longnameislonge

It seems like the abstract space that economics and social sciences in general operate in is not something that most people grasp too quickly, and once you get to applied economic analysis it really becomes tough to follow. They want people who can do all the number work and come back and give a result and an explanation for that result that is clear and simple.

This. I know it's not the question the OP asked, but can I ask the advantage of having both? It seems like it wouldn't be worth the opportunity cost, regardless of what you want to do in life.

Personally I feel like the Fed is overextended in its collusion with the legislative and executive branches as is. The Fed's mission should be stable prices, period. Anything else is bound to mess up more than it fixes.

I bet if you had your PhD in econ you could answer this question yourself.

Nope, just econ and math majors here. Haha, ha! But seriously, good information.

Yeah, decades of work culminating in the popular zeitgeist shifting is pretty useless. Economist fight and argue and present cases in technical space, those with the strongest cases and best research become the most recognized in their field, and those economists are imbued with power with which they can influence political figures, and those political figures and movements change history. Friedman influencing Reagan's "opinion" is an incredibly powerful testament to the strength of academia.

Dude it was long and there were some really big words in it.

Just ordered baby Varian and the other book that was linked to in this thread (well, ordered yesterday). Thanks fellows.

I think this is untrue. While economic research does not directly change the political conversation, it changes the conversations that changes those conversations. It's sort of a trickle-down of ideas, and it becomes less pure along the way but it gets there. Milton Friedman to Reagan, I guess was always my conception of this.

Oh that's absolutely impossible. Do you intend to ever have a family? Or sleep for more than two hours at a time? I do think you are seriously downplaying the immense effort it takes to be an economist. Crap, now I find myself feeling more sympathetic to tm_guru's point of view.

I have never been sooooo insulted! *throws drink in face* If someone wants to learn economics that is their business, and if they're good enough (I doubt OP is but hypothetically) to contribute to economic research while being a surgeon, hurt feelings among "the professionals" are sort of petty and silly.

1. I'm sort of surprised to hear part-time econ doctorate programs exist. If you're near one, though, I'm sure they're offered as a money maker for the college (and you will be paying dearly, my friend), and not as the research-centered free-slave-labor programs at major universities. So, I'm sure you and your friend Mr. Franklin will be quite welcome. 2. You'll be fine on math. 3. There are so many good professors (in my opinion, often more than the big names) at these smaller colleges for people who just want to learn. The idea that MIT or Harvard must have great lecturers (although they do have a few) because they're top-ten doesn't really make sense - they're top ten for research, and research professors don't teach much and usually don't make exceptional teachers. I'm sure you'll find some good souls at Suffolk, and I'm sure you can audit some classes first. And actually, just looked up Suffolk on UNWR. Ranked for the region, so not bad at all. 4. Can't really help you there, as I didn't know part time PhD's existed. However, the difference between a more academically-centered MA and a PhD is often just the dissertation, and I'm not sure if you're really interested in writing one of those. Maybe you are though. 5. I can only answer from my perspective, which is of course it's worth it.

Not that I can think of, at least in modern times (I think the concept of a "professional" economist didn't exist three hundred years ago). You certainly can be a superb scholar, and can even reach some notoriety with popular publishing (it's more fun and where the money is), but the JPE isn't going to open letters whose return addresses don't have "Ph.D." after the name.

You won't with a masters, and the opportunity cost for that alone (and the years of putting it off as you go through residency, work yourself out from under a pile of debt, etc) would make it incredibly insane. Keep to your autodidactic studies, and maybe take a few upper level maths at whatever local college you're near to help along with the harder stuff. A masters seems like an immense waste of time.

Depends on how fast you type.