Bees

UCL I don't want to say more so now let me post ...

Use Aplia. Whichever book is integrated with Aplia will have really cool applications and the problem sets that Aplia creates are pretty entertaining.

SOrry I thought Rust was more recent

The other minor drawback of the fixed effect model is that it requires panel data, it has the incidental parameter problem so I cannot estimates the effects consistently and pretty much cannot deal with fixed effects in non-linear models (with exceptions), the effects are fixed over time (not necessary for a random effects model). Other than that it is superior to the random effects model.

Of course, as in every department not every hire is a hit. Plus I would get all the facts out there and not just a negatively selected few as you did. This is the info I got from their website and some stuff I remember reading in the rumor boards. In the last years they lost Rust (his best work was at Wisconsin) went to Yale, Samuelson (a giant in the profession went to Yale), Manuelli (I guess $ to WUSTL), Staiger (to Stanford), and they hired Noah Williams (super new line of work in Robustness with Hansen and Sargent two giants), Chris Taber (current editor of JOLE), Wright (if the rumors are true, another giant), they tenured Seshadri (publications in QJE, AER, JPE, ReStud, JET) and Lentz (works with Dale Mortensen who is another giant just got a paper in Econometrica). Plus the guys they already had like Buzz Brock (another giant), Steve Durlauf (amazing work on social interactions and editor of the new applied Econometrics Society Quantitative Economics journal), Ken West and Bruce Hansen (top time series guys), John Kennan (just this year he already has a JPE and an ReStud according to his website), Charles Engel (Editor of Journal of International Economics), Jim Walker, Bill Sandholm (a top guy in evolutionary game theory they tell me). I think the juniors are OK too. They have a Heckman student (Navarro), a Queens student (Houde), a Bajari student (Jane Cooley), a bunch of theory guys (can't judge there), etc. (plus whoever they may have hired) So I guess I am saying I don't see it as negatively as you do.

But you are missing the point, you just described a Nash Equilibrium so in equilibrium it must be true! Seriously though, no question Wisconsin. They may have lost people but it has always been to better places (meaning they have a very good eye for hiring people when they are still active before they become famous and someone steals them). Plus every time they loose someone they replace him/her with someone of high calibre (just look at the data).

Shouldn't Penn be -Persico not +Persico

BTW Kline (Yale to Berkeley) is not a senior so I am not sure why to include him in the list . If we are going to include Juniors this is going to be a huge list.

Additional ones: For NU: -Matzkin For Wisconsin: -Manuelli,+Williams,+Taber,+Lentz For Stanford: -Vytlacil,-Rossi-Hansberg For Princeton:+Rossi-Hansberg, -Williams For Chicago: +Kortum,+List,+Shimer,+Uhlig

It is called a random coefficients model. In it you estimate the parameters of the distribution of these individual specific parameters. You cannot efficiently estimate one (or more) parameters per person (be them fixed effects or not). That is called the incidental parameters problem.

I just got news that it is confirmed. Randy Wright is moving to Wisconsin.

Wow, I did not know my life was imaginary or fictitious.

Hendel is not moving. He rejected Princeton, confirmed.

And it only took like 10 million dollars. At this pace (assuming diminishing returns do not hit) It will only take them (takes out calculator........., if the square root of pi ........). Oh screw that, congratulations good for you

Lol :confused:

He is going to Wisconsin (not confirmed)

You mean in terms of drinking capacity of faculty or of students?

How can anyone put Northwestern as top 10 in labor? With what? And Penn as top 10 in econometrics? You have to be kidding.

A) Don't know but I doubt very high. B) Certainly not, in fact your chance of ending up in academia (unconditionally I know there is selection) are probably like 50-50

Good luck, say hello to Paul Schrimpf for me.

Pat Bajari, no question

For 13k? I would go to Chicago no question. You cannot even get a decent small car for 13k!

People in this forum can attest I am a Chicago fan but do not waist your time on this Price Theory camp. Useless.

There is nothing wrong with transfering. I know people who started at a lower ranked department and then transfered WITH THE HELP of the people in the school they started at. Everyone understands the ranking of their department and if you are (and prove to be) above them there is no reason why reasonable people would not help you. It is a life changing decision after all. All bets are off if you are trying to transfer in an almost lateral fashion since then you will piss people off.

:hmm:Just wondering after all the comments that List has made this year about this being the best applicant pool he has seen in decades what should we expect for next year. Something like: "This year the applicant pool is dreadful, you guys are the sorriest bunch of losers I have seen. You cannot compare to last year's pool (LINK TO PREVIOUS YEARS COMMENTS). I am sorry we even have to consider admitting the likes of you. Sincerely John" Just wondering...:D