EconMist

The question on the SOP asks "what professional and educational goals other than in economics are you considering at this time?" I am confused about what this question means? No clue how to answer! Any ideas? Can somebody elaborate? Thank you, EconMist

I will have to agree with Explorer. That post by pevdoki1 was useless and not helpful. You may not care about his/her loss of excitement, but at least have the decency to butt out when you don't have any value to add to the on-going discussion. It's not that you should apologize, but you should accept his/her reaction.

Hi folks, What is the best way to determine if a function is quasiconcave/quasiconvex without having to do the bordered hessian? If you have Simon & Blume, I am referring to question 21.23 (and 21.18). Example: (e^x +5y^4 + abs(z))^1/2 Thanks.. ECONMIST!

Thank you all for your inputs. Of course, I wasn't referring to grades that are so low that you'd lose your funding. I am only talking about grades that you'd normally freak out about (especially in a course that has anything to do with economics). That said, given the above assumption, what I have learnt from this discussion is that I should keep my eyes on the forest (i.e. the prelims)!!!

Hi all, Obviously, this question is to those who are current Ph.D. students or who know a little something about it. The question is: What is the role of your grades in your first year graduate courses? How does it affect your success in the program (i.e. in terms of how faculty views you, your knowledge of the subject matter, and eventually in the job market)? And what are faculty's expectations anyways? ~EconMist!

For the demand functions idefined by D(P) = A * e ^ (-yp) and D(P) = A * P ^ (-y) where A, P, Y > 0, find the elasticities of these functions. Aren't the first derivatives the elasticities? I saw a differnt approach, so I just thought I would ask!

Well, if a program increases the student's value (market value, that is), then the student should get a good placement. Ultimately, a good program is one that has good placements. Of course, one could get all philosophical and ask how you should measure value, but at the end of the day most people really care about where a Ph.D. from X University can take them in life.

That is correct!

The other thread about visa issues made me think of a couple questions, so I couldn't help but ask: Once you start your Ph.D. studies, if you decide to go back home and visit during some school break, is there any chance that you might be denied visa when you try to get a visa to return to school? Does your chance increase if you did your undergrad in the U.S. and you haven't visited home since you came here? [Let's assume you're receiving funds from the school and that you have some of your family back home.] ~EconMist

I am just wondering: is there a significant difference in the content and difficulty of the curriculum between a top 20, 20 - 50, and 50 - 100 economics departments. I am sure that there is a difference as far as pressure to do research (and opportunities to do more quality research), but what else really separates these departments as far as the kind of education one receives. Thanks. ~EconMist

I totally agree with you as I am a macro person myself and tend to be interested in more abstract stuff. But again, my main curiousity was if the fact you mentioned affects the productivity of economists in these two broadly classified areas.

When I look at the research that academic economists do, I notice that the more "interesting" researches (to the average individual) tend to be in applied microeconomics. Do microeconomists have an advantage over macro people in that they can apply their tools in a wide range of topics and hence making them more prolific researchers? Is it singnificantly easier in micro to do less "serious" work than it is in macro? What do you guys think? ~EconMist

Just a general question (sorry if it sounds stupid): if you receive via email an acceptance letter (acceptance with funding) and you decide to accept. How do you accept? Do you reply to the email, call the writer of the letter? If so, do you write a formal letter, or just a quickie saying that you have accepted their offer? Thank you. ~EconMist

I AGREE with Apropos!!!!

The reason that the placement of a 60+ institution is geographically close to the institution, I don't think, has a lot to do with the ranking. Instead, most people choose to go to a low ranked university for geographic reasons (i.e. they want to be in that area, which does not change when they graduate). That's how I see things.

Just out of curiousity, if one is not bothered by becoming a professor at a Master's/bachelor's degree granting institution (as opposed to Ph.D. granting/research univeristy), how easy or difficut/easy is to achieve that goal coming from NEDT (given the most recent definition of NEDT[#100+])?

Here is a research conducted on this topic: Economics Ph.D. programs lose about 13 percent of their entering class during each of the first two years, thereby limiting eventual program completion rates to less than 75 percent. Because some dropouts transfer to other economics Ph.D. programs during the first two years, discipline-wide attrition is less than the sum of individual program attrition. Attrition is higher at institutions ranked 16–48 by the NRC than at either top-15 programs or programs ranked 49 or lower. Students with higher verbal and higher quantitative GRE scores are less likely to drop out during the first two years. Those holding a research assistantship and those with access to shared office space during their first year also experienced significantly lower attrition, probably reflecting greater integration into the life of a professional economist. And here is the source: http://www.aeaweb.org/joe/articles/2006/attrition.pdf If this helps! ~EconMist

The unemployment rate for Ph.D. economists is extremely low. Like someone else here said, it may not be the most efficient way to reach your destination. However, you won't have to worry about unemployment!!!

How many fields of specialization is "too many"? "Too many" in the sense that it is not do-able?

Everyone is best at their own style macro, which style macro are you interested in? It would not make sense to study Princeton style macro while what you're really interested in is Minnesota style macro - now would it?

Let me tell you something about software engineers: most of them chose that field for the money. Now, that's not what I call smart!

Does anyone here plan on specializing in fields that other people might think would be an odd combination. Here is what I'm planning as far as specialization fields: Primary: International economics, macro and monetary economics Secondary: Industrial organization, applied econometrics I don't know how odd a combination my primary and secondary fields would be, but does anyone have a weirder combination?

Kknd82, just out of curiousity, why do you want to go to UMN specifically? Just go to the highest ranked school that accepts and funds you and just excell there! When your profile doesn't seem good enough for Random University, it could be a sign that if you get into that school, there is a huge chance that you could be a mediocre student there. Of course, this is not necessarily true, but when it's your gpa that's hurting you, then you should think twice.

I generally tend to believe that staying away from U.S. master's programs could help you. Regardless, wherever you are, just improve your profile. Otherwise, studying in the U.S. is not going to help your profile by itself and make you more attractive to the adcoms. Wherever you are, just be as good as you can be!!! Everything else is just noise!

Let me just say that I have great respect for the guy/gal who wrote this (eventhough I don't know them). I think most people don't have the slightest idea of what it is to be smart. I had the highest GPA in my class and I don't think I was the smartest kid around (even though some thought and said so). I got that gpa due to my stamina and ability to committ myself to a cause. The same goes to the Ph.D. - - it is a test of stamina and ability to focus and committ onself to a cause. In any case, like everything else on the planet, being smart beyong a certain point yeilds diminishing marginal returns as far as the attainment of happiness. I dont' believe that being smart, in and of itself, enhances your level of happiness, certeris paribus.