Oh...oh dear.
The NYPD has found...the
@OUPAcademic
Oxford Very Short Introduction series.
I wonder if he thinks the Antisemitism is also a how-to book.
Thinking about that one school that rejected me from their PhD program, asked if I wanted to be considered for their master's program and then also rejected me from their master's program
After a brutal application cycle I am disappointed to say I was rejected from every PhD program I applied to, BUT the silver lining is that I will be accepting my offer from Oxford University to begin an MPhil in Economics this fall!
Doing economics has made me actively worse at debating because it turns out most people don’t find “actually it’s complicated” to be an especially compelling argument
Historians: It is imperative that we recognize the complex relationship between different outcomes over time and the significance of the past in determining the future.
Economists:
Working hard at the gym to get those “1988-2008 global income growth distribution” arms because lifting isn’t just about aesthetics, it also serves a valuable intellectual purpose
One of the biggest gaps in economics is explaining why outcomes differ across countries.
Why is homeownership lower in Germany? Why do the rich live the center of the city in Argentina, but in the suburbs in America?
We don't have great frameworks to answer these Qs.
It is once again time for my annual reading roundup, here’s the 10 most insightful, relevant, and generally interesting new(ish) books in politics, economics, and history that I read this year (in no particular order):
Happy birthday to David Graeber. “The ultimate, hidden truth of the world is that it is something that we make, and could just as easily make differently.”
So you’re telling me a “Swiftie” isn’t someone who’s really into interbank communication networks and the secure exchange of financial transaction information?
How to get good at data science in 3 easy steps:
Step 1. Uninstall STATA
Step 2. Download R Studio
Step 3. Install packages until the two applications are functionally identical
Of course I’m being productive, I’m researching patterns of state formation by dividing the world into hexagonal cells with defined geographical features and resource availability, then simulating inter-polity conflicts to explain tendencies towards polycentrism and consolidation
Jack says this as a joke, but the image is surprisingly accurate. Sometimes, even simple lagged models go a long way in explaining historical dynamics that match what qualitative sources say. The issue, and that is where historians get pissed at economists, is that the latter
What is the evidence that perpetual growth in the scale of economic activity is feasible?
There is none.
Quite the opposite.
Virtually all economists & policy makers still simply assume this to be so, without any discussion or a second thought.
This is the strangest thing.
Economists: History helps us understand the complex relationships between different outcomes over time and illustrates the significance of the past in determining the future
The history in question:
It’s not just “some game” I’m studying patterns of state formation by dividing the world into hexagonal cells with randomly assigned geographical features and resource endowments, then simulating inter-polity trade and conflict to demonstrate the tendency towards consolidation
I just imposed a series of tariffs on goods made in China:
25% on steel and aluminum,
50% on semiconductors,
100% on EVs,
And 50% on solar panels.
China is determined to dominate these industries.
I'm determined to ensure America leads the world in them.
When I was in undergrad I got into a big argument with my microeconmics professor after class over whether Amtrak should subsidize less profitable routes, he said that *nobody* lives on these routes meanwhile *I* lived on one of those routes