• 4 months - 53 posts - Latest - RSS
• OP: 7 Goods vs 17 No Goods
• Thread: 0 Goods vs 0 No Goods

1. Economist
   a6b7
   

   John Quiggin good:

   http://crookedtimber.org/2013/01/01/the-failed-state-of-macroeconomics/

   4 months ago # QUOTE 7 GOOD 17 NO GOOD

2. Economist
   6668
   

   This is ridiculous! Clearly OP have not read Peter Montiel's Macroeconomics in Emerging Markets: "Lessons from Great Recession" pp 705 - pp 744.

   In case you think I am trolling, yes I have the book with me. Everyone should own and read it!

   4 months ago # QUOTE 7 GOOD 3 NO GOOD

3. Economist
   4e7c
   

   What a pile of s**t that column and the comments are.

   4 months ago # QUOTE 5 GOOD 2 NO GOOD

4. Economist
   1523
   

   Why do Oztards think they know better than anyone else what is wrong with economics and yet they have so little to contribute in return?

   4 months ago # QUOTE 3 GOOD 4 NO GOOD

5. Economist
   4e67
   

   macro no giod p

   4 months ago # QUOTE 7 GOOD 0 NO GOOD

6. Economist
   6668
   

   Because to them criticizing mainstream economics is 'their' contribution.

   Why do Oztards think they know better than anyone else what is wrong with economics and yet they have so little to contribute in return?

   4 months ago # QUOTE 3 GOOD 3 NO GOOD

7. Economist
   320e
   

   the bulls**t/truth ratio in that post is disgustingly high. quiggin demonstrates his willful ignorance once again.

   4 months ago # QUOTE 4 GOOD 2 NO GOOD

8. Economist
   dfc9
   

   I LOVE this site for the way it deals with self-criticism. So sharp. So convincing. So erudite.

   4 months ago # QUOTE 8 GOOD 1 NO GOOD

9. Economist
   326b
   

   That's a pretty poor explanation of why DSGE models eventually became standard in macroeconomics, especially New Keynesian DSGE models.

   But, is the failure to understand the crisis (or to 'anticipate' the crisis) the result of DSGE models?

   4 months ago # QUOTE 0 GOOD 0 NO GOOD

10. Economist
    320e
    

    I LOVE this site for the way it deals with self-criticism. So sharp. So convincing. So erudite.

    self-criticism? lol

    the suggestion that s**t criticism deserves a sharp, convincing, erudite (lol) response? lol

    4 months ago # QUOTE 0 GOOD 3 NO GOOD

11. Economist
    ae0b
    

    Quiggin is just mad at Steve Williamson's thoughtful 27 page review of his book:

    http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/~swilliam/papers/quigginlong.pdf

    Quiggin: You're deadwood!

    4 months ago # QUOTE 5 GOOD 4 NO GOOD

12. Economist
    1f3a
    

    Quiggin is far from being the lamest source of heterodox criticism.

    4 months ago # QUOTE 0 GOOD 6 NO GOOD

13. Economist
    320e
    

    Quiggin is far from being the lamest source of heterodox criticism.

    litote?

    4 months ago # QUOTE 3 GOOD 0 NO GOOD

14. Economist
    1523
    

    Australia has heterodox "econ is voodoo" grandstanding way worse than Quiggin.

    4 months ago # QUOTE 4 GOOD 0 NO GOOD

15. Economist
    7ca0
    

    Yes, it is a must-have. I used to be a hard-nosed critic of the textbook. After reading it, I became a convert.

    This is ridiculous! Clearly OP have not read Peter Montiel's Macroeconomics in Emerging Markets: "Lessons from Great Recession" pp 705 - pp 744.
    In case you think I am trolling, yes I have the book with me. Everyone should own and read it!

    4 months ago # QUOTE 2 GOOD 0 NO GOOD

16. Economist
    78d7
    

    Quiggin's contributions to economics far exceed those of Williamson. The fact that you think Quiggin is a hack shows how little you really know about economics.

    4 months ago # QUOTE 7 GOOD 6 NO GOOD

17. Economist
    1523
    

    Please back up your assertion with facts.

    Quiggin's contributions to economics far exceed those of Williamson. The fact that you think Quiggin is a hack shows how little you really know about economics.

    4 months ago # QUOTE 2 GOOD 0 NO GOOD

18. Economist
    7ca0
    

    No way. Williamson's undergraduate text is a seminal contribution to economics. No one - except for Peter Montiel - has given economic science as much as he has.

    Quiggin's contributions to economics far exceed those of Williamson. The fact that you think Quiggin is a hack shows how little you really know about economics.

    4 months ago # QUOTE 1 GOOD 3 NO GOOD

19. Economist
    dfc9
    

    ^^ http://scholar.google.com/citations?user=5-etgjQAAAAJ&hl=en&oi=ao

    You done better?

    4 months ago # QUOTE 0 GOOD 1 NO GOOD

20. Economist
    1523
    

    Question was: Quiggin > Williamson, How?

    ^^ http://scholar.google.com/citations?user=5-etgjQAAAAJ&hl=en&oi=ao
    You done better?

    4 months ago # QUOTE 1 GOOD 2 NO GOOD

Reply »