andrew_gelman_stats andrew_gelman_stats-2011 andrew_gelman_stats-2011-1043 knowledge-graph by maker-knowledge-mining
Source: html
Introduction: That’s ok , Krugman earlier slammed Galbraith. (I wonder if Krugman is as big a fan of “tough choices” now as he was in 1996 .) Given Krugman’s politicization in recent years, I’m surprised he’s so dismissive of the political (rather than technical-economic) nature of Hayek’s influence. (I don’t know if he’s changed his views on Galbraith in recent years.) P.S. Greg Mankiw, in contrast, labels Galbraith and Hayek as “two of the great economists of the 20th century” and writes, “even though their most famous works were written many decades ago, they are still well worth reading today.”
sentIndex sentText sentNum sentScore
1 (I wonder if Krugman is as big a fan of “tough choices” now as he was in 1996 . [sent-2, score-0.277]
2 ) Given Krugman’s politicization in recent years, I’m surprised he’s so dismissive of the political (rather than technical-economic) nature of Hayek’s influence. [sent-3, score-0.805]
3 (I don’t know if he’s changed his views on Galbraith in recent years. [sent-4, score-0.378]
4 Greg Mankiw, in contrast, labels Galbraith and Hayek as “two of the great economists of the 20th century” and writes, “even though their most famous works were written many decades ago, they are still well worth reading today. [sent-7, score-1.068]
wordName wordTfidf (topN-words)
[('hayek', 0.46), ('krugman', 0.414), ('galbraith', 0.4), ('politicization', 0.23), ('dismissive', 0.194), ('slammed', 0.181), ('mankiw', 0.167), ('greg', 0.157), ('labels', 0.154), ('century', 0.138), ('tough', 0.131), ('fan', 0.13), ('recent', 0.119), ('choices', 0.118), ('views', 0.115), ('decades', 0.109), ('changed', 0.107), ('famous', 0.105), ('surprised', 0.101), ('contrast', 0.101), ('nature', 0.099), ('economists', 0.098), ('works', 0.093), ('earlier', 0.087), ('wonder', 0.086), ('worth', 0.084), ('written', 0.084), ('ok', 0.078), ('reading', 0.074), ('ago', 0.066), ('great', 0.065), ('political', 0.062), ('big', 0.061), ('though', 0.059), ('given', 0.055), ('still', 0.053), ('years', 0.05), ('well', 0.048), ('rather', 0.047), ('two', 0.043), ('many', 0.042), ('know', 0.037), ('even', 0.035), ('writes', 0.035)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 1.0 1043 andrew gelman stats-2011-12-06-Krugman disses Hayek as “being almost entirely about politics rather than economics”
Introduction: That’s ok , Krugman earlier slammed Galbraith. (I wonder if Krugman is as big a fan of “tough choices” now as he was in 1996 .) Given Krugman’s politicization in recent years, I’m surprised he’s so dismissive of the political (rather than technical-economic) nature of Hayek’s influence. (I don’t know if he’s changed his views on Galbraith in recent years.) P.S. Greg Mankiw, in contrast, labels Galbraith and Hayek as “two of the great economists of the 20th century” and writes, “even though their most famous works were written many decades ago, they are still well worth reading today.”
2 0.22593099 1108 andrew gelman stats-2012-01-09-Blogging, polemical and otherwise
Introduction: In a discussion of Paul Krugman and his critics, Noah Smith compares two styles of argumentation: Way #1 is to put your complete thought process on a page – to lay out both sides of an argument, and explain why you arrived at a conclusion. This is what [Tyler] Cowen calls the “Humean” method, after David Hume. As I [Smith] see it, the Humean method is what you use if you want to get the most out of a discussion with a well-informed but fundamentally disinterested interlocutor. . . . But not all interlocutors are disinterested. Some have political agendas. Some have strong personal biases. And not all interlocutors are well-informed. . . . In this situation, it may provide the most social benefit to adopt a more Hegelian method of argumentation. . . . two people argue their cases as strongly as possible, and observers can pick and choose the best points of each. This is how our court system works, for example. In the context of econ blogs, using a Hegelian approach means saying “
3 0.18014035 1705 andrew gelman stats-2013-02-04-Recently in the sister blog
Introduction: I remarked that If you’re havin’ electoral problems I feel bad for you son, I got 538 problems but partisan bias ain’t one , and it got such a strong reaction it caused me to rethink my entire approach to political blogging, so I followed up with, What we’ve got here is failure to communicate . In other news, Paul “I’m not Galbraith” disses Larry “I’m not Krugman” Summers and we ask, What is the middle class? Also, Essentialist reasoning about the biological world .
