kt253

We used Atack's book in my undergrad american economic history class. It has a nice balance of historical data, discussion, and relevant economic models. Edit for link: http://www.amazon.com/New-Economic-View-American-History/dp/0393963152

I'm going to buck the trend and say Georgetown, based only on your interest in Macro. Funding matters quite a bit, and I don't think JHU has a clear edge over Georgetown for the private/government jobs that you're shooting for. Now if you think your interests may change, I'd change that recommendation to Austin. It's a great school but its relative strengths are in micro fields.

I am just posting to say that I agree with this sentiment completely. Don't miss your friend's wedding for math camp - missing a few classes of math camp is very trivial compared to attending and participating in your friend's wedding.

Whoa deja-vu. This may be of some interest - (possibly) some faculty weighing in on the same issue. helicopter parents « Economics Job Market Rumors

I definitely agree that loans are an option. My post was just meant to caution against excessive optimism when deciding whether or not to get a loan for the first year.

The problem with this comparison is that those schools don't have prelims to get through (I don't think). You just pay, do well enough in your classes, and then graduate. No one can genuinely expect to breeze through prelims (one could simply fail due to having a couple of bad days), so you have to ask yourself if, worst case scenario, a $55k master's (potentially more if you must stay another semester or two before receiving a master's) would be worth it.

I think it means $30k - $40k range.

http://i860.photobucket.com/albums/ab167/keitht253/3698tu.jpg

http://i860.photobucket.com/albums/ab167/keitht253/3697sv.jpg http://i860.photobucket.com/albums/ab167/keitht253/15005024.jpg

Hulk86 got nominated and chosen for a university fellowship, and those decisions happen relatively early. Last year, regular TA offers followed a couple weeks afterward.

When I visited last year, I was told that they had a target class size of around 10-12.

Lily714, I think your list of ag econ programs looks pretty good. I honestly think you could shoot a bit higher on the straight econ PhD side of things. I don't think your undergrad institution or letters will hurt you at all (except maybe for top 15-20 schools). In fact, even if your letter writers are relatively unknown, if they all sing your praises, the admissions committees will take notice and give weight to that. I came from a well-known but not well-reputed state school with relatively unknown letter writers, and was offered admission at MSU, UIUC, Vanderbilt, and more. Don't be afraid to shoot a bit higher - one of my biggest regrets from last year's application cycle is that I applied to too many lower-ranked programs and not enough reach/mid-tier schools. I was worried about precisely the same things you are. One school you may want to look at adding to your list is Michigan State (both econ and ag econ). From what I've seen, the ag econ program here seems pretty strong and there are a few people doing environmental econ as well. Hope this helps and good luck with everything! Edit: You also have a good amount of math, which will bode well for you. You should also discount the hype that having taken RA and having a grade in it before sending applications is crucial. It won't hurt you that much (if at all) at schools ranked 20-30 and below.

He's actually a professor emeritus at GMU and "advisory general director" of the Center for Study of Public Choice. He's hardly active from what I hear, and you can't expect to work with him if you go to GMU.

That list seems pretty good to me. You may also want to consider Vanderbilt for law & econ and history. They're quite strong in these two areas.

As a minor point of correction, it's West Virginia University. The public choice professors there are Russell Sobel, and Roger Congleton (recently hired BB&T Chair who came from GMU) as of this fall. Andrew Young is also there, who may be considered Austrian but also does lots of mainstream work. Overall, though, the department is pretty mainstream. Suffolk seems decent too, but it's still a very new program. Ben Powell is there, not sure of anyone else, and the Beacon Hill Institute is there if you'd be interested in doing some work with them. I'm surprised no one mentioned this already, but Florida State is another great place to check out. They have Randall Holcombe, James Gwartney, Bruce Benson, and more, and plenty of mainstream people as well, along with a strong experimental program. I'd say FSU and WVU would be the best out of the schools known for having a free-market bent yet still providing a well-rounded education. Steevomtnbiker, I realize you didn't really ask for the information regarding whether the departments have a mainstream aspect to them, but I think this aspect is important to take into consideration. There are pros as well as cons that come along with attending a notoriously heterodox program such as GMU. If I'm not mistaken, the schools OneArmedEcon mentioned in his second post are heterodox programs with a left bent (not sure about Utah, Riverside, or Missouri, KC). This may or may not matter to you, but I just figured I'd point it out. Also, I second his recommendation of UC Irvine for public choice.

