publicaffairsny Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 Sure, it does fundamentally shape society, but that's still not a plan to solve anything. How do you identify who got rich via their ancestors oppression versus who got there via talent and a little luck? Think Mark Zuckerberg versus the descendant of a slave-owner. Moreover, it doesn't help you figure out who is poor because of oppression or because they are a gambling addict who throws away their family's fortune. It also doesn't prevent the same thing from happening again not due to oppression. What then? What's the point in doing all this redistribution on the grounds of centuries-old wrongs if it'll just be back to the same 2 generations from now. Then, I suppose everyone who got screwed in the first great redistribution would claim they were oppressed by political elites. It's a pointless endeavor. That's all stepping aside from the issue of why someone born today should be punished for their ancestors wrongdoings, which, of course, were likely perfectly legal at the time but feel wrong today in a way they didn't back then. But I'm not arguing for redistribution. I'm not quite sure of the finance of it, but if we provided every family with an income at 3 times poverty, we could save money by eliminating bureaucracy and probably fund it with only a marginal tax increase. Providing it as a negative tax would phase out the subsidy for people who choose to earn. It could also eliminate major cost centers of social security and medicare. There is no call for confiscation of wealth. This system actually encourages the accumulation of wealth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tm_member Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 But I'm not arguing for redistribution. I'm not quite sure of the finance of it, but if we provided every family with an income at 3 times poverty, we could save money by eliminating bureaucracy and probably fund it with only a marginal tax increase. Providing it as a negative tax would phase out the subsidy for people who choose to earn. It could also eliminate major cost centers of social security and medicare. There is no call for confiscation of wealth. This system actually encourages the accumulation of wealth. I'm in favor of a basic minimum income and the abolishment of all government income support programs but the politics of a minimum income scare the crap out of me. However, a negative income tax and a minimum income both involve redistribution, no? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
publicaffairsny Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 I'm in favor of a basic minimum income and the abolishment of all government income support programs but the politics of a minimum income scare the crap out of me. However, a negative income tax and a minimum income both involve redistribution, no? It is a form of redistribution but not as extreme or destructive as what I felt you were interpreting. If everyone who was not working was promised 3 times poverty, we could liquidate the social security and medicare trusts, and simply give the cash payout to retirees. It may be less re distributive than current policy if it reduces the tax burden. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Food4Thought Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 To bring the thread back on point, browsing the CVs of Rice faculty will show that nobody really does the type of public economics publicaffairsny is referring to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
publicaffairsny Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 To bring the thread back on point, browsing the CVs of Rice faculty will show that nobody really does the type of public economics publicaffairsny is referring to. Are you sure? I'm not interested in researching what we are talking about in this thread. This is all normative mumbo jumbo. My research interest is public finance, specifically education finance. Does anyone do that at Rice? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catrina Posted January 9, 2015 Author Share Posted January 9, 2015 That better be true. I'm not interested in researching what we are talking about in this thread. This is all normative mumbo jumbo. My research interest is public finance, specifically education finance. Does anyone do that at Rice? Not exactly, although some of Dr. Wolpin's research may be related to what you have in mind: http://economics.rice.edu/sites/default/files/cv/wolpin_vitae_0714_RICE.pdf However, when discussing the issue of research interests with Dr. Eraslan, she mentioned that the key consideration is not the specific applications of applied microeconomics, but rather in the research methods used, and that distinguishing oneself through having an independent research agenda is important on the job market. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catrina Posted January 9, 2015 Author Share Posted January 9, 2015 By the way, I considered intervening at some point to get this thread back on track, but I was somewhat reluctant to do so due the fact that this forum was and continues to be in desperate need of some fresh discussion topics. It would probably be better if this side discussion could be split into a new thread, however. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
