Now that PhDs are being given in Data Science, maybe monkey regs can go there
Applied micro is a joke field
-
It is the most useless field in economics. People doing reduced-form applies microeconomics pretending they are able to achieve internal validity with their limited toolset of quasi-experimental methods is laughable. The fact that they use that toolset to answer questions more suitable for an undergraduate sociology course course is embarrassing. This subset of ‘economists’ is making a mockery of our field. I can’t believe these people get jobs and publish in economics journals.
I have read many applied micro papers that are published in good journals. I can say that many of them are really interesting and sometimes change how I view the world around me. It is a great and relevant field.
-
Yes, look at all that asset pricing and empirical IO and macro have accomplished!
Macro is So successful that Claudia is world rebound for ... using unemployment to indicate a recession! Leading macroeconomists are dunked on by URM undergrads on Twitter! Important presidential candidates are listening to advice from the likes of Kelton!
As for asset pricing, need I say any more than GME?
And IO, how about the fact that major corporations like T-MOBILE and sprint are Allowed to merge? You all done a great job in demonstrating the importance of competition to society!!they have a much higher bar to enter than micro. end of story.
But still useless and develop in the wrong direction
-
It is the most useless field in economics. People doing reduced-form applies microeconomics pretending they are able to achieve internal validity with their limited toolset of quasi-experimental methods is laughable. The fact that they use that toolset to answer questions more suitable for an undergraduate sociology course course is embarrassing. This subset of ‘economists’ is making a mockery of our field. I can’t believe these people get jobs and publish in economics journals.
I have read many applied micro papers that are published in good journals. I can say that many of them are really interesting and sometimes change how I view the world around me. It is a great and relevant field.
I enjoy reading those papers too, I just hope that sociology papers will go into sociology journals, anthropology papers go into anthropology journals... etc
-
Yes, look at all that asset pricing and empirical IO and macro have accomplished!
Macro is So successful that Claudia is world rebound for ... using unemployment to indicate a recession! Leading macroeconomists are dunked on by URM undergrads on Twitter! Important presidential candidates are listening to advice from the likes of Kelton!
As for asset pricing, need I say any more than GME?
And IO, how about the fact that major corporations like T-MOBILE and sprint are Allowed to merge? You all done a great job in demonstrating the importance of competition to society!!they have a much higher bar to enter than micro. end of story.
But still useless and develop in the wrong direction
a higher entry bar forces entrants to think hard anyway. still much better.
-
It is the most useless field in economics. People doing reduced-form applies microeconomics pretending they are able to achieve internal validity with their limited toolset of quasi-experimental methods is laughable. The fact that they use that toolset to answer questions more suitable for an undergraduate sociology course course is embarrassing. This subset of ‘economists’ is making a mockery of our field. I can’t believe these people get jobs and publish in economics journals.
I have read many applied micro papers that are published in good journals. I can say that many of them are really interesting and sometimes change how I view the world around me. It is a great and relevant field.
I enjoy reading those papers too, I just hope that sociology papers will go into sociology journals, anthropology papers go into anthropology journals... etc
I'm sorry that you are so small-minded. Now suck it up
-
"a higher entry bar forces entrants to think hard anyway. still much better." Come on bro, you only talk about supply but purely ignore demand. Why do these fields have much higher entry bar in the equilibrium given the same amount of salary? Much less demand, that's why
-
"a higher entry bar forces entrants to think hard anyway. still much better." Come on bro, you only talk about supply but purely ignore demand. Why do these fields have much higher entry bar in the equilibrium given the same amount of salary? Much less demand, that's why
Demand for stu/pid applied micro work is driven by the fact that lots of other stu/pid people do this same sort of cr/ap and try to hire other ret/tards to join them.
-
"a higher entry bar forces entrants to think hard anyway. still much better." Come on bro, you only talk about supply but purely ignore demand. Why do these fields have much higher entry bar in the equilibrium given the same amount of salary? Much less demand, that's why
Demand for stu/pid applied micro work is driven by the fact that lots of other stu/pid people do this same sort of cr/ap and try to hire other ret/tards to join them.
Whether the market is "stu/pid" or not, we do not know. But there is a larger market for applied people for sure.
-
"a higher entry bar forces entrants to think hard anyway. still much better." Come on bro, you only talk about supply but purely ignore demand. Why do these fields have much higher entry bar in the equilibrium given the same amount of salary? Much less demand, that's why
Demand for stu/pid applied micro work is driven by the fact that lots of other stu/pid people do this same sort of cr/ap and try to hire other ret/tards to join them.
Whether the market is "stu/pid" or not, we do not know. But there is a larger market for applied people for sure.
there isn't. there is a demand for non-theorist economists in general. The only reason you see more reduced form empiricists is because the supply of structural folks is low due to higher entry costs.
-
Metrics/Theory is just useless mathurbation
Macro is charlatan bs
applied micro is the only real economics.applied micro is not economics. ljl you say Macro is charlatan bs; it's one of the only legitimate fields where people are geniunely trying to answer big questions.