Close

Complete Captcha

• 11 months - 790 posts - Latest - RSS
• Thread: 4952 Goods vs 1810 No Goods

1. Economist
   398d
   

   This looks pretty bad. Verner and coauthors pumped their research that lockdowns increased growth after 1918, huge news coverage everywhere. MIT even bought ads about it

   https://almlgr.github.io/paper.pdf

   Turns out, it's just pretrends. Did they not check, or were they hoping to get away with it?

   Bravo to the students. I guess when there's no jobs out there to lose, don't have to worry about the job market...

   11 months ago # QUOTE 301 Jab 14 No Jab !

2. Economist
   999c
   

   But they can't rule out large, positive effects.

   Better lock down for another 6 months just in case.

   11 months ago # QUOTE 61 Jab 1 No Jab !

3. Economist
   8f60
   

   LOL

   The Wolf is crying, losing hoap

   11 months ago # QUOTE 38 Jab 0 No Jab !

4. Economist
   441e
   

   They also don't control for WWI spending, which struck me as a fatal flaw. The added population growth probably captures some of that.

   11 months ago # QUOTE 38 Jab 0 No Jab !

5. Economist
   6a86
   

   Heros!

   11 months ago # QUOTE 24 Jab 1 No Jab !

6. Economist
   5b10
   

   LOL
   The Wolf is crying, losing hoap

   By what right does The Wolf judge the Leonine? BY WHAT RIGHT?!

   j/k, we need more comments like these. Not fewer.

   11 months ago # QUOTE 2 Jab 0 No Jab !

7. Economist
   d3ce
   

   That’s brutal. 10 bucks says Verner never retracts

   11 months ago # QUOTE 27 Jab 0 No Jab !

8. Economist
   493d
   

   Doesn't matter, NBER paper was in QJE typesetting already - forthcoming!

   11 months ago # QUOTE 60 Jab 0 No Jab !

9. Economist
   f88b
   

   Honestly, I think we all knew that covid papers were being cobbled together too fast to do basic checks. Who can write a good empirical paper in a month?

   Says a lot about you as a researcher if you try and grab 5 minutes of notoriety with half-baked analysis.

   11 months ago # QUOTE 89 Jab 2 No Jab !

10. Economist
    cf85
    

    Good work. But also fyi only Harvard students can attack an MIT professor

    11 months ago # QUOTE 35 Jab 4 No Jab !

11. Economist
    ad06
    

    LOL, will the end of the JM be the start of econ's replication crisis? We all have about ten of these in our email forwards...

    11 months ago # QUOTE 24 Jab 0 No Jab !

12. Economist
    0852
    

    "Grad students" with friendly support from R. Barro. I suppose that means the other paper will not appear in QJE.
    Good work though!

    11 months ago # QUOTE 42 Jab 1 No Jab !

13. Economist
    0838
    

    JW emailed all fed staff system-wide about this paper LOL

    11 months ago # QUOTE 26 Jab 0 No Jab !

14. Economist
    441e
    

    Hahah I didn't see he had a hand in this.

    "Grad students" with friendly support from R. Barro. I suppose that means the other paper will not appear in QJE.
    Good work though!

    11 months ago # QUOTE 17 Jab 0 No Jab !

15. Economist
    ed2f
    

    JW emailed all fed staff system-wide about this paper LOL

    Michigan? How would they be able to do that?

    11 months ago # QUOTE 13 Jab 0 No Jab !

16. Economist
    6a86
    

    I eagerly await all those media outlets that peddled this nonsense to report on this correction.

    11 months ago # QUOTE 20 Jab 0 No Jab !

17. Economist
    f88b
    

    JW emailed all fed staff system-wide about this paper LOL

    About the original paper or the replication?

    11 months ago # QUOTE 1 Jab 0 No Jab !

18. Economist
    8ae6
    

    People are dying. This is not the time to replicate papers that are Saving Lives.

    11 months ago # QUOTE 21 Jab 17 No Jab !

19. Economist
    cfcf
    

    JW emailed all fed staff system-wide about this paper LOL

    This = the grad student refutation or the original paper?

    11 months ago # QUOTE 0 Jab 0 No Jab !

20. Economist
    dddb
    

    what an embarrassment

    11 months ago # QUOTE 10 Jab 1 No Jab !

Reply »