tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2499715909956774229.post4354459707031992877..comments2024-03-22T22:37:02.639-07:00Comments on Stephen Williamson: New Monetarist Economics: Piketty and the MacroeconomistsStephen Williamsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01434465858419028592noreply@blogger.comBlogger55125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2499715909956774229.post-85940636959224602102014-05-20T01:52:37.342-07:002014-05-20T01:52:37.342-07:00"What is the average years of education of yo..."What is the average years of education of your average CEO? "<br /><br />At least 12, although there are exceptions. The confusion of luck with skill continues, and if you doubt this consider Carly Fiorina or Chainsaw Al. When their luck runs out bad things happen,EliRabetthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07957002964638398767noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2499715909956774229.post-75220452379250918672014-05-15T13:52:46.601-07:002014-05-15T13:52:46.601-07:00I am not asserting I understood them, I am asserti...I am not asserting I understood them, I am asserting you did not. I can do this all day, and will if it keeps you from polluting the academy with crummy papers.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2499715909956774229.post-36319056923566097612014-05-14T13:31:53.054-07:002014-05-14T13:31:53.054-07:00Well, so are you. (How long should we keep this th...Well, so are you. (How long should we keep this thread going?)CAnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2499715909956774229.post-41186450014441378282014-05-14T09:46:13.950-07:002014-05-14T09:46:13.950-07:00Read Bob Solow's review: http://www.newrepubli...Read Bob Solow's review: http://www.newrepublic.com/article/117429/capital-twenty-first-century-thomas-piketty-reviewedSom Dasguptahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11848089230329819807noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2499715909956774229.post-75375202916310763202014-05-13T17:22:32.210-07:002014-05-13T17:22:32.210-07:00Well, you're certainly entitled to think you u...Well, you're certainly entitled to think you understood them.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2499715909956774229.post-51909361670732667452014-05-13T10:35:25.851-07:002014-05-13T10:35:25.851-07:00Isn't it amazing? I admit, I will go to any le...Isn't it amazing? I admit, I will go to any length to delay grading undergraduate homework! And yet, I still think I understood Roger's points (there are several) quite well. CAnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2499715909956774229.post-62845313413691432812014-05-12T15:44:35.473-07:002014-05-12T15:44:35.473-07:00Hee hee, you're answering me! My insults carr...Hee hee, you're answering me! My insults carry the day! Go meat!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2499715909956774229.post-9478242262282382772014-05-12T13:13:36.167-07:002014-05-12T13:13:36.167-07:00Dear claritin, why don't you enlighten me? Or ...Dear claritin, why don't you enlighten me? Or are your insults a desperate attempt to hide your lack of substance? CAnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2499715909956774229.post-88588754194969543512014-05-12T11:44:24.526-07:002014-05-12T11:44:24.526-07:00You seem to have misunderstood Roger's point. ...You seem to have misunderstood Roger's point. Not surprising, given that you misunderstand a great many things.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2499715909956774229.post-5231673670337536672014-05-12T07:38:31.530-07:002014-05-12T07:38:31.530-07:00January who?
Anyway, I defer to my favorite west-...January who?<br /><br />Anyway, I defer to my favorite west-coast Brit: <br />http://rogerfarmerblog.blogspot.com/2014/04/teaching-economics.html<br /><br />And if this is not good enough, I will be happy to send you my recent paper (under review) highlighting one methodological victory of economic historians (over a group of growth theorists).CAnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2499715909956774229.post-77940588885202534292014-05-11T15:28:52.904-07:002014-05-11T15:28:52.904-07:00"At least their vague models deal with the on..."At least their vague models deal with the one element of the state space that matters, the real world, as opposed to most models published in academic journals."<br /><br />Sure they do. And I just had sex with January Jones.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2499715909956774229.post-36573209793909665802014-05-09T03:48:24.567-07:002014-05-09T03:48:24.567-07:00"How does Piketty put his work in the context..."How does Piketty put his work in the context of the literature on inequality, economic growth..?"<br /><br />Since it has Solow's approval, it must be relatable to neo-classical growth theory. However, the conclusions - that capitalism has intrinsic tendencies towards clusters of capital accumulation, divergence, inequality,disequilibrium and instability is classic Marxian theory.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2499715909956774229.post-27651881121377521782014-05-09T03:37:58.880-07:002014-05-09T03:37:58.880-07:00"Historians use models, they just use incompl..."Historians use models, they just use incomplete and extremely vague ones. And they use them badly"<br /><br />You are right some extent Anonymous. At least though they are aware of the dangers and try not to fall into them! Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2499715909956774229.post-79955247768898355172014-05-08T18:04:45.940-07:002014-05-08T18:04:45.940-07:00At least their vague models deal with the one elem...At least their vague models deal with the one element of the state space that matters, the real world, as opposed to most models published in academic journals.CAnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2499715909956774229.post-41790274868299163762014-05-08T07:14:33.378-07:002014-05-08T07:14:33.378-07:00Historians use models, they just use incomplete an...Historians use models, they just use incomplete and extremely vague ones. And they use them badly.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2499715909956774229.post-37118801886131528892014-05-08T07:13:08.855-07:002014-05-08T07:13:08.855-07:00I spy with my own eye a person in desperate need o...I spy with my own eye a person in desperate need of an education. Read Kartik's book and come back.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2499715909956774229.post-45961214920063582642014-05-08T07:10:43.633-07:002014-05-08T07:10:43.633-07:00There is nothing useful at MoneyIllusion.There is nothing useful at MoneyIllusion.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2499715909956774229.post-70979653656439940182014-05-08T07:09:40.769-07:002014-05-08T07:09:40.769-07:00Piketty has to use models with power laws, because...Piketty has to use models with power laws, because he doesn't know how to solve models on the computer.