Economics is not dead. I just designed a model on the basis of some assumptions, and when I fed some numbers into the model, the output conformed with the assumptions. THE ASSUMPTIONS HAVE BEEN PROVEN TRUE! I've got to get this into a journal ASAP.
Reports of econ's demise have been greatly exaggerated: people like me are still creating new, PROVEN knowledge. Really, we're kind of like physicists, when you think about it.
I actually wanted to switch to Econ.
1. Then pay in Econ departments is much higher than any other department
2. The subject is easy
3. The citations potential is very good (attracts a lot of people)
4. Economists are always needed to advise governments, banks, ..
Also I think Robert Lucas is a very good economist.
I actually wanted to switch to Econ.
1. Then pay in Econ departments is much higher than any other department
2. The subject is easy
3. The citations potential is very good (attracts a lot of people)
4. Economists are always needed to advise governments, banks, ..
Also I think Robert Lucas is a very good economist.
It's funny how wrong you are.
The inevitable result of turning your back on theory, the only thing that separates your field from sociology.Sociology has lots of theory. Their problem is the low quality of evidence.
Nope, sociology has largely abandoned theory, at least theory in the economics sense. The one outlet for anything even moderately constrained by logic (mathematics), the journal of Mathematical Sociology, has regressed significantly over the last 20 years.
HRM demand side here. The corruption problem is not just unfair, it promotes bad research. Look at Zillibotti promoting himself and his network through ECMA -- these people get tenure at good places and then push more of this bad stuff.
This is correct. Zillibotti and people like him hold back everyone
HRM demand side here. The corruption problem is not just unfair, it promotes bad research. Look at Zillibotti promoting himself and his network through ECMA -- these people get tenure at good places and then push more of this bad stuff.
This is important. The concentration on the Top 5 means that rents to corruption are really high.
Have interviewed 20 new phds and have concluded that real economics is dead. We might as well merge with sociology.Congrats, you picked the wrong people to interview. Next time maybe look at the JMPs instead of going by pedigree.
to be fair they were interviewing only candidates from the top 5.
Lotta good econ being done at lower ranked schools.
Could you explain why Zilibotti's research is bad and what his "network" is?HRM demand side here. The corruption problem is not just unfair, it promotes bad research. Look at Zillibotti promoting himself and his network through ECMA -- these people get tenure at good places and then push more of this bad stuff.
Just read his work, including the papers published in ECMA while he was editor. Ask yourself whether you believe anything he says. Expert on China? Rrrrrrright. For network, look at DA and all his cronies.
Of all the people you could have said this about, you pick FZ?? There are much more clear and corrupt examples, even among the current Top 5 editors.
Could you explain why Zilibotti's research is bad and what his "network" is?HRM demand side here. The corruption problem is not just unfair, it promotes bad research. Look at Zillibotti promoting himself and his network through ECMA -- these people get tenure at good places and then push more of this bad stuff.
Just read his work, including the papers published in ECMA while he was editor. Ask yourself whether you believe anything he says. Expert on China? Rrrrrrright. For network, look at DA and all his cronies.
Of all the people you could have said this about, you pick FZ?? There are much more clear and corrupt examples, even among the current Top 5 editors.
Such as?