ramlau

They just like to make fun of GMU Economics. Like this thread: http://www.econjobrumors.com/topic.php?id=7725

Wait, some 20 people entering the program and only 3-5 graduating each year? That sounds a lot worse than half...

The public would look at the US News rankings and call the unranked programs "unknown" to them: http://grad-schools.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-graduate-schools/top-economics-schools/rankings Not sure if 100+ is meaningful when that's just about all of the programs that exist. The NRC is supposed to have a new list coming out, and we should see some surprises compared to this old one: http://www.stat.tamu.edu/~jnewton/nrc_rankings/area36.html

Touche! I totally forgot about the book cover. I did listen to the audio book.

It's still an apple-orange comparison... Which one is easier to eat? Some say orange because you can peel the orange by hand and some say apple because you can eat the skin and forget about peeling.

You should visit the schools and talk to the profs. And what's WM? William and Mary? WaMu?

I was responding to the original question of the post. The time of the "adcoms people" is just too valuable.

When did you finish college?

You're way overestimating your importance to them. They couldn't give less of a shyt.

Why don't we just look at the placement records of the schools again?

I said having read Dixit is a good start for getting into books like Ljungvist's and Stokey's. That's referring to dynamic programming.

Depends on what "high" means and what a "general program" is.

Dixit's book is rather easy to read. You're better off knowing Dixit well before going into books like Ljungqvist & Sargent and Stokey & Lucas.

Agree. Should be a required reading for all students of economics.

MWG and Greene are the "official" texts. Hayashi is also a popular book for econometrics. But different profs go with different books (e.g. my micro prof used only Debreu's Theory of Value for his lectures). Can't help you on the Stanford question.