>> You don't like developmental ... too many field experiments. No external validity, amirite?!?! Wait. Whut?
Are these sentences, OP?
Dear Applied Micro -- please die painfully.
-
Lol, no, private sector rewards empirical skills.
There won't be a crisis, just a sad, slow decline to irrelevance. Economists who want to solve real problems will drift to private firms and central banks, which have plenty of resources to reward those who can deliver. If things get bad enough, these institutions will simply hire candidates with MAs and train them the rest of the way themselves.
-
Lol, no, private sector rewards empirical skills.
There won't be a crisis, just a sad, slow decline to irrelevance. Economists who want to solve real problems will drift to private firms and central banks, which have plenty of resources to reward those who can deliver. If things get bad enough, these institutions will simply hire candidates with MAs and train them the rest of the way themselves.
The empirical skills rewarded by the private sector are, mostly, not taught in economics PhD programs.
-
Lol, no, private sector rewards empirical skills.
There won't be a crisis, just a sad, slow decline to irrelevance. Economists who want to solve real problems will drift to private firms and central banks, which have plenty of resources to reward those who can deliver. If things get bad enough, these institutions will simply hire candidates with MAs and train them the rest of the way themselves.
The empirical skills rewarded by the private sector are, mostly, not taught in economics PhD programs.
bruh an applied io person is 100x more likely to land an industry job than a theoretical io dude
-
Lol, no, private sector rewards empirical skills.
There won't be a crisis, just a sad, slow decline to irrelevance. Economists who want to solve real problems will drift to private firms and central banks, which have plenty of resources to reward those who can deliver. If things get bad enough, these institutions will simply hire candidates with MAs and train them the rest of the way themselves.
The empirical skills rewarded by the private sector are, mostly, not taught in economics PhD programs.
The empirical skills rewarded by academia are, mostly, not taught in PhD programs either.
-
Lol, no, private sector rewards empirical skills.
There won't be a crisis, just a sad, slow decline to irrelevance. Economists who want to solve real problems will drift to private firms and central banks, which have plenty of resources to reward those who can deliver. If things get bad enough, these institutions will simply hire candidates with MAs and train them the rest of the way themselves.
The empirical skills rewarded by the private sector are, mostly, not taught in economics PhD programs.
The empirical skills rewarded by academia are, mostly, not taught in PhD programs either.
P-hacking?
-
RA'd for an applied micro prof this summer. It was quite a learning experience, in how stupid I was for believing any applied micro papers. There's no integrity in this field, you just p-hack until you get a result you like and write your story around it. Proper identification isn't even attempted either, it's just another story you tell, willingly ignoring any covariates that aren't in your "novel dataset". This experience made me a lot more comfortable with going for a masters instead of a PhD.
-
Applied micro no good, but the current states of macro and theory are even bigger j0kes. That's why many people would rather do applied micro despite being aware of its issues
Market is revealing itself. Without academia, applied micro leads to homelessness. Anybody pursuing theory already accepted homelessness, but applied micro folks did not expect homelessness. The market reveals winners and that's macrobros.
-
Applied micro ... *sigh*
You spend your time pretending to obtain clean, causal identification. We all know this is not reality. And, to be frank, the very best scenario you can achieve is a natural experiment. Yet, these natural experiments are, in many or most cases, no more externally valid than well-designed lab or field experiments. Yet, most of you bash experiments and hold yourself somehow above experimentalists. Laughable, really. Your best case scenario is their everyday approach to answering questions. At least they are not limited to answering whatever stupid , non-economics related question that shakes out of some 'proprietary and untouchable to dont ask us' data set.
You hate macro because of its approach to identification. Yet, the questions you all ask are peanuts relative to the questions macro people tackle. Seriously ... is applied micro really even economics anymore? You all seem like masquerading sociologists.
You don't like developmental ... too many field experiments. No external validity, amirite?!?! Wait. Whut?
You don't have the balls to mess with theorists because they have more intelligence in their left nut than you. They could roll off the top of your mom and scribble out a mathematical model of how they just created your baby brother and it would still be too sophisticated for you.
In conclusion, applied micro is a mostly useless approach to research. Thanks for obtaining useless sample estimates of meaningless parameters, folks!Agreed. It also provides credibility to fake academics like Treyvon Martin, who is full of BS.