Close

Complete Captcha

• 4 years - 60 posts - Latest - RSS
• Thread: 127 Goods vs 84 No Goods

1. Economist
   844a
   

   Is there a serious alternative to teaching ISLM at an undergrad level? What else can you teach that the undergrads without maths background would understand?

   In terms of business cycles, that is.

   Not sure at this point yet. Hence why I'm doing the recon now. I was under the impression that the Barro book was an introductory textbook (is that correct??). It seems there is a chapter towards the end covering the Keynesian approach, but it wasn't part of the text's basis.

   Is DLS too advanced for intermediate (seems it's basic dynamic optimization)??

   4 years ago # QUOTE 0 Good 0 No Good !

2. Economist
   fb24
   

   Think about it as teaching somewhat of a historical survey:
   So you teach the quantity theory, IS/LM, etc. You can always tell them this is what people believed and point out shortcomings. It's a good approach because students will understand how and why research progressed as it did. Also, they ned to know IS/LM well because it's a model that many policymakers and prominent Nobel prize winners believe.

   The most common mistake of rookie APs is equating More Math=Good course. But it actually is: More economics Knowledge = Good Course.

   4 years ago # QUOTE 9 Good 0 No Good !

3. Economist
   b802
   

   is lm>>>>>>>>>rbc crap

   4 years ago # QUOTE 13 Good 4 No Good !

4. Economist
   3564
   

   ^ you're clearly not an economist, so why do post here?

   4 years ago # QUOTE 3 Good 12 No Good !

5. Economist
   3564
   

   *do you post*

   4 years ago # QUOTE 0 Good 2 No Good !

6. Economist
   1b1b
   

   Barro is more of an intermediate book.

   It is really funny after the Great Recession, which remains completely unexplained by RBC models, to see people here declaring that teaching ISLM or some form of Keynesian economics to undergrads is "unethical," especially given that it is not just the IMF but also the Fed which continue to use some variation of it in their analyses. Yes, folks, we realize you were brainwashed back in the 80s to the point of drowning in some freshwater place, but it is time to grow up and get over it.

   4 years ago # QUOTE 12 Good 2 No Good !

7. Economist
   3564
   

   ^ the publication records of top journals shows the profession disagrees with you.

   4 years ago # QUOTE 2 Good 9 No Good !

8. Economist
   bad3
   

   Freshwater macro is like religion. Best leave it where it belongs: the church of the small-minded microfoundedness.

   Barro is more of an intermediate book.
   It is really funny after the Great Recession, which remains completely unexplained by RBC models, to see people here declaring that teaching ISLM or some form of Keynesian economics to undergrads is "unethical," especially given that it is not just the IMF but also the Fed which continue to use some variation of it in their analyses. Yes, folks, we realize you were brainwashed back in the 80s to the point of drowning in some freshwater place, but it is time to grow up and get over it.

   4 years ago # QUOTE 10 Good 1 No Good !

9. Economist
   9dac
   

   by the way do you guys now all of the material in a intro macro course?

   The textbooks are only filled with loads of texts, and few equations!

   i have not taken intro to macro but am also gonna teach in it. Not similar to my grad courses.

   feels a bit strange....

   4 years ago # QUOTE 1 Good 0 No Good !

10. Economist
    7169
    

    by the way do you guys now all of the material in a intro macro course?
    The textbooks are only filled with loads of texts, and few equations!
    i have not taken intro to macro but am also gonna teach in it. Not similar to my grad courses.
    feels a bit strange....

    This is exactly the problem! This is why I figures that the choice of the text is probably important until i've had a couple of iterations of teaching intro/inter macro and can then customize my own. I was planning on going through a textbook one chapter per week of the semester. But which book to use??

    4 years ago # QUOTE 0 Good 3 No Good !

11. Economist
    3a87
    

    Use Blanchard. Call it a day.

    4 years ago # QUOTE 9 Good 0 No Good !

