Re: Card/Krueger Revisited

[Chris Auld]

Wasn't it John Kennan who wrote a piece which summarized the original
Card and Krueger results as: the placebo had a big positive effect,
the treatement had no effect, and the sample size is n=2?


Chris Auld  (403)220-4098
Economics, University of Calgary
Calgary, Alberta, Canadahttp://jerry.ss.ucalgary.ca/>

Re: The M.B.A. - why bother?

[michael gilson de lemos]

In my experience, outside of specialized consultants, many consulting firms
hire preferentially philosophy/history  majors with knowledge of  languages
and supervisory experience. Sales and community experience is helpful. MBAs
are for scutwork, as they say, and you're supposed to pick up engineering
background unless you are a specialist.

Persons with knowledge of opera who enjoy country music are considered way
ahead of the pack as business and economic analysts, whatever the
background. Most other requirements are there to satisfy government
mandates, dazzle customers or mislead those who do not have the background
and are trying to get hired. There are even standards based on hobbies an
interests that are used for hiring, as these tend to be quite revealing when
all other factors are constant.

Alexander Proudfoot, for many years the top implementation consulting firm,
hired top persons exclusively based on their ability to apply the philosophy
of Gracian, Sun-Tzu, various Samurai thinkers  and Lao-tse to business
situations in interesting ways,  Aristotle's Physics was required reading
for top persons. Top marks to anyone on the list who figures out  why all
this must be so.

The NYT is 70 years behind the curve and why are academics assuming they
understand that it has any understanding of how consultants act?

For many years a major firm used a device called a consensor on those with
academic training or government backgrounds. This device  was like the
electronic  voting devices on TV that averaged responses. They were asked a
set of questions on how to solve a problem. Those that did not follow the
pack were hired, especially if they knew opera.

Many consulting firms, however, exist that do not follow such standards as
they are in the business of justifying decisions already taken. For them
MBA's and other degrees are a signaling device and are so called quite
openly, also "union cards."

Best Regards,
MG
Sent: Saturday, September 30, 2000 10:15 PM
Subject: The M.B.A. - why bother?


>
> Business schools have been criticized for being pure credentialing
> agencies. The New York Time ran an article today about how consulting
> firms are hiring non-MBA's. usually people with graduate degrees
> in any field. In house studies show that MBA do just as well
> as non-MBAs.
>
> The article is:
>
> http://www.nytimes.com/2000/10/01/business/01MBAS.html
>
> Question 1: What took firms so long to realize this? Did they just
> depend on the MBA as an easy signal (smart, business oriented) until
> the stream of MBA's started to get diverted to the internet start ups?
>
> Question 2: In a competitive market for labor, what value does the
> MBA degree have? The NYT article reports that non-MBA pick up what they
> need in a few weeks. Is there any value added?
>
> -fabio
>

RE: Card/Krueger Revisited

[Seth Giertz]

Title: 



I believe the Rybczynski theorem (popular among 
international economists) suggests that an increase in one factor (e.g., 
low-skilled labor) will result in an increase the production of the good which 
uses that factor intensively while the production of the good intensive in the 
constant factor will decrease.  If the country (or area) of interest 
is small relative to the overall economy, factor prices remain 
unchanged.Seth Giertz-Original Message-From: Bryan 
Caplan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Sunday, October 
01, 2000 12:03 AMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Gordon DahlSubject: Card/Krueger 
RevisitedAlmost everyone has heard of the Card/Krueger minimum wage 
paper.  Noapparent effect, suggesting a perfectly inelastic (vertical) 
labordemand curve.But they had another equally perplexing paper on 
the Mariel boat lift.Large influx of unskilled Cuban labor into southern 
Florida, but noperceptible downward effect on wages.  (This summary is 
based onhearsay, so please correct me if I misstate anything).  In 
other words,this paper suggests a perfectly elastic (horizontal) labor 
demand curve.Note further that both of these papers focus on the market 
forlow-skilled labor, albeit in different states.  So as puzzling as 
bothpapers are separately, they are even more puzzling taken together: 
howcan labor demand be at once perfectly inelastic and perfectly 
elastic?Anyone able to resolve this puzzle?  And has anyone else 
pointed 
thisout?--  
Prof. Bryan 
Caplan   
[EMAIL PROTECTED]  
http://www.gmu.edu/departments/economics/bcaplan  "[W]hen we attempt to prove by direct argument, what is 
really   self-evident, the reasoning will always be inconclusive; 
for it   will either take for granted the thing to be proved, or 
something   not more evident; and so, instead of giving strength 
to the   conclusion, will rather tempt those to doubt of it, who 
never   did so before." -- Thomas 
Reid, _Essays on the Active Powers of the Human 
Mind_

Re: Card/Krueger Revisited

[DismalScientist]

In response to the Card/Krueger study that came out of Princeton:

I was under the impression that the work that Card and Krueger completed after 
narrowly studying employment patterns in fast-food restaurants in California, Texas, 
New Jersey had been largely dismissed, if not discredited.  For a while their study 
had been mentioned by the Clinton Administration in policy forums, particularly by 
Robert Reich, who had a long professional relationship with both researchers.  After 
the dust cleared from the debate, I don't think Card/Krueger is mentioned seriously 
anymore - even by its one-time paraphrasers.  Interestingly, a friend in an 
intro-level graduate course in Behavioral Statistics saw a reference to the study in a 
textbook chapter on data fishiness.  I haven't seen that reference but pass it along 
only as hearsay.

I can't imagine what Card and Krueger found in south Florida employment patterns.  
However, I'm sure it's a humorous read.