4 0.16814783 338 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-12-Update on Mankiw’s work incentives
Introduction: Tyler Cowen links to a blog by Greg Mankiw with further details on his argument that his anticipated 90% marginal tax rate will reduce his work level. Having already given my thoughts on Mankiw’s column, I merely have a few things to add/emphasize. 1. Cowen frames the arguments in terms of the “status” of George Bush, Greg Mankiw, Barack Obama, and their proposed policies. I hadn’t thought of the arguments as being about status, but I think I see what Cowen is saying. By being a well-known economist and having a column in the New York Times, Mankiw is trading some of his status for political advocacy (just as Krugman does, from the opposite direction). If Mankiw didn’t have the pre-existing status, I doubt this particular column would’ve made it into the newspaper. (Again, ditto with many of Krugman’s columns.) So it makes sense that arguments about the substance of Mankiw’s remarks will get tied into disputes about his status. 2. Neither Cowen nor Mankiw address
Introduction: Greg Mankiw writes (link from Tyler Cowen ): Without any taxes, accepting that editor’s assignment would have yielded my children an extra $10,000. With taxes, it yields only $1,000. In effect, once the entire tax system is taken into account, my family’s marginal tax rate is about 90 percent. Is it any wonder that I [Mankiw] turn down most of the money-making opportunities I am offered? By contrast, without the tax increases advocated by the Obama administration, the numbers would look quite different. I would face a lower income tax rate, a lower Medicare tax rate, and no deduction phaseout or estate tax. Taking that writing assignment would yield my kids about $2,000. I would have twice the incentive to keep working. First, the good news Obama’s tax rates are much lower than Mankiw had anticipated! According to the above quote, his marginal tax rate is currently 80% but threatens to rise to 90%. But, in October 2008, Mankiw calculated that Obama’s would tax his m
6 0.14658986 1936 andrew gelman stats-2013-07-13-Economic policy does not occur in a political vacuum
7 0.14501062 2261 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-23-Greg Mankiw’s utility function
8 0.13665257 1616 andrew gelman stats-2012-12-10-John McAfee is a Heinlein hero
9 0.11414239 630 andrew gelman stats-2011-03-27-What is an economic “conspiracy theory”?
10 0.098738246 1396 andrew gelman stats-2012-06-27-Recently in the sister blog
11 0.098461092 1846 andrew gelman stats-2013-05-07-Like Casper the ghost, Niall Ferguson is not only white. He is also very, very adorable.
12 0.097167179 1650 andrew gelman stats-2013-01-03-Did Steven Levitt really believe in 2008 that Obama “would be the greatest president in history”?
13 0.094745092 1010 andrew gelman stats-2011-11-14-“Free energy” and economic resources
14 0.093996242 1493 andrew gelman stats-2012-09-12-Niall Ferguson, the John Yoo line, and the paradox of influence
15 0.091695666 1728 andrew gelman stats-2013-02-19-The grasshopper wins, and Greg Mankiw’s grandmother would be “shocked and appalled” all over again
16 0.079458974 1204 andrew gelman stats-2012-03-08-The politics of economic and statistical models
17 0.079266861 483 andrew gelman stats-2010-12-23-Science, ideology, and human origins
18 0.078823425 366 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-24-Mankiw tax update
19 0.073938496 120 andrew gelman stats-2010-06-30-You can’t put Pandora back in the box
20 0.072538793 1456 andrew gelman stats-2012-08-13-Macro, micro, and conflicts of interest
topicId topicWeight
[(0, 0.081), (1, -0.057), (2, 0.003), (3, 0.044), (4, -0.039), (5, -0.015), (6, 0.035), (7, 0.0), (8, 0.034), (9, 0.051), (10, -0.048), (11, -0.016), (12, -0.037), (13, 0.046), (14, 0.008), (15, -0.052), (16, -0.038), (17, -0.03), (18, -0.057), (19, 0.029), (20, 0.053), (21, 0.036), (22, 0.027), (23, 0.04), (24, -0.024), (25, 0.003), (26, 0.019), (27, 0.0), (28, 0.007), (29, -0.045), (30, -0.038), (31, 0.025), (32, 0.008), (33, -0.037), (34, -0.029), (35, 0.018), (36, 0.009), (37, 0.028), (38, 0.033), (39, -0.026), (40, -0.022), (41, 0.018), (42, 0.029), (43, -0.055), (44, -0.005), (45, -0.004), (46, 0.021), (47, -0.032), (48, 0.037), (49, 0.032)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
same-blog 1 0.9533897 1043 andrew gelman stats-2011-12-06-Krugman disses Hayek as “being almost entirely about politics rather than economics”
Introduction: That’s ok , Krugman earlier slammed Galbraith. (I wonder if Krugman is as big a fan of “tough choices” now as he was in 1996 .) Given Krugman’s politicization in recent years, I’m surprised he’s so dismissive of the political (rather than technical-economic) nature of Hayek’s influence. (I don’t know if he’s changed his views on Galbraith in recent years.) P.S. Greg Mankiw, in contrast, labels Galbraith and Hayek as “two of the great economists of the 20th century” and writes, “even though their most famous works were written many decades ago, they are still well worth reading today.”