12. Economist
    3206
    

    https://www.ecb.europa.eu/events/pdf/conferences/Galietal.pdf
    Galì on IS-LM vs RBC

    while the standard RBC model generally predicts a decline in consumption in response to a rise in government spending, the IS-LM model predicts an increase in the same variable, hence amplifying the effects of the expansion in government spending on output. Of course, the reason for the differential impact across those two models lies in how consumers are assumed to behave in each case. The RBC model features an infinitely-lived household, whose consumption decisions at any point in time are based on an intertemporal budget contraint. Ceteris paribus, an increase in government spending lowers the present value of after-tax income, thus generating a negative wealth effect that induces a cut in consumption.1 In the IS-LM model consumers behave in a non-Ricardian fashion, with their consumption being a function of their current disposable income and not of their lifetime resources.
    [...]
    In particular, and like several other authors that preceded us, we find that a government spending leads to a significant increase in consumption, while investment either falls or does not respond significantly. Thus, our evidence seems to be consistent with the predictions of IS-LM type models, and hard to reconcile with those of the neoclassical paradigm.

    4 years ago # QUOTE 8 Good 2 No Good !

13. Economist
    f6d9
    

    Mankiw then Barro

    4 years ago # QUOTE 0 Good 1 No Good !

14. Economist
    1b1b
    

    3564, That the top journals continue to largely publish this bilge is why there is the famous gap between the front room and the back room in so many central banks, where the policymakers find what the back room produces to be a useless joke. See what happened at the Minneapolis Fed, but not it alone.

    4 years ago # QUOTE 6 Good 1 No Good !

15. Economist
    8c85
    

    3564, That the top journals continue to largely publish this bilge is why there is the famous gap between the front room and the back room in so many central banks, where the policymakers find what the back room produces to be a useless joke. See what happened at the Minneapolis Fed, but not it alone.

    No single Central Bank in the world, I guess not even ECB or BuBa, uses some basic RBC or non NK model. Even the most fervent Minnesotard, mr. Kochelakota, turned New Keynesian once had to face the data.

    4 years ago # QUOTE 5 Good 0 No Good !

16. Economist
    14f6
    

    IS/LM A wet stink pile of bocconi.

    4 years ago # QUOTE 0 Good 3 No Good !

17. Economist
    fb24
    

    Following up in terms of books that provide a balanced approach and have good detail on macro policy issues:

    For Principles: No need to lose much sleep on choosing, most well-known books do decent job for what this course should be. And they have lots of resources. If I had the choice, I would adopt Cowen and Tabarrok's book (lots of neat applications and fun to read) or the new Acemoglu, Laibson, List book ("evidence-based approach").

    For intermediate: Chad Jones's book or Mankiw are very readable. Barro is a bit dated and not as fun to read. Blanchard is also good with a little more math than Jones or Mankiw.

    4 years ago # QUOTE 1 Good 0 No Good !

18. Economist
    3206
    

    Following up in terms of books that provide a balanced approach and have good detail on macro policy issues:
    For Principles: No need to lose much sleep on choosing, most well-known books do decent job for what this course should be. And they have lots of resources. If I had the choice, I would adopt Cowen and Tabarrok's book (lots of neat applications and fun to read) or the new Acemoglu, Laibson, List book ("evidence-based approach").
    For intermediate: Chad Jones's book or Mankiw are very readable. Barro is a bit dated and not as fun to read. Blanchard is also good with a little more math than Jones or Mankiw.

    Both Cowen&Tabarrok and ALL books are not very well done. I would go either for Krugman&Wells or Mankiw. For intermediate Jones is superb.

    4 years ago # QUOTE 0 Good 0 No Good !

19. Economist
    ebbf
    

    1937, actually.

    Do a new consensus version of it. You do need to teach it, but there are definitely more up to date ways to do that.

    Its from 1936. Teaching IS/LM is like telling people in a physics class that atoms orbit around the nucleus. Like that theory it has been completely discredited. Get your lazy aszes in gear and teach something decent.

    4 years ago # QUOTE 1 Good 1 No Good !

20. Economist
    294d
    

    Use Williamson.

    4 years ago # QUOTE 1 Good 0 No Good !

Reply »