MT is an excellent academic. Great hire for HannoverYes, and I am also an excellent academic.
Hi Homburgs Steffelchen!
German Market
-
Public finance isn't just a big field in Germany. Every US econ department also needs someone in public finance.
So you are saying it is harder to publish in a top 5 journal for pf guys because the supply of papers is larger? ;)
The problem is that bread and butter PF topics are harder to publish in top 5 without using US data. Of course if you have unique data or a once in a lifetime natural experiment that only exists in Germany it's a different story.
Second. You can take AP as an example: 1 AER with German data (in specific setting), second AER with US data (although theory fits equally well to Germany).
But I agree, not much Top5 in German PF -
Public finance isn't just a big field in Germany. Every US econ department also needs someone in public finance.
So you are saying it is harder to publish in a top 5 journal for pf guys because the supply of papers is larger? ;)
The problem is that bread and butter PF topics are harder to publish in top 5 without using US data. Of course if you have unique data or a once in a lifetime natural experiment that only exists in Germany it's a different story.
Second. You can take AP as an example: 1 AER with German data (in specific setting), second AER with US data (although theory fits equally well to Germany).
But I agree, not much Top5 in German PFWhy do you get a top5 with data?
-
Second. You can take AP as an example: 1 AER with German data (in specific setting), second AER with US data (although theory fits equally well to Germany).
But I agree, not much Top5 in German PFI guess into these papers went a lot of labour of student helpers and bothering / lobbying of editors and potential referees.
-
Second. You can take AP as an example: 1 AER with German data (in specific setting), second AER with US data (although theory fits equally well to Germany).
But I agree, not much Top5 in German PFI guess into these papers went a lot of labour of student helpers and bothering / lobbying of editors and potential referees.
As always
-
AP‘s second AER shouldn‘t really count for him. His coauthors already had a r&r from the AER before he joined, and in the revision they decided to add some data work, which I guess he delivered.
No he did not. They just blackmailed him (to add the empirical result from their joint project to their paper). And, come on, who would not do the same?
-
AP‘s second AER shouldn‘t really count for him. His coauthors already had a r&r from the AER before he joined, and in the revision they decided to add some data work, which I guess he delivered.
No he did not. They just blackmailed him (to add the empirical result from their joint project to their paper). And, come on, who would not do the same?
From a different joint project? Are you sure?
-
AP‘s second AER shouldn‘t really count for him. His coauthors already had a r&r from the AER before he joined, and in the revision they decided to add some data work, which I guess he delivered.
No he did not. They just blackmailed him (to add the empirical result from their joint project to their paper). And, come on, who would not do the same?
Hä? How can you blackmail someone to be on an AER??
-
AP‘s second AER shouldn‘t really count for him. His coauthors already had a r&r from the AER before he joined, and in the revision they decided to add some data work, which I guess he delivered.
No he did not. They just blackmailed him (to add the empirical result from their joint project to their paper). And, come on, who would not do the same?
From a different joint project? Are you sure?
Yes, See eg:
https://www.steuern.bwl.uni-kiel.de/de/fotos/maxtax-2018-programm
I saw it. Editor too and asked for the real empirical work in the AER. So they gave up on the 2nd paper and merged the 2. who would not do it for an AER?