Close

Complete Captcha

• 1 year - 209 posts - Latest - RSS
• Thread: 935 Goods vs 231 No Goods

1. Economist
   1eb2
   

   Hey Chris we know your ego can’t stand it that you’re completely ignored by anyone who matters. You can go back to your Kangarootard convict island prison now

   the section on aggregation in their recent note is quite a joke. they are quick to ridicule others, but do not address the obvious mistake of weighting by sales rather then costs. if you weigh by cost and compare the resulting correct aggregate markup (*) to the time series on the labor share, it looks a lot less convincing. weighting by the numerator instead of the denominator is even more basic than ECON101.
   * even that is a stretch b/c public companies are a selected sample, and the selection is not constant over time
   

   ^ sounds like JDL.
   I'm not Chris, and their point is so obvious that I don't give them credit for it.

   Shut up james.

   1 year ago # QUOTE 1 Good 2 No Good !

2. Economist
   b8a8
   

   Hey Chris we know your ego can’t stand it that you’re completely ignored by anyone who matters. You can go back to your Kangarootard convict island prison now

   the section on aggregation in their recent note is quite a joke. they are quick to ridicule others, but do not address the obvious mistake of weighting by sales rather then costs. if you weigh by cost and compare the resulting correct aggregate markup (*) to the time series on the labor share, it looks a lot less convincing. weighting by the numerator instead of the denominator is even more basic than ECON101.
   * even that is a stretch b/c public companies are a selected sample, and the selection is not constant over time
   

   ^ sounds like JDL.
   I'm not Chris, and their point is so obvious that I don't give them credit for it.

   Shut up james.

   fick you up, John!

   1 year ago # QUOTE 1 Good 0 No Good !

3. Economist
   c7cc
   

   finance guy here. have no idea what you're talking about. but that initial footnote from De Loecker and Eckhout was juvenile, vicious, and simply outrageous. they should be held accountable for that.

   1 year ago # QUOTE 17 Good 1 No Good !

4. Economist
   0763
   

   So this is cool

   1 year ago # QUOTE 0 Good 0 No Good !

5. Economist
   8402
   

   You know it’s bad when finance guys accuse you of being juvenile and vicious (which is what JdL actually is)

   finance guy here. have no idea what you're talking about. but that initial footnote from De Loecker and Eckhout was juvenile, vicious, and simply outrageous. they should be held accountable for that.

   1 year ago # QUOTE 12 Good 1 No Good !

6. Economist
   98bc
   

   De Loecker and Eckhout are well known in the field for cooking results.

   1 year ago # QUOTE 0 Good 1 No Good !

7. Economist
   c7f1
   

   The econometric society should be very proud of having a bully like De Loecker as a fellow. Now is time to add Eckhout.

   1 year ago # QUOTE 3 Good 0 No Good !

8. Economist
   22b9
   

   Haha and then they said: “ we should go for the big questions”

   Yeah right.

   1 year ago # QUOTE 3 Good 0 No Good !

9. Economist
   b0bc
   

   Ahsley Madison here. Leave JE alone. He's a wonderful, energetic human being.

   1 year ago # QUOTE 0 Good 0 No Good !

10. Economist
    8402
    

    Sad human beings everywhere

    1 year ago # QUOTE 0 Good 0 No Good !

11. Economist
    1e44
    

    Where do I find this infamous Footnote 1?

    1 year ago # QUOTE 0 Good 0 No Good !

12. Economist
    93e3
    

    Where do I find this infamous Footnote 1?

    how about, you click on the Twitter link in OP's post?

    just lol at the Jans. this will stick to them for a long time. well deserved.

    1 year ago # QUOTE 3 Good 0 No Good !

13. Economist
    93ed
    

    Ahsley Madison here. Leave JE alone. He's a wonderful, energetic human being.

    What???

    1 year ago # QUOTE 0 Good 0 No Good !

14. Economist
    8402
    

    De Loecker is human trash

    1 year ago # QUOTE 0 Good 0 No Good !

15. Economist
    6b38
    

    bump

    1 year ago # QUOTE 0 Good 0 No Good !

16. Economist
    f725
    

    Their twitter post has been deleted?

    1 year ago # QUOTE 0 Good 0 No Good !

17. Economist
    590d
    

    "sounds like Econ 101". What a rude way to dismiss anyone's research. Rather than have a constructive conversation and make the grad student learn something, they bash him and discourage him psychologically to go back to study Econ 101????

    1 year ago # QUOTE 0 Good 0 No Good !

18. Economist
    590d
    

    Sounds like Lambertini threatening grad students to talk to their advisor or dean before discussing any of her papers.

    1 year ago # QUOTE 0 Good 0 No Good !

19. Economist
    e623
    

    "sounds like Econ 101". What a rude way to dismiss anyone's research. Rather than have a constructive conversation and make the grad student learn something, they bash him and discourage him psychologically to go back to study Econ 101????

    It's worst than that. JDL was wrong.

    1 year ago # QUOTE 3 Good 0 No Good !

20. Economist
    93e3
    

    "sounds like Econ 101". What a rude way to dismiss anyone's research. Rather than have a constructive conversation and make the grad student learn something, they bash him and discourage him psychologically to go back to study Econ 101????

    It's worst than that. JDL was wrong.

    I agree. At the very least, the issue is blurry and JDL is wrong as well, strictly speaking. They say you can't lump together COGS and SGA and treat them as a single input factor. Sure. But even COGS is an aggregate of wildly different input factors. It seems to me that you might as well apply this critique to their own approach.

    1 year ago # QUOTE 0 Good 0 No Good !

Reply »