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2499715909956774229.post-44619549568216322772014-05-06T07:23:54.388-07:002014-05-06T07:23:54.388-07:00What I'm curious about is what is in Piketty&#...What I'm curious about is what is in Piketty's book, not what he mentioned in 2010. How does Piketty put his work in the context of the literature on inequality, economic growth, etc.? Does he have a rigorous theory to structure his arguments?<br /><br />I suspect that Piketty is not only an economist but probably an historian. In fact he is probably more an historian than an economist. This is the difference between him and Sargent (by the way in ref to your other thread - Sargent is not an historian and would not be considered seriously as one). <br /><br />You do not use theories or models in history. Very basic rule. You use primary documentary evidence and data - concentrating on what it means - ie understanding the institutional and other context. Models shape your conclusions - and therefore are considered dangerous things in history. Models come, if they do, at the end of historical investigations, not at the beginning. <br /><br />I have not read Piketty yet, but I suspect the references to contemporary literature are used as part of evidence collated to document contemporary issues - such as those of discussion - of the time.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2499715909956774229.post-72761720977787752092014-05-05T10:58:30.215-07:002014-05-05T10:58:30.215-07:00"it is not Jane and John Doe who control poli..."it is not Jane and John Doe who control politics anymore but corporations and rich individuals."<br /><br />Some evidence here would be nice. You mean Buffet? Ted Turner? Bill Gates? Or the Koch's? Because I do not see a united front here. By the way, if CEOs are defrauding people, they are defrauding some pretty rich people (those who own large amounts of stocks). Again, what is going on? I cannot talk about all lefties, but I can point to your two big problems: 1) You have anger issues, and 2) you think you have figured everything out. The two remedies are 1) get laid and 2) grow up.CAnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2499715909956774229.post-78853005924546035382014-05-02T16:01:21.488-07:002014-05-02T16:01:21.488-07:00Piketty admits that his proposed solution is not p...Piketty admits that his proposed solution is not politically feasible and we all know that taxing flows/ income is far easier than taxing stock / wealth.<br /><br />The key issue at hand here is actually not inequality but democracy. It is apparent that the right doesn't mind the "political externality" of increasing income and wealth inequality: oligarchy. Sure, we can have all those democratic formal structures but there is no democratic substance if a few rich and thus powerful people pull the strings (and I don't care whether they are called Koch or Soros). Left-wingers and centrists (guys like Krugman and Piketty would get labelled something like neoliberal scum by left-wingers) on the other hand do care.<br /><br />Income inequality is not an issue if it reflects productivity inequality and doesn't impact wealth inequality and thus undermines democracy. Yet the two conditions are not satisfied right now, CEOs earn gigantic sums even if they ruin their company and it is not Jane and John Doe who control politics anymore but corporations and rich individuals.<br /><br />So yeah, it is not envious lefties who wanna tax people based on arbitrary criteria but oligarchical right-wingers who don't give a sh*t about the slow but steady demise of democracy and who would perhaps even appreciate a second Gilded Age.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2499715909956774229.post-31659306098440573132014-05-02T12:01:51.597-07:002014-05-02T12:01:51.597-07:00"But if you had ever worked outside of academ..."But if you had ever worked outside of academia"<br /><br />You assume I haven't! Careful!! <br /><br />Also, I am curious about which economists you have in mind. Principal-agent problems are well recognized. The question is, why do stockholders, some of which are institutional investors, fall victims to such practices? Why do private equity funds, which make a living by taking over and replacing less competent CEOs, not address this issue? As you say, this is a complex problem and not clear at all. So what is moronic here is the view that it can be addressed by taxing everyone who makes "too much" according to their standards. <br /><br />Piketty is crazy for making bold forecasts (he should know by now this is a bad idea) and for believing that a global wealth tax is politically feasible. Otherwise, he is certainly not a Marxist. I am not sure who claims that he is.CAnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2499715909956774229.post-28872549438988380892014-05-02T08:01:44.660-07:002014-05-02T08:01:44.660-07:00Sorry Noah. No zing.Sorry Noah. No zing.Stephen Williamsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01434465858419028592noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2499715909956774229.post-3341032563188458132014-05-02T08:01:27.594-07:002014-05-02T08:01:27.594-07:00"if we had perfectly competitive markets, ine..."if we had perfectly competitive markets, inequality would never be an issue."<br /><br />That doesn't make any sense. We can have perfectly competitive markets and still have inefficient outcomes.Stephen Williamsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01434465858419028592noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2499715909956774229.post-51705380251093986312014-05-01T14:34:55.656-07:002014-05-01T14:34:55.656-07:00Of course CEOs are highly productive. But if you h...Of course CEOs are highly productive. But if you had ever worked outside of academia you would know the corporate governance problems that make top management basically colludes to extract rents from the company, i.e. a significant part of their pay is due to rent extraction.<br /><br />Now admittedly the issue is more complex. I do for example think that workers have been so well off in the post WWII area because they have been able to get a large share of the "rent pie" (when a company has monopoly power people it gains monpoly rents and they somehow have to be distributed among capital and labour).<br /><br />So yeah, I am not beating up on CEOs. I am beating up on all the moronic economists who still believe that incomes perfectly reflect productivity and that Eisenhower era tax rates would have serious disincentive effects and be leftist lunacy. There are ample of lunatic lefties but you won't find them any of them among classical economists (and despite all the comparisons with Marx, Piketty is a mainstream guy).Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com