JEL.L63

Thanks a lot for your replies guys. It really helped me.

Hi folks. This is a very straight question. How generous is The Graduate School of Arts and Sciences of Harvard University at funding Economics PhD students? Does it exist the posibility of full tutition cover plus extipend? Thnaks in advance.

Wow, I love that answer. I will steal it from you and use it in my own SOP. It sounds very convincing. Thanks man.

Diesel, check your Private Messages Folder, I just sent you a PM.

I do not like the way you say that. But I must recognize there is a great chance you get to be right. I do like the economic way of thinking. But I do not approve the overmathematization of it. And because I do not like it, it doesn't mean I do no get it. What I do not like is the fact that many people forget its limitation and over trust it. Just as a friend say in the previews post you mention. I have been accepted by an spanish university in that ranking. I have the admission letter, Supposely I was going to start this september, but my senior thesis got in the way. I wrote the university and they say there was no problem. The sent me another admission letter but for september 2009. So that I can enroll then. I was admitted because the thesis I am working in, is being part of the current research of the director of the program. When he saw my work in progress he asked me to apply so he could work with me closely. I did, and I got admission. My academic record is as follow: GPA: 75/100 (I do not know how this will fit in your system, but here is not very good. Pssing grade is 60) GRE: Q:800. A: 5.5 V: 773 Clases: they are so differently structured that I will not mentioned but I know Calculus, Real Analysis, Linear Algebra, Abstrac Algebra, Topology. And of course Stat and econometrics. What do you thing?

Amen Brother!!! You really Understand me! this is what I mean. The Enlightened has written!

Okay, okay, you're right! I am being unrealistic about the paper. But let stick with the excellent grades (A+) and strong LOR's, in the MA Program. Can it make it up for the poor undergraduate performance? Ohh and just for the record, the MA I am considering is a two years program. I have already been admitted. And yes, I am working already in a serious project, but it is true that it won't be published on time. So let's drop the paper assumption. Do you elieve I could get admitted in a top 10 program? Lets add to the assumption a 800Q GRE, 5.5 Analitical.

Hi guys, need your advice about an Issue. I am from an underdeveloped country. I am finishing my undergraduate degree (in Econ) in a few months. And I want to apply to a PhD program in the US. But the fact is that I do not have pretty good grades. Nor my undergrad program is rigurously structured. So, following the recommendation of a profesor, I will apply first to a MA program in Europe. It is in a university in the top 40 in this ranking: Rankings at IDEAS: Economics Departments I want to go there to get better grades and better LOR's than the ones I could get a the present time. Also, Perhaps publish a paper or two so I get more curriculum. But I have the doubt. Let us assume I get excellent grades in my MA, (suppose all A+'s). Excellent LOR's and a paper published. Do you thing an Adcom from the top 10 US schools in the same ranking above will ignore my poor grades in undergrad, and admit me? please be honest. Thanks in advance.

Hi guys: Thanks for all your replies. You'll see, The fact is not that I undervalue or subestimate the applications of math to Economic Theory, the fact is that I hate the overestimation of Math over literal (argumentative) economics. People Just do not care for really understanding the philosophical foundations of economics before Marshall. They seems that the only thing that matter is the mathematicall stuff developed afterwards. And what I hate is that, in some programs, the academic structure is setup to reinforce that belief by giving an exagerated focus on mathematical methods and practically relegating non-mathematical approaches. And, as you might agree with me, mathematical methods are not perfect. Especifically, qualitative factors of economic reality are imposible to reflect in a mathematical setting. Even the most elegants of mathematical models relies on constant (Ceteris Paribus) assumptions. And this assumptions are not allways true in real life. What I mean is that Mathematics is not a suitable way to modelize social behavior. It is perfect for Natural and Mechanical behavior where the presence of constant make posible to modelize over them. But there is not such a thing like the gravity constant that we have in phisics, in economics. But, in spite of this true, many programs ignore it, and put al the emphasis in the mathematical aspecto of economics. Like if it were the more (or the only) suitable way of analyzing social reality. Many mainstrem economist critic Sociology or antropology for not using the strong mathematical technics of economics. But at least the other social scientist do no give recomendations on things that really do not hold true in the social reality. And that are based on asumptions which many times, do not hold true in the real life.

When I first envitioned the dream of having a PhD one day, I had really wrong ideas about it. At first, I thought a PhD was a synonimous of erudition in economics. I believed that someone who had a PhD would have run trhough all the economic theory. But I was mistaken. It really amaze me that it exists some people who have a PhD in economics and who have never read the wealth of Nations. Right now, a PhD in Economics looks more like an Applied Math PhD. Which is something that really annoys me. Today, a PhD in economics is not about mastery of economic science but about mastery of statistics and mathematics, in respect to their applications to economic theory. If I were a graduate dean, I wouldn't admit anyone without undergrad training in economics to persuit graduate studies. In my opinion the profession is too much full with frustrated mathematician and physist who, after they realized they wouldn't do anything worth in their field turned to economics to corrupt that beautiful science with their arcane mathematics. I hate that. And I hate people who allows that. PS: I also hate the people who erased my threrd about sex while in graduate school.

Please! Seriously, forget about the IMF/WB. You will only Jeopardize your carrer.

Yes! and he is pretty much accurate in that statement. Eppur si muove. If you want proof, just look at the current state of developing countries after the application of IMF/WB programs. QED.

Hi there: You know, working for the IMF/WB is not a difficult thing at all with a PhD. In fact It is actually something you do because you might not have better options. In addition you should know that those are not prestigious jobs for a PhD. I recommend you to read Stiglitz book; Globalization and its discontents. You will find there accounts of the relative low level technical skill of their human resources. So may advice would be, stay away from it as much as you can, and consider them only if you cannot land at an academic job.

Listen to this. I have known of people with poor GPA and Very (And I really mean it, VERY) strong LOR's get admitted. So Do not worry about your GPA. Get Strong LOR's

Okay, let's imagine you are already in graduate school. You are preparing a second year research paper with a wonderfull new idea. Suddenly you realize that one of your professors, is working in something with a very similar approach but slightly of lower quality, that he is ready to submit to AER. He ask you that if you put off your paper, so that it thoese not drive away attention from his, He will grant you an A in his class, or better, he will help you out in your PhD thesis Defence. What would yo do?