2 0.73303396 338 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-12-Update on Mankiw’s work incentives
Introduction: Tyler Cowen links to a blog by Greg Mankiw with further details on his argument that his anticipated 90% marginal tax rate will reduce his work level. Having already given my thoughts on Mankiw’s column, I merely have a few things to add/emphasize. 1. Cowen frames the arguments in terms of the “status” of George Bush, Greg Mankiw, Barack Obama, and their proposed policies. I hadn’t thought of the arguments as being about status, but I think I see what Cowen is saying. By being a well-known economist and having a column in the New York Times, Mankiw is trading some of his status for political advocacy (just as Krugman does, from the opposite direction). If Mankiw didn’t have the pre-existing status, I doubt this particular column would’ve made it into the newspaper. (Again, ditto with many of Krugman’s columns.) So it makes sense that arguments about the substance of Mankiw’s remarks will get tied into disputes about his status. 2. Neither Cowen nor Mankiw address
3 0.7178728 1936 andrew gelman stats-2013-07-13-Economic policy does not occur in a political vacuum
Introduction: Even if a policymaker is sure of the ideal economic policy, he or she can only implement it with the help of some of the other political players. But I’m saying something different, echoing what I wrote a couple days ago. I thought of this the other day after seeing this recent quote from Paul Krugman ( extracted by Brad DeLong) about Larry “Starbucks” Summers: Summers is . . . indistinguishable from me [Krugman] on macro-policy. And he may be a bit to the left, because he’s even more certain than I am . . . that some extra spending now will actually help us more in fiscal terms. So he published a piece in the Financial Times that was meant to be a big statement about this. But before he got to that, he spend three paragraphs about the importance of dealing with the deficit in the medium term . . . to establish that ‘I am a respectable person; I am not like that rabble-rouser, Krugman.’ . . . Maybe. But, going back to 2009, I still suspect that Summers, or some part of S
Introduction: Given Grandma Mankiw’s hypothetical distaste for Sonia Sotomayor’s spending habits (recall that Grandma “would have been shocked and appalled” by the judge’s lack of savings), I expect she (the grandmother) would be even more irritated by the success of Sotomayor’s recent book: Now that Sotomayor has a ton of money coming in, in addition to a well-paying job and pension for life, that would almost seem to validate Sotomayor’s foolish, foolish decision to enjoy herself in middle age rather than sock hundreds of thousands of dollars into a retirement account she likely would never touch during her lifetime. One interesting thing about this example is that Mankiw apparently holds within himself a descriptive and normative view of economics. Descriptively, he models people as “spenders” or “savers.” But, normatively, he seems to attribute higher values to the “savers.” (He also seems to be confused about the relation between saving to intertemporal preference (see my long p
5 0.70191693 2261 andrew gelman stats-2014-03-23-Greg Mankiw’s utility function
Introduction: From 2010 : Greg Mankiw writes (link from Tyler Cowen ): Without any taxes, accepting that editor’s assignment would have yielded my children an extra $10,000. With taxes, it yields only $1,000. In effect, once the entire tax system is taken into account, my family’s marginal tax rate is about 90 percent. Is it any wonder that I [Mankiw] turn down most of the money-making opportunities I am offered? By contrast, without the tax increases advocated by the Obama administration, the numbers would look quite different. I would face a lower income tax rate, a lower Medicare tax rate, and no deduction phaseout or estate tax. Taking that writing assignment would yield my kids about $2,000. I would have twice the incentive to keep working. First, the good news Obama’s tax rates are much lower than Mankiw had anticipated! According to the above quote, his marginal tax rate is currently 80% but threatens to rise to 90%. But, in October 2008, Mankiw calculated that Obama’s
7 0.691082 366 andrew gelman stats-2010-10-24-Mankiw tax update
8 0.68615127 630 andrew gelman stats-2011-03-27-What is an economic “conspiracy theory”?
9 0.61417174 1037 andrew gelman stats-2011-12-01-Lamentably common misunderstanding of meritocracy
10 0.6135124 922 andrew gelman stats-2011-09-24-Economists don’t think like accountants—but maybe they should
11 0.58804482 1378 andrew gelman stats-2012-06-13-Economists . . .
12 0.57669622 711 andrew gelman stats-2011-05-14-Steven Rhoads’s book, “The Economist’s View of the World”
13 0.56710643 688 andrew gelman stats-2011-04-30-Why it’s so relaxing to think about social issues
14 0.54843462 585 andrew gelman stats-2011-02-22-“How has your thinking changed over the past three years?”
