Economists for Obama

I like this blog alot!

This list is most impressive!

Economic policy advisors:

Jason Furman (director of economic policy)
Austan Goolsbee (senior economic policy advisor), University of Chicago tax policy expert

Karen Kornbluh (policy director)

David Cutler, Harvard health policy expert

Jeff Liebman, Harvard welfare expert

Michael Froman, Citigroup executive

Daniel Tarullo, Georgetown law professor

David Romer, Berkeley macroeconomist

Christina Romer, Berkeley economic historian

Richard Thaler, University of Chicago behavioral finance expert

Robert Rubin, former Treasury Secretary

Larry Summers, former Treasury Secretary

Alan Blinder, former Vice-chairman of the Federal Reserve

Jared Bernstein, Economic Policy Institute labor economist

James Galbraith, University of Texas macroeconomist

Paul Volcker, Chairman of the Federal Reserve 1979-1987

Laura Tyson, Berkeley international economist, Bill Clinton economic adviser

Robert Reich, Berkeley public policy professor, former Secretary of Labor

Peter Henry, Stanford international economist

Gene Sperling, former White House economic adviser

Other prominent economists who support Obama:

Brad Delong, Berkeley macroeconomist

Joseph Stiglitz, 2001 Nobel laureate

Edmund Phelps, 2006 Nobel laureate

Ray Fair, Yale macroeconomist

Dan McFadden, 2000 Nobel laureate

Robert Solow, 1987 Nobel laureate

Prominent finance people who support Obama:(not actually economists)

William Donaldson, Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Chair 2003-05

Arthur Levitt, SEC chair 1993-2001

David Ruder, SEC chair 1987-1989

Warren Buffet, investor, richest person in world

Latest Nobel Buzz: Nobel Prize Prediction 2008

An article has boldly predicted that an economist of Indian decent will probably win the Nobel Prize this year. Their choices are;

1. Jagdish Bhagwati - International trade specialist
2. Avinash Dixit - Game theory, IO, International trade, .......
3. Partha Dasgupta - Development economics, environmental economics

I cannot say that I am familiar with their work, or even the fields that they have revolutionized, so I can't comment on this list. However, I would say that if Dixit wins, it probably won't be for his contributions to game theory or industrial organization, since there are plenty of other guys who have had more impact on these two fields.

The article continues to list some more economists who have a chance:
Peter Diamond - Macroeconomic titan
Dale Mortensen - search and matching theory in frictional unemployment
Christopher Pissarides - Again, search theory, unemployment
Elhanan Helpman - International trade titan
Robert Barro - Macroeconomic titan
Paul Krugman - New trade theory
Paul Romer - Endogenous Growth Theory
Gene Grossman - Work on asymmetric information (probably for incomplete contracts too)
Eugene Fama - Market Efficiency Hypothesis

I think all these guys deserve a prize. But in light of the recent financial turmoil, and the lack of common understanding that economists have displayed in response to this catastrophe, I think we should award the prize to Eugene Fama (and Kenneth French), and Richard Thaler (I really do not know why he is not mentioned more often). This award would be a joyful occasion to both sides of the profession: those who believe in government intervention and those who do not.

I studies finance during college, and I know how Fama's efficiency argument has been a basis for much of the deregulation argument (not to mention a whole bulk of finance theory is based on it), while Thaler's contributions to behavioral finance has led a whole new revolution on making economics more about homo sapiens than it is about homo economicus. In my opinion, both deserve the prize, and what better time to give the prize to them than now!

The Bailout Plan: Joker Style

I think I will make a summary of what happened with the financial crisis, and the policy advice of some of the more pominent economists as soon as possible. It just doesn't seem right for my blog to be silent on this issue.

Best Graduate Schools in Economics

The full list is here.

And for the finance people, this is a list for finance.

Hillary Would be Proud of

Rwanda!

Rwanda will be the first country where women will outnumber men in parliament.

Pictures from Beijing-Hsinchu Economic Conference

新竹清大的黃春興老師

新竹清大的吳易樺學長

北京清大的羅偉卿學長

新竹清大的龍歌

下午討論會的主持人，俞欣榮

新竹清大的老師群

俞哥聽問題

新竹清大的許峰銘

我口渴了，馬拉松式的報告

北京清大的張賀與孫靈菲

北京清大的單淼 (有人念成 ㄉㄢ 水)

余沛成: 我都聽不懂。俞欣榮: 攝影師在&*%##&^%個##$%#阿?

北京清大的趙燕琛

新竹清大的邱詩詠學姊

大合照!

How to Explain Inflation to Your Wife

Very SEXIST, but good!

'When we married, you measured 36-24-36. Now you’re 42-42-42. There’s more of you, but you are not worth as much.'

Just a Correlation!

芝加哥大學經濟教授 Casey Mulligan 說選共和黨的話，男女平均收入會比較接近。也就是說，若你希望男女平等的話，你就應該支持共和黨當選。但這是真的嗎?

有一個部落格願意解釋這個現象:

Given the Republicans' strong anti-equality record, Mulligan's finding that Republican presidents increase pay equity for women surely demands an explanation. What is the causal mechanism here? But curiously, Mulligan is entirely silent on this point. He offers no explanation for these findings -- not even the usual blather about how Republicans let the magic of the market do its thing.

.....It's not that Republican economic policies help women all that much. It's that they hurt the working class, especially working class men. A lot.

也就是說，不是女性的薪資上漲，而是男性的薪資在共和黨的執政下被往下壓縮了。

近幾年經濟學時常只是提供一個有趣的 correlation 而沒有做太多的解釋。這不是一個好現象!

What are Commercials Trying to Tell Us?

Even though 20 years ago, economists have rendered advertising content meaningless, since its sole purpose is to look flashy and act as a signal of quality, I really think that analyzing advertising content is an important issue in industrial organization and the future of microeconomics.

Think about this: I can tell you that my house is 'huge', or I can instead tell you exact number of acres. Which one would you rather hear? However, which one would arouse interest?

Just my humble opinion.

First Lesson in Economics

"It is through exchange that difference becomes a blessing, not a curse."

This should be the first lesson in economics. And as pointed out by The Austrian Economists, "Have the benefits of the specialization and exchange ever been presented more concisely and beautifully than in that one sentence?"