publicaffairsny Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 Not exactly, although some of Dr. Wolpin's research may be related to what you have in mind: http://economics.rice.edu/sites/default/files/cv/wolpin_vitae_0714_RICE.pdf However, when discussing the issue of research interests with Dr. Eraslan, she mentioned that the key consideration is not the specific applications of applied microeconomics, but rather in the research methods used, and that distinguishing oneself through having an independent research agenda is important on the job market. Right on. Any other public non education people? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catrina Posted January 9, 2015 Author Share Posted January 9, 2015 Right on. Any other public non education people? What specific areas of public economics other than education are you interested in? Rice definitely has people doing health policy and energy policy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
publicaffairsny Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 What specific areas of public economics other than education are you interested in? Rice definitely has people doing health policy and energy policy. Yeah, I'm not crazy about health and definitely not energy. I'm into social service programs mainly, welfare, medicaid, unemployment etc. Also non-profits. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ColonelForbin Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 Catrina -- thanks for the very thoughtful post. Sorry it got hijacked, since I think you provided some really nice information here. Admins: I think one thing of value on this forum should be a sticky thread called: PANY's Musings. This way we could keep the board on topic without his habitual thread jacking, while still keeping him occupied. I think it's a win-win. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
publicaffairsny Posted January 10, 2015 Share Posted January 10, 2015 Catrina -- thanks for the very thoughtful post. Sorry it got hijacked, since I think you provided some really nice information here. Admins: I think one thing of value on this forum should be a sticky thread called: PANY's Musings. This way we could keep the board on topic without his habitual thread jacking, while still keeping him occupied. I think it's a win-win. I didn't hi-jack the thread, tm_member did (the moderator). But i was thinking about how catrina says there is value to economics discussions that go past just admissions. However I don't post topics musing about actual economics topics because they aren't admissions related. I know they talk about actual things on job-market rumors but you can't post there really unless you are already in a program at the very least. It seems like there is a deadweight loss resulting from having a bunch of aspiring economists together but not having a mechanism for discussion of economics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tm_member Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 (edited) I accept most of the blame here but it does take two to tango. I just jumped off something PAny said about regulation. 2 years ago, I would have said my bit and then tried to get the thread back on topic. With the forum's decline in traffic since the website changes, I figured what the heck. :-) Edited January 11, 2015 by tm_member Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
publicaffairsny Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 It would be cool to have a sticky thread devoted to economic discussion and debate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catrina Posted January 11, 2015 Author Share Posted January 11, 2015 It would be cool to have a sticky thread devoted to economic discussion and debate. That is an interesting idea. I don't like the idea of having too many off-topic threads, but having one specific thread devoted to economic discussion may increase traffic to this forum, which it desperately needs right now, and may help prevent other discussions from getting derailed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catrina Posted January 11, 2015 Author Share Posted January 11, 2015 BTW, I will be flying back to Texas tomorrow and start classes on Monday, so I won't be around as much. However, I will still make a point of checking this thread for questions, especially prior to the application deadline. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ColonelForbin Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 I think the lack of traffic means this forum has done it's job and done it's job well. It's not obsolete but there can only be so many posts about "OMG I failed RA! What do I do next?" This forum is still valuable as an encyclopedia of admission for economics Ph.D. I mean at one point John List posted here, now we muse about a politician, a Bush nonetheless, riding the fence! We've hit diminishing returns and I think that is OK. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fakeo Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 What about that sub-forum for grad students someone proposed a couple of months ago? Could increase activity a little. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tm_member Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 (edited) What about that sub-forum for grad students someone proposed a couple of months ago? Could increase activity a little. It's been mooted for years to create a sub-forum for members to discuss non-admission or even just post-admission related topics. But there's a few problems with this idea. Basically, there's no lack of places for people to discuss economics and political economy on the internet and that type of sub-forum wouldn't "fit" with the overall sites focus on graduate school. A forum focused only on post-admission topics would be in the spirit of the forum itself. There's lots of questions people could ask, questions about problem sets, how to prep for prelims/comps, how to choose an advisor, what fields to take, what conferences/funding sources to apply to, etc. The problem is that while this forum is a way to connect with people who are going through the same thing as you are in a bunch of places around the globe, once you get admitted and start school, there are people like that all around you. You share an office with them, you take classes with them, you might even share an apartment with a couple of them. Why not ask the people you see everyday their thoughts on your question rather than people in different schools online? At the same time, if someone wants to pitch the idea to Erin in the feedback forum, please do so. I'm happy to moderate it (with my typical laissez-faire approach, for better or worse) but Erin is the one who would have to set it up. It's his site. Edited January 11, 2015 by tm_member Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
