7
8

BadModerators Discussion Thread, 18 August 2015 (self.badeconomics)

submitted by BMRMikePeople are towns - stickied post

Our own discussion thread, with blackjack and hookers

Time to inject some liquidity into the discussion market

all 45 comments
sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a

[–]besttrousers"Then again, I have pegged you for a Neoclassical/Austrian." 5 points6 points  (1 child)

Today's game:

Take this quiz. Can you guess which social programs are effective/ineffective?

[–]besttrousers"Then again, I have pegged you for a Neoclassical/Austrian." 1 point2 points  (0 children)

My results: 6/10. Pretty bad, considering I'm familiar with at least 3 of the studies.

[–]EveRommel 4 points5 points  (6 children)

Do anyone have a good paper to explain government debt to the "GOVMET GOIN BROKE" type Austrians?

[–]besttrousers"Then again, I have pegged you for a Neoclassical/Austrian." 4 points5 points  (4 children)

The best response is:

"Unplugging the computer and taking a walk" (2015).

[–]EveRommel 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Damn you and your cool logical responses.

[–]besttrousers"Then again, I have pegged you for a Neoclassical/Austrian." 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If only I practiced what I preached....

[–]urnbabyurnNeoPanglossian 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Or switch to angry alt.

my secret is that this is the angry alt.

[–]besttrousers"Then again, I have pegged you for a Neoclassical/Austrian." 1 point2 points  (0 children)

http://i.memecaptain.com/gend_images/hI0phQ.jpg

[–]BMRMikePeople are towns[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Alcohol Exposure In Utero and Child Academic Achievement

[–]IntegraldsI am the rep agent AMA 3 points4 points  (1 child)

Today's paper: "Alcohol Exposure In Utero and Child Academic Achievement," 2014 EJ. Ungated version.

We examine the effect of alcohol exposure in utero on child academic achievement. As well as studying the effect of any alcohol exposure, we investigate the effect of the dose, pattern, and duration of exposure. We use a genetic variant in the maternal alcohol-metabolism gene ADH1B as an instrument for alcohol exposure, whilst controlling for the child's genotype on the same variant. We show that the instrument is unrelated to an extensive range of maternal and paternal characteristics and behaviours. OLS regressions suggest an ambiguous association between alcohol exposure in utero and children's academic attainment, but there is a strong social gradient in maternal drinking, with mothers in higher socio-economic groups more likely to drink. In stark contrast to the OLS, the IV estimates show negative effects of prenatal alcohol exposure on child educational attainment. These results are very robust to an extensive set of model specifications. In addition, we show that that the effects are solely driven by the maternal genotype, with no impact of the child's genotype.

[–]besttrousers"Then again, I have pegged you for a Neoclassical/Austrian." 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Oster responded on facebook:

https://www.facebook.com/profemilyoster/posts/533329066786412

Highlights:

The study focuses on estimating the impact of alcohol measured by exposure units per week, duration of exposure or binge drinking. As the authors note (conclusion, page 30), the study is unable to say anything clear about low to moderate drinking. The range of consumption in the study is up to 35 drinks a week with a reasonable share of the population reporting binge drinking.

Estimating the impact of a continuous measure of alcohol units in this setting cannot be interpreted as the impact of moving from abstaining to a small number, as it is likely to be at least partially driven by increases at the higher levels. Moreover, the estimated impact of “Any Alcohol” in this setup will also be driven by the impacts of heavy and binge drinking and cannot be interpreted as the impact of light drinking.

To look at the issue of moderate drinking, one would want to limit the sample to women who abstain or drinking in moderation (including eliminating binge drinkers), and then preform the analysis on them. The authors report a version of this in Figure 3, although they do not exclude binge drinkers. The estimates are very noisy (first stages are not reported to is it hard to get a sense of the precision of the instrument here) and even in the 11-15 drinks per week group or 16+ drinks they cannot reject zero. This is certainly not to say that the results suggest low alcohol intact has no impacts, just that this study is not equipped to comment on that.

[–]13104598210I help banks get free monies 3 points4 points  (1 child)

THE ECONOMY IS A PONZI SCHEME

JANET YELLEN IS A NAZI

OUR CURRENCY IS A LIE

[–]neshalchanderman 0 points1 point  (0 children)

OUR CURRENCY IS A LIE

But there is cake... right?

[–]urnbabyurnNeoPanglossian 3 points4 points  (6 children)

I'm surprised we didn't make an appearance on SRD after that ditty of a post I woke up to. Some bans have been issued.

[–]somegurkWhy doesn't modern medicine use more leaches? 4 points5 points  (5 children)

hmmm what did I miss? apart from easy SRD link karma

[–]urnbabyurnNeoPanglossian 4 points5 points  (3 children)

http://www.reddit.com/r/badeconomics/comments/3heblb/shittalking_to_the_left_tyvm/

[–]somegurkWhy doesn't modern medicine use more leaches? 3 points4 points  (0 children)

well shit.

[–]wyman856I think, therefore I am a horse 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Hey, that's the same user who talked shit about my unborn children and told another user he should deport himself back to his native African country even though he has lived in the U.S. for practically his entire life.

Needless to say I am shocked.

[–]urnbabyurnNeoPanglossian 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Shit, I wish I had seen that stuff sooner. I knew some racist shit was growing on but never saw it directly. I'm glad that ban was placed then.