15 0.54732347 1204 andrew gelman stats-2012-03-08-The politics of economic and statistical models
17 0.54300916 1616 andrew gelman stats-2012-12-10-John McAfee is a Heinlein hero
18 0.53807783 1108 andrew gelman stats-2012-01-09-Blogging, polemical and otherwise
19 0.53439003 1020 andrew gelman stats-2011-11-20-No no no no no
20 0.52491981 1696 andrew gelman stats-2013-01-29-The latest in economics exceptionalism
topicId topicWeight
[(16, 0.018), (21, 0.026), (24, 0.055), (35, 0.027), (45, 0.018), (55, 0.02), (57, 0.356), (74, 0.029), (86, 0.023), (99, 0.282)]
simIndex simValue blogId blogTitle
1 0.93019485 1542 andrew gelman stats-2012-10-20-A statistical model for underdispersion
Introduction: We have lots of models for overdispersed count data but we rarely see underdispersed data. But now I know what example I’ll be giving when this next comes up in class. From a book review by Theo Tait: A number of shark species go in for oophagy, or uterine cannibalism. Sand tiger foetuses ‘eat each other in utero, acting out the harshest form of sibling rivalry imaginable’. Only two babies emerge, one from each of the mother shark’s uteruses: the survivors have eaten everything else. ‘A female sand tiger gives birth to a baby that’s already a metre long and an experienced killer,’ explains Demian Chapman, an expert on the subject. That’s what I call underdispersion. E(y)=2, var(y)=0. Take that, M. Poisson!
2 0.9209528 1146 andrew gelman stats-2012-01-30-Convenient page of data sources from the Washington Post
Introduction: Wayne Folta points us to this list .
same-blog 3 0.89927673 1043 andrew gelman stats-2011-12-06-Krugman disses Hayek as “being almost entirely about politics rather than economics”
Introduction: That’s ok , Krugman earlier slammed Galbraith. (I wonder if Krugman is as big a fan of “tough choices” now as he was in 1996 .) Given Krugman’s politicization in recent years, I’m surprised he’s so dismissive of the political (rather than technical-economic) nature of Hayek’s influence. (I don’t know if he’s changed his views on Galbraith in recent years.) P.S. Greg Mankiw, in contrast, labels Galbraith and Hayek as “two of the great economists of the 20th century” and writes, “even though their most famous works were written many decades ago, they are still well worth reading today.”
4 0.85688913 891 andrew gelman stats-2011-09-05-World Bank data now online
Introduction: Wayne Folta writes that the World Bank is opening up some of its data for researchers.
5 0.83925676 1018 andrew gelman stats-2011-11-19-Tempering and modes
Introduction: Gustavo writes: Tempering should always be done in the spirit of *searching* for important modes of the distribution. If we assume that we know where they are, then there is no point to tempering. Now, tempering is actually a *bad* way of searching for important modes, it just happens to be easy to program. As always, my [Gustavo's] prescription is to FIRST find the important modes (as a pre-processing step); THEN sample from each mode independently; and FINALLY weight the samples appropriately, based on the estimated probability mass of each mode, though things might get messy if you end up jumping between modes. My reply: 1. Parallel tempering has always seemed like a great idea, but I have to admit that the only time I tried it (with Matt2 on the tree-ring example), it didn’t work for us. 2. You say you’d rather sample from the modes and then average over them. But that won’t work if if you have a zillion modes. Also, if you know where the modes are, the quickest w
6 0.81585801 861 andrew gelman stats-2011-08-19-Will Stan work well with 40×40 matrices?
8 0.79599875 1101 andrew gelman stats-2012-01-05-What are the standards for reliability in experimental psychology?
9 0.78982103 215 andrew gelman stats-2010-08-18-DataMarket
10 0.76164269 1120 andrew gelman stats-2012-01-15-Fun fight over the Grover search algorithm
11 0.76098645 306 andrew gelman stats-2010-09-29-Statistics and the end of time
12 0.75607079 1460 andrew gelman stats-2012-08-16-“Real data can be a pain”
13 0.75448573 1870 andrew gelman stats-2013-05-26-How to understand coefficients that reverse sign when you start controlling for things?
14 0.75122976 989 andrew gelman stats-2011-11-03-This post does not mention Wegman
15 0.72284484 1044 andrew gelman stats-2011-12-06-The K Foundation burns Cosma’s turkey
16 0.72060591 1821 andrew gelman stats-2013-04-24-My talk midtown this Friday noon (and at Columbia Monday afternoon)
17 0.7204836 2318 andrew gelman stats-2014-05-04-Stan (& JAGS) Tutorial on Linear Mixed Models
18 0.7180109 1036 andrew gelman stats-2011-11-30-Stan uses Nuts!
20 0.70205414 816 andrew gelman stats-2011-07-22-“Information visualization” vs. “Statistical graphics”