publicaffairsny Posted January 11, 2015 Share Posted January 11, 2015 (edited) It's been mooted for years to create a sub-forum for members to discuss non-admission or even just post-admission related topics. But there's a few problems with this idea. Basically, there's no lack of places for people to discuss economics and political economy on the internet and that type of sub-forum wouldn't "fit" with the overall sites focus on graduate school. A forum focused only on post-admission topics would be in the spirit of the forum itself. There's lots of questions people could ask, questions about problem sets, how to prep for prelims/comps, how to choose an advisor, what fields to take, what conferences/funding sources to apply to, etc. The problem is that while this forum is a way to connect with people who are going through the same thing as you are in a bunch of places around the globe, once you get admitted and start school, there are people like that all around you. You share an office with them, you take classes with them, you might even share an apartment with a couple of them. Why not ask the people you see everyday their thoughts on your question rather than people in different schools online? At the same time, if someone wants to pitch the idea to Erin in the feedback forum, please do so. I'm happy to moderate it (with my typical laissez-faire approach, for better or worse) but Erin is the one who would have to set it up. It's his site. One of the considerations is that on the entire Urch website the econ forum, and to a lesser extent the business PhD forum are the only ones that receive any traffic. Any modification would have to occur within thr econ PhD forum to be meaningful. Also, yes there are places to talk economics online but they are for the general audience and the level of discourse is pretty low. See reddit economics. There are also costs for anyone on Urch to enter one of those forums. It takes a process of socializing and acculturation to the forum which takes time and effort. Ultimately it may be less efficient than having our own place on here. This site is a small community of very strong econ applicants. We have a unique dynamic and a very good grasp on each others personalities. That presents an opportunity for a level of discussion and collegiality that I don't think is available anywhere else. Edited January 12, 2015 by publicaffairsny Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Econhead Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 The problem is that while this forum is a way to connect with people who are going through the same thing as you are in a bunch of places around the globe, once you get admitted and start school, there are people like that all around you. You share an office with them, you take classes with them, you might even share an apartment with a couple of them. Why not ask the people you see everyday their thoughts on your question rather than people in different schools online? Personally, I still think that this is of great benefit. Fellow first-years are dredging through just the same as you, and thus for the same reason that you generally don't ask fellow undergrads for suggestions about admission, you wouldn't ask fellow first-years what worked best for them for studying for comps, etc. Because there are some individuals that have finished their degree and are now teaching, it also gives the seldom opportunity for these members to voice their opinion about what they have seen work for their students. There's a lot to gain from communicating 'what works best for you.' These type of discussions often lead to new types of learning (or ways to learn) for many of us. Some of the departments are relatively small, and the number of 'upperclass grad students' is still relatively limited. Even so, I see posts (which effectively catalog information) being more valuable in terms of overall girth than any few personal-conversations that can easily be forgotten. It's for this very reason that the econ-wiki (econ notes) page exists with helpful free econ literature/notes per field/subfield. I would be in favor of such a sub-forum. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
publicaffairsny Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 (edited) Personally, I still think that this is of great benefit. Fellow first-years are dredging through just the same as you, and thus for the same reason that you generally don't ask fellow undergrads for suggestions about admission, you wouldn't ask fellow first-years what worked best for them for studying for comps, etc. Because there are some individuals that have finished their degree and are now teaching, it also gives the seldom opportunity for these members to voice their opinion about what they have seen work for their students. There's a lot to gain from communicating 'what works best for you.' These type of discussions often lead to new types of learning (or ways to learn) for many of us. Some of the departments are relatively small, and the number of 'upperclass grad students' is still relatively limited. Even so, I see posts (which effectively catalog information) being more valuable in terms of overall girth than any few personal-conversations that can easily be forgotten. It's