MonkeyEconomist

Thanks for the response. I initially misread what he typed about the math courses the applicant would have by admissions. I also do not imagine many harvard/ u chicago ugrads who have taken Calc 3 and linear algebra as freshman are trying to be admitted to programs ranked in the 40-80 range. Looking at admissions profiles listed on some schools Web pages in that range, I don't think it would be highly unlikely for op to have a decent shot at admission in the 40-80 schools. I'm curious what information he uses to make these determinations other than what he has seen/heard from first hand experience at a VHRM as a graduate student. That fact in itself might be quite valuable, but when seeking advice from an anonymous person online it helps to have some source of data for how they're making their determination.

How is asking for a source/data snarky? Also, chateau has said 2 pretty absurd things in this thread that lead me to question his advice. He's said that this candidate wouldn't have Calc 3 or linear algebra on his transcript by admission deadline which isn't true and he claimed that it's common for first semester freshman to be taking Calc 3 and linear algebra which is not true at all. That would be very rare in U.S. universities. Why are you guys bringing in emotion to a forum for econ admissions. It's contradictory of the profession to be hyper defensive/sensitive and emotional. I'm asking him to back up his claims with some kind of factual/empirical evidence. There is no reason to make assumptions on the motive of my posting.

Why are you assuming I'm "snarky accusing you passive-aggressively"? I'm simply asking how you're making the determination that he is unqualified. Also, he will have this semesters grades in time for application deadlines so Calc. 3 and linear algebra grades will be on his transcript. Don't be so quick to get hyper defensive as if I've just assassinated your first born son. No need to make assumptions about the intent of my post as if I have some vendetta against you. I'm just curious what data/resources you're using to draw the conclusion that he is unqualified for a sub 40 program.

Are you on an adcom for a program ranked in the #40-#60 range? How do you know that his chances are slim? What evidence are you using to determine this?

Alright thanks for the replies. I'll go that route then.

But are they self contained? Meaning one doesn't need a prerequisite knowledge of Calc 3 or linear algebra to read and work through?

Thanks man. I'll take this into consideration. Appreciated.

Is Alpha Chiang's book similarly too advanced without prior exposure to linear algebra and multivariate calc?

Hypothetically speaking, if I'm not trying to get into grad school, and just want to learn the math necessary for economics and to be able to have a limited ability to understand the research literature, are there any math for econ books that satisfy my original post?

Are there any math for economics books that are almost entirely self-contained? I have only taken a semester of calculus and have no exposure to multivariate Calc or linear algebra. Do any of the math for econ books not assume a working knowledge of those topics?

Woah wait a second there mate. Make no mistake about it, I was never praising Noah Smith for his academic merits. I barely know who he is. I've read his blog maybe twice, and a back and forth conversation between him and Stephen Williamson on Williamson's blog. I mentioned him in one sentence as an example of the toxicity that occurs on EJMR, and his mature response to the bashing. Now, from this one sentence remark that I made on Noah Smith, you proceeded to go on a multi-post, and multi-paragraph attack of Noah Smith as if you have a personal vendetta against him. Worthy as that may be, it's not at all the point I was making when I brought his name up. I was pointing out that it's praiseworthy that he goes on an anonymous forum and discloses his real identity and discusses with harsh critics who engage in verbal harassment. Now you are continuing this harassment behind the veil of anonymity just as many others in EJMR seem to love to do.

Again, I'll refer to my point that people on that site (and to an extent this site) seem to have intense jealously, elitist attitude, and pessimistic attitude. Leave it to professional economists to forget the zero-sum game fallacy. One person's success doesn't prevent anyone else from succeeding. To anonymously attack someone's real life identity on a forum shows an extreme level of emotional immaturity that I would not expect from an academic.

It's pretty sad to witness some of the threads on there. I saw one thread where a bunch of people were **** talking and bashing Noah Smith. He replied to the thread with his real name and did so in a very intelligent and admirable manner. Gained respect for that guy after seeing that. It seems there are so many people on that site filled with either intense jealousy or elitism. Constantly bad mouthing placements, institutions, or professors.

Why would you make this assumption? I'm just pointing out that I find it surprising that a forum for academics is filled with trolls and harassment. From my experience, urch doesn't have nearly the level of trolls/toxicity as ejmr. Not sure if that's because of moderation or not.

Can anyone explain to me the difference in PhD programs between economics, applied economics, and agricultural & resource economics? What are the differences in research? What are the differences in entrance requirements for PhD programs? Is admission as competitive for all programs? What are the differences in the coursework? Do applied economics and agricultural/resource economics take the same micro, macro, and econometrics courses as standard econ programs? I assume that an econ phd student can get jobs in applied econ or agricultural resource econ departments but not vice versa. Is this true? I've noticed the math admission requirements tend to be less intense for applied and agricultural/resource. Is the math in the program less intense? I am much more interested in doing research that is relevant to the real world and less theoretical. Naturally, I assume that applied econ and ag/resource econ are less theoretical but to what extent? Here is an example of one school that I'm looking at: UC Davis Ag and Resource economics: https://are.ucdavis.edu/en/ The only listed pre-reqs are: intermediate micro, intermediate stats, and calculus. (No linear algebra, no real analysis, no diff eq.) Is it safe to assume that this program is less mathematical than a standard econ phd program? Also, the placements seem to be very good with many placements at public research universities. Thanks for any input on the topic.