[–]Homeboy_JesusCogito ergo sum equus 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Long story short:

User whines about their street cred on /r/badeconomics, loses more street cred.

[–]Petros557there is no such thing as a market failure 3 points4 points  (0 children)

great presentation on why the free market can solve the discussion thread quantity problem. amen.

[–]Homeboy_JesusCogito ergo sum equus 2 points3 points  (2 children)

How about changing the AotW over at /r/economics, eh?

[–]besttrousers"Then again, I have pegged you for a Neoclassical/Austrian." 2 points3 points  (1 child)

GET YOUR ACT TOGETHE MODS

[–]Homeboy_JesusCogito ergo sum equus 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Mod failure across the board. Something something central planning nazis.

[–]KEM10le STEM (up until it breaks my bias) 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I found an actual "humans are horses" in the wild. I didn't believe people would actually say this shit, but here it is.

I'd make it a real post but the R1 is just "Humans aren't horses" and I think the Wub is against such silliness.

[–]jajakes 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Does anybody have a decent set of links on the current state of the literature on the effectiveness of economic sanctions?

Most of what Google Scholar shows me is at least fifteen years old -- and most of it significantly older. Surely there've been some advancements in the last seventh of a century

[–]urnbabyurnNeoPanglossian 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Fine, I'll sticky this.

[–]SenorFluffyThe Invisible Foot 1 point2 points  (8 children)

I know a lot of people didn't like the question day, but I think having one like once a month would be good. If we complain about bad economics then we should have some outlet for redditors to ask questions and learn to not be so stupid wrt economics.

[–]BMRMikePeople are towns[S] 3 points4 points  (6 children)

A question only sticky would be a better alternative methinks.

The main problem is that questions in stickies get washed out by the wank fest

[–]SenorFluffyThe Invisible Foot 0 points1 point  (4 children)

I agree. And the stickies have problem where a lot of the later stuff would never get seen. It seemed liked part of the problem was regular users just posting funny questions which got more attention than the actual questions. I liked the idea and once a month seems fair to not over run the sub IMO

[–]besttrousers"Then again, I have pegged you for a Neoclassical/Austrian." 1 point2 points  (3 children)

I still think people aren't thinking about the labor supply of 'reddit economists'.

Answering questions (especially the same questions you've answered before) is 1.) labor intensive 2.) pretty boring. The more RIV violations, the less experts will find this a fun place to hang out.

[–]BMRMikePeople are towns[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Maybe a wiki/FAQ? Whatever happened to the experts write up

But I agree, only badecon posts, no question bullshit

[–]SenorFluffyThe Invisible Foot 0 points1 point  (1 child)

That's fair. I totally understand. It can be a bit tiring to teach during the day and come online and teach there too. But there's no real outlet in other subreddits to ask questions. However, if people don't want to answer questions in a sticky or during one day of the month, then they could always stay away from a day?

Edit: that being said, if people really don't want it, that's fair too. I don't particularly care one way or the other

[–]besttrousers"Then again, I have pegged you for a Neoclassical/Austrian." 0 points1 point  (0 children)

But there's no real outlet in other subreddits to ask questions.

/r/asksocialscience !

Here's my model of how /r/badeconomics can best contribute to furthering knowledge:

1.) RI 2.) Making a place for 'reddit economists' to hang out, and provide knowledge as a 'spillover'.

I don't think question days actually result in more answers.

[–]KEM10le STEM (up until it breaks my bias) 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What could also help is if you set it up to sort by new. I know it's possible because /r/homebrewing and all game day threads do that.

[–]somegurkWhy doesn't modern medicine use more leaches? 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well the way I see it learning something is a possibility on this sub but not its purpose, mods and rules aren't set up for it. /r/asksocialscience is decent and I'm sure if you put economics in the question someone will answer you. They have more mods and require sources in top level comments. So I think it's better to encourage people to ask questions there and also encourage subs here to check it out to see if they can contribute to answers.

[–]Lambchops_Legion 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I marathoned the show "Humans" over the weekend. Really good show - I recommend for anyone who liked Utopia. Although, the doctor is the one who realizes how the synths complement as opposed to substitute.

I can see now why there are a lot more "automation = we're doomed!" posts recently.

[–][deleted]  (1 child)

[deleted]

    [–]wumbotarianI want to be the Walrasian Auctioneer when I grow up 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    More Sanders fun

    [–]neshalchanderman 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    This article on plausibility stayed on my reading list for a long while but the wait was worth it.

    A neat methodological tool that's worth a look: http://archive.cspo.org/projects/plausibility/files/read_Weimer-Jehle-Cross-impact-balances.pdf

    [–]urnbabyurnNeoPanglossian 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    I got a rejection the other week with two referee reports by people who seemed to completely not understand the paper or the model, or even be familiar with agency theory. Fuck that journal.

    [–]PonderayFollows an AR(1) process 1 point2 points  (2 children)

    We need the mod monopoly on discussion stickies. Otherwise we'll get sticky hyper inflation.

    [–]urnbabyurnNeoPanglossian 0 points1 point  (1 child)

    We've had Cuba as a case study for 50 years. No need to update.

    [–]besttrousers"Then again, I have pegged you for a Neoclassical/Austrian." 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    The old paradigms don't account for the radical changes the new crypto-stickies imply.