for this very reason that the econ-wiki (econ notes) page exists with helpful free econ literature/notes per field/subfield. I would be in favor of such a sub-forum. Also, the two options (in person with colleagues/ online with strangers) aren't mutually exclusive. This site provides a form of info-tainment. More topics means more fun. Edited January 12, 2015 by publicaffairsny Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YaSvoboden Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 Personally, I still think that this is of great benefit. Fellow first-years are dredging through just the same as you, and thus for the same reason that you generally don't ask fellow undergrads for suggestions about admission, you wouldn't ask fellow first-years what worked best for them for studying for comps, etc. Because there are some individuals that have finished their degree and are now teaching, it also gives the seldom opportunity for these members to voice their opinion about what they have seen work for their students. There's a lot to gain from communicating 'what works best for you.' These type of discussions often lead to new types of learning (or ways to learn) for many of us. Some of the departments are relatively small, and the number of 'upperclass grad students' is still relatively limited. Even so, I see posts (which effectively catalog information) being more valuable in terms of overall girth than any few personal-conversations that can easily be forgotten. It's for this very reason that the econ-wiki (econ notes) page exists with helpful free econ literature/notes per field/subfield. I would be in favor of such a sub-forum. Another reason to come to a forum like this is to break the mold a little. As a PhD student you are stuck in a little world with not too many people that understand what you are actually doing. A lot of the advice that you get from older students is simply what they did, and there isn't going to be a huge sample size with any variation in things tried for you to know what could work better. Reaching out to think of different ways of studying for comps or, more importantly, pursuing research can be extremely valuable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Econhead Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 As those of you who followed my posts last year know, I had a very difficult time making my final decision regarding which program to attend. I ultimately made my decision to attend Rice after speaking to the new chair, Dr. Antonio Merlo from Penn, and hearing from him about all of the changes that he was planning for the program. In addition to Dr. Merlo, Rice hired Dr. Eraslan from Hopkins, and Dr. Ken Wolpin, Dr. Flavio Cunha, and Dr. Xun Tang from Penn, and they are planning on hiring five new faculty members in the near future. I am now sure that I made the correct choice. I have been very impressed with the program so far, and can tell that the program will continue to improve substantially over the next few years. Catrina, I am glad that you were not only able to make peace with your difficult decision last year, but have also grown into your school. These are always positive words to hear. I hate to ask an extremely difficult question, but here goes: Clearly based on the decision, you feel like Rice was not only the best place for you (based on your 'real life' balances with your husband), but also that Rice is a 'bargin' for it's rank. You seemed convinced, both before and in this post, that their placements will be at least as competitive as what they are ranked as a result of these new hires (past, present, and near future). Do you believe that your placement will be better than what your comparable placement would have (hypothetically) been at Ohio State? Why? This could influence other's decisions who end up in a comparable situation this cycle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catrina Posted January 15, 2015 Author Share Posted January 15, 2015 Catrina, I am glad that you were not only able to make peace with your difficult decision last year, but have also grown into your school. These are always positive words to hear. I hate to ask an extremely difficult question, but here goes: Clearly based on the decision, you feel like Rice was not only the best place for you (based on your 'real life' balances with your husband), but also that Rice is a 'bargin' for it's rank. You seemed convinced, both before and in this post, that their placements will be at least as competitive as what they are ranked as a result of these new hires (past, present, and near future). Do you believe that your placement will be better than what your comparable placement would have (hypothetically) been at Ohio State? Why? This could influence other's decisions who end up in a comparable situation this cycle. Good question. While I am obviously unable to predict the future, my completely honest answer is "yes". The reasoning is based on what I said in the above post, that from what I have been told placement depends more on the placement record of the advisor/letter writers than the actual institution granting the degree. While I am obviously just a first-year student and can't claim to know much about placement, I have been told that this is the case due to placement depending largely on both the effectiveness of the advisor as an advisor (providing the right level of assistance with research, helping the student find the best conferences to present at, etc.), and the effort and connections that the advisor uses during the placement process itself. None of these change when an advisor switches institutions. I also think that fit in terms of research interests (defined broadly) matters, and Rice is a great fit for me in terms of that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.