I think OneArmedEcon makes a great case against the minimum wage, in a few ways I had not thought about before. To add to his analysis, here's what I was thinking of when I posted earlier: To directly address the idea that those getting paid less-than-the-current-minimum wage would be unable to subsist, I would reply with: even if wages at places such as McDonalds, Wal-Mart, etc (the places where one is most likely getting paid minimum wage) dropped, so would the cost of labor inputs. The prices of the goods and services from those places would drop along with it. It seems that the purchasing power of the lowest-paid workers would remain basically unchanged, and the purchasing power of just about everyone above that point would improve. We'd be adding employment, presumably making no one worse off, and making a lot of people better off. I realize that this may not be correct, though. In thinking of rebuttals to what I just said, one could argue that demand would increase with these newly employed workers - enough to offset any decreases in prices of goods. However, this may get tricky when thinking of those on unemployment insurance, welfare, etc, and how the removal of the minimum wage would affect those populations, as well as those not currently receiving any government benefits. Just thinking out loud here, really. I'd love to hear what you all think about these points I've raised.

I would like this point to be explained a little further, if you don't mind. I'm not sure that it's obvious that this would be the outcome. Perhaps I'm missing something in my reasoning, but I've got a basic idea of why this statement might be wrong. I'd like to hear your justification, though, before coming out and presenting a rebuttal.

Vanderbilt did seem pretty strong in macro and monetary when I visited. They're also very strong in law and econ, as well as econ history. Definitely a good option to look into.

I would suggest, and I think others here would as well, that you take one of the advanced courses you mentioned. I'm not sure about advanced micro, but an A in PhD micro would probably make up for the B in intermediate.

I am inclined to agree with chisquared on this. Would you be able to (or have you already) taken a look at the different MacBook models in person? From what I recall, I don't think the 15" is much more cumbersome than the 13" (only 1 pound heavier, same thickness, 1 inch deeper, and 1.5 inches wider). MacBooks are relatively thin compared to other laptops, sturdier, and seem to be just as light if not lighter than other 15" laptops - 5.6 pounds compared to my 5.54 pound Dell - which is mostly plastic :( ... Also, it'd still fit in just about any laptop-carrying backpack, etc.

Agreed, regarding the MacBook Pro comment. Not sure about Linux - haven't used it - but I really like the lenovo computers as well. Edit: was going to say this, but forgot: the 13" display may be a bit small for working with datasets.

To add in another couple of data points: I believe Pete Leeson (coming out of GMU) did a post-doc or something of the sort at Harvard, and was also a visiting professor at Chicago for a year; and a student from FSU got placed into a post-doc at Caltech for this coming year.

I got 3 offers that did not require first year work. The wording is something like this: "You have been awarded a first year fellowship in the amount of $$, and are not expected to perform any duties during this year. For years 2-5, you will serve as a TA/RA and receive $$ per year. This offer includes a tuition waiver and health insurance." The key word there is fellowship - if you are offered first year funding without any work requirement, that funding is called a fellowship. Thereafter, you'd be classified as a TA or RA and yes, an assistantship does entail a stipend. I don't know how common this type of offer really is, but seems like it is the most common. I did get a couple offers (from lower ranked programs) that would have required first year duties. Also, it's very rare to be made a funding offer that doesn't come with a tuition waiver. A couple schools did not offer health insurance, and a few did. Some offers also included a university fee waiver, and others were unable to waive that fee. There's quite a bit of heterogeneity in funding offers, as I'm sure you can tell by looking at this year's results threads. As for what people wrote for their results, I imagine they'd put first year fellowship and TA/RA for years 2-5 (or something along those lines) if that is what they were offered. Thus, I guess I'd assume that, if they only put TA/RA, they must perform TA/RA duties in the first year.

I think the letter from the nobel laureate will be very valuable, especially if he is a reputed letter writer and has great things to say about you. Also, a thought may be to have one of your letter writers emphasize your strength in econometrics (if you indeed are strong in metrics), since it seems to be where linear algebra really matters.

I think the B in linear algebra will hurt. I would probably not worry too much about the field classes. Depending on how mathematical your game theory course is, anything less than an A may hurt there. Others may be better qualified to weigh in on these latter two points, though.