Fearing the Lucas critique

Thank you for all the blogging suggestions.  I am going to try an experiment, namely to satisfy the first 50, not counting the ones I’ve already done and yes the archives go way way back.  Let’s see how far I can get without flipping out in the middle, running for blogging liberty and charging that corporate America was infringing upon my sacred freedom of speech.  It would be fun if some other blogger picked up the same topics (though I won’t do them in order), if so let us know in the comments.  And if you’re not in the first fifty, I’ll still consider your suggestion, so don’t stop leaving ideas.


Here's an idea to blog about: Tradeable permits for the bar/restaurant industry that entitle the holder to allow smoking in their establishment. The city/county/whatever would set a cap on the number of places that could allow smoking and would auction off the decided-upon number of permits, which owners would then be able to buy and sell at will.

Assuming the market functioned well, what would you expect of the permit price over time?

I'd really like to read your thoughts about Moore's Law and productivity; to what extent you take Singularity-thinking seriously, and so on. Some time ago I tried to figure out how long-run productivity projections worked, and came across, e.g., Vox Baby referring to Robert J. Gordon's Brookings paper (PDF), which seems to predict diminishing technological returns because

The size of human fingers and the ability of human eyes to absorb information from tiny screens set limits to miniaturization.

I suggest either Murder as a Fine Art or the Economics of Serial Killing: In the words of Caplan, is murder just an extreme revealed preference?

How to best appreciate the work of Thomas Pynchon

How about the Marginal Utility of additional higher education spending, when does it become negative (there was a recent paper by two Texas at Austin Economists that found a negative return to a Masters degree), in addition to increased subsidies of student loans, who is it that truly benefits from this, is there an equilibrium and how do you get there.

Advice for grad students is always appreciated.

How important is the bias in empirical economics that favors finding statistically significant results? With medical research, the Economist argues that many times numerous regressions are run, but only those showing statistical significance are reported, or published. Because of this bias, it is argued, many reported statistical relationships are simply do to randomness and aren't uncovering a causal relationship.
"[E]ach result is tested separately to see how likely, in statistical terms, it was to have happened by chance. If that likelihood is below a certain threshold, typically 5%, then the convention is that an effect is 'real'...that is fine if only one hypothesis is being tested. But if, say, 20 are being tested at the same time, then on average one of them will be accepted as provisionally true, even though it is not."

Bayesian Statistics: Fact or Crap?

What are the ten economics books written before 1936(*) still worth reading in 2007?

(*) Date of publication of Keynes's General Theory. Arbitrary cut-off - an alternative might be be 1947 Samuelson's Foundations, or Robbins' 1932 Essay.

The Singularity. Do you believe it will occur? What are the implications for economics, and society in general for that matter.

Can Axl Rose's continual postponement of the release of Chinese Democracy be adequately explained by any rational choice models?

Comments for this post are closed