHaving followed engineering cursus THEN economics with econometry courses : this was the most WTF moments of my life.
- photochemsyn 5y agoEconometrics is one of the most discredited branches of academics that exists. These were the people who were waving their models around in the early 1990s, trying to tell people that NAFTA would have no effect on manufacturing jobs in the United States. They also promoted elimination of Glass-Steagall and the deregulation of the housing market, resulting in the subprime fraud-based economic disaster of 2008. There's a reason the neoclassical economists are hidden away in business schools, not in the actual science departments - it's because they'd have to endure the ridicule of anyone with basic training in science and math. When your models predict the opposite of what actually occurs, time and time again, well, you're supposed to recognize that there are fundamental flaws in them and go back to basics. Imagine if, in the late 1970s, all the climate researchers had predicted several decades of global cooling thanks to human activity, and had turned out to be entirely wrong, yet made no effort to re-examine their basic assumptions about how the world works. That's what neoclassical economists are doing with their econometric model nonsense.
- barrenko 5y agoNot sure why you're downvoted.
- bachmeier 5y agoLikely because it's a confused comment not having any relationship to the posted article, and it demonstrates lack of even a basic understanding of what econometrics is. (Source: I teach econometrics classes in a college of arts and sciences, which I share with math, statistics, physics, chemistry, and biology departments.)
- aww_dang 5y agoThis is a politicized issue.
- crimsoneer 5y agoThis is silly. Econometrics is the basis for much of what we now call data science, and good causal inference. It has bugger all to do with nafta.
- motohagiography 5y agoFunny, now do epidemiology.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- tonmoy 5y agoEquation 4 is obviously incorrect, right?