Do you agree that economists are uniquely bad at presenting their work to public audiences? Context to my question is that this does not seem to be a problem facing psychologists for example whereas pop economics books are filled with anthropological accounts and no discussion of econometric traps and resolutions. Is this a result of the poor training economists receive in articulation or are conceptual ideas in economics fundamentally more difficult to communicate? I am interested in your thoughts seeing as you communicate the methodology of the field so effectively and persuasively.
What did you like the most and disliked the most about your PhD experience at GMU? What you think is the best/worst aspects of the program from the perspective of someone who aspires for a career in academia (best case scenario, so in any of the following fields where GMU is supposedly better: public choice/political economy, economic history, experimental economics)? Any other thought on for whom it makes sense to pursue an Econ PhD there? Thanks for your posts and contributions!
decentralized comm tech make it harder for good/elite behaviors to make their way down to low income individuals/groups - what can help the poor get better habits? what can help unassimilated groups get better habits? I think enclaves/bubbles/echo chambers of low productivity and grievance are bad for individuals, groups, and our country
There seems to be a discussion online about how your talents may be best served as a communicator of econ research rather than as a researcher. How happy would you be with this outcome ten years down the lane?
You've previously mentioned that your undergraduate record is not perfectly spotless. How would you approach it differently if you were 18 years old again?
Do you think that liberalism ever has a chance of becoming a popular ideology ? It has no manicheism, no eschatology, no aesthetic. Does its success pass through convincing the masses or should it stay an ideology of the elites ?
Do you agree that economists are uniquely bad at presenting their work to public audiences? Context to my question is that this does not seem to be a problem facing psychologists for example whereas pop economics books are filled with anthropological accounts and no discussion of econometric traps and resolutions. Is this a result of the poor training economists receive in articulation or are conceptual ideas in economics fundamentally more difficult to communicate? I am interested in your thoughts seeing as you communicate the methodology of the field so effectively and persuasively.
How can a chud like me, make his econ predoc applications standout?
Thoughts on debt deflation theory, endogenous money models?
Thoughts on o-ring theory?
What did you like the most and disliked the most about your PhD experience at GMU? What you think is the best/worst aspects of the program from the perspective of someone who aspires for a career in academia (best case scenario, so in any of the following fields where GMU is supposedly better: public choice/political economy, economic history, experimental economics)? Any other thought on for whom it makes sense to pursue an Econ PhD there? Thanks for your posts and contributions!
decentralized comm tech make it harder for good/elite behaviors to make their way down to low income individuals/groups - what can help the poor get better habits? what can help unassimilated groups get better habits? I think enclaves/bubbles/echo chambers of low productivity and grievance are bad for individuals, groups, and our country
There seems to be a discussion online about how your talents may be best served as a communicator of econ research rather than as a researcher. How happy would you be with this outcome ten years down the lane?
You've previously mentioned that your undergraduate record is not perfectly spotless. How would you approach it differently if you were 18 years old again?
What is your opinion on the movement for "Charter Cities" such as Prospera, Honduras?
You've previously made a number of smug comments about how obviously guns cause gun violence.
Can you elaborate so we can engage with something tangible?
What do you think about Garett Jones ?
Do you think that liberalism ever has a chance of becoming a popular ideology ? It has no manicheism, no eschatology, no aesthetic. Does its success pass through convincing the masses or should it stay an ideology of the elites ?