Comments on: A lot of talk of change… where’s the action? http://newschooljournal.com/2009/08/a-lot-of-talk-of-change-wheres-the-action/ A student run economics journal and open blog Sat, 29 Oct 2011 12:27:40 -0400 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.3 By: New School Economic Review » The Masked Geek Avenger http://newschooljournal.com/2009/08/a-lot-of-talk-of-change-wheres-the-action/comment-page-1/#comment-5583 New School Economic Review » The Masked Geek Avenger Wed, 09 Sep 2009 17:32:17 +0000 http://newschooljournal.com/?p=952#comment-5583 [...] cohort and don’t think he’s really adding anything new to the topic. It’s been talked about here and here and here. Here are my brief [...] [...] cohort and don’t think he’s really adding anything new to the topic. It’s been talked about here and here and here. Here are my brief [...]

]]> By: Benjamin http://newschooljournal.com/2009/08/a-lot-of-talk-of-change-wheres-the-action/comment-page-1/#comment-5581 Benjamin Wed, 09 Sep 2009 09:29:09 +0000 http://newschooljournal.com/?p=952#comment-5581 My personal opinion on what could be done - in the immediate term - is to re-orient the way we do research into macroeconomics. If you have to do models, and we all do I guess, move away from micro-foundations, and make assumptions which can be empirically or institutionally checked (where possible), and base the models around this. The Taylor rule started out like this, but that is a long time back now. how about modelling the money markets according to how they are structured, rather than a simplified version of demand and supply for liquid funds and bonds? Setting up a model which includes the functioning of the FED, money market and bank funding would shed a lot more light on the credit crunch we had last year than any micro model. I know Nassim Taleb has been arguing that we simply stop teaching the efficient market hypothesis because it doesn't work - and at some level we have to admit that something is very odd in a discipline which would rather stick to theories which are empirically ruined rather than scrap them and send the students out to look at the economy... Then again, that Phillips curve keeps coming back as well. I guess I am saying more empirics - not econometrics - and more knowledge about the economy to academics and students... My personal opinion on what could be done – in the immediate term – is to re-orient the way we do research into macroeconomics. If you have to do models, and we all do I guess, move away from micro-foundations, and make assumptions which can be empirically or institutionally checked (where possible), and base the models around this. The Taylor rule started out like this, but that is a long time back now. how about modelling the money markets according to how they are structured, rather than a simplified version of demand and supply for liquid funds and bonds? Setting up a model which includes the functioning of the FED, money market and bank funding would shed a lot more light on the credit crunch we had last year than any micro model.

I know Nassim Taleb has been arguing that we simply stop teaching the efficient market hypothesis because it doesn’t work – and at some level we have to admit that something is very odd in a discipline which would rather stick to theories which are empirically ruined rather than scrap them and send the students out to look at the economy… Then again, that Phillips curve keeps coming back as well.

I guess I am saying more empirics – not econometrics – and more knowledge about the economy to academics and students…

]]> By: Christian http://newschooljournal.com/2009/08/a-lot-of-talk-of-change-wheres-the-action/comment-page-1/#comment-5566 Christian Mon, 07 Sep 2009 19:55:26 +0000 http://newschooljournal.com/?p=952#comment-5566 So what can WE do to go beyond talk, Benjamin? So what can WE do to go beyond talk, Benjamin?

]]>