J. Morrison
New York, NY

Re: The M.B.A. - why bother?

[Robin Hanson]

Fabio points us to:
>http://www.nytimes.com/2000/10/01/business/01MBAS.html

Quotes from article:
>Perhaps most striking are the results: the lawyers and doctors and
>philosophers perform no worse than their business school counterparts,
>according to internal studies done by the firms. If anything, they are
>promoted faster, on average.
>All of this raises an interesting and disquieting question: What is the point
>of an M.B.A., anyway?  ... Booz Allen & Hamilton, after years
>of ad hoc hiring of non- M.B.A.'s, started formally recruiting Ph.D.'s on
>campus last year and expects that one-third of its new consultants this
>year will not have M.B.A.'s.

They're hiring PhDs as substitutes for MBAs.  But if it is easier to get
an MBA than a PhD, it still makes sense to get an MBA.  And it also makes
sense for people who have found less other uses for their PhD than they
had hoped to turn it into an MBA-substitute.

>... The harshest critics say the two years
>spent earning an M.B.A. are little more than an extended job search and
>a chance to build of network of contacts.

But this by itself can be more than worth the price of admission.



Robin Hanson  [EMAIL PROTECTED]  http://hanson.gmu.edu
Asst. Prof. Economics, George Mason University
MSN 1D3, Carow Hall, Fairfax VA 22030-
703-993-2326  FAX: 703-993-2323

Re: Whither Wittmanian Public Choice?

[Fred Foldvary]

> Why does Donald Wittman's (cfr "The mith of democratic failure") arguments 
> are ipso facto ruled out as "naive panglossian view of the markets" by some 
> scholars?
> Who else is doing political economy work in Wittmanian lines?  Who has 
> elaborated the best rebuttal to Wittman?
> Etch

Charles Rowley and Michelle Vachris reubutted Wittman in their chapter on
"The Virginia school of political economy" in Beyond Neoclassical
Economics, ed. Fred Foldvary  (Edward Elgar Publishing, 1996). 

Card/Krueger Revisited

[Bryan Caplan]

Almost everyone has heard of the Card/Krueger minimum wage paper.  No
apparent effect, suggesting a perfectly inelastic (vertical) labor
demand curve.

But they had another equally perplexing paper on the Mariel boat lift. 
Large influx of unskilled Cuban labor into southern Florida, but no
perceptible downward effect on wages.  (This summary is based on
hearsay, so please correct me if I misstate anything).  In other words,
this paper suggests a perfectly elastic (horizontal) labor demand curve.

Note further that both of these papers focus on the market for
low-skilled labor, albeit in different states.  So as puzzling as both
papers are separately, they are even more puzzling taken together: how
can labor demand be at once perfectly inelastic and perfectly elastic?

Anyone able to resolve this puzzle?  And has anyone else pointed this
out?
-- 
  Prof. Bryan Caplan   [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
 
  http://www.gmu.edu/departments/economics/bcaplan 
 
  "[W]hen we attempt to prove by direct argument, what is really
   self-evident, the reasoning will always be inconclusive; for it
   will either take for granted the thing to be proved, or something
   not more evident; and so, instead of giving strength to the
   conclusion, will rather tempt those to doubt of it, who never
   did so before."  
-- Thomas Reid, _Essays on the Active Powers of the Human Mind_

Re: RU-486

[Gizmoleon]

To think of permitting death as a "forgone opportunity cost" does not seem to 
be a subject that should be discussed.  Personally, I agree with the critics 
who cite that this drug will lead to increased abortions due to its ease of 
access and other factors.  This will certainly be a welcome substitute for 
surgical abortions, yet I agree with Lynn Gray who stated that the "forgone 
opportunity costs" of the loss in children will always be greater than any 
opportunity cost associated with a drug used for indiscriminatory killing.  

Re: Upward Sloping Demand Curves

[Fred Foldvary]

> Very often for water bills, you have to pay more per unit once your
> consumption goes above a certain level.  This might make it seem like
> the price goes up because your quantity demanded goes up(which reverses
> the causality) and would mean an upward sloping demand curve. 
> Cyril Morong

At a lower price the consume would be willing to buy more water, but the
regulated utility is offering the first amount at a subsidy, creating a
large consumer surplus.  The price only goes up because it is controlled
by regulators.  In other cases, it is the opposite: large users get a
volume discount.

Fred Foldvary 

Re: RU-486

[Bryan Caplan]

dmccarthy wrote:
> 
> Bryan, whats the story with this? It's a French abortion drug right? Was the
> delay wholly due to political pressure? I'm unsure of whether its approved
> in Britain but I thought there would've been a huge amount of climical data
> available to the FDA since millions of Europeans have used it.

I think it was a mix of political pressure and the usual FDA
unwillingness to mae due with data on clinical tests from other
countries.  Anyone know more?  Alex?
-- 
Prof. Bryan Caplan   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.gmu.edu/departments/economics/bcaplan

  "We may be dissatisfied with television for two quite different 
   reasons: because our set does not work, or because we dislike 
   the program we are receiving.  Similarly, we may be dissatisfied 
   with ourselves for two quite different reasons: because our body 
   does not work (bodily illness), or because we dislike our 
   conduct (mental illness)."
   --Thomas Szasz, *The Untamed Tongue*

The M.B.A. - why bother?

[fabio guillermo rojas]

Business schools have been criticized for being pure credentialing
agencies. The New York Time ran an article today about how consulting
firms are hiring non-MBA's. usually people with graduate degrees
in any field. In house studies show that MBA do just as well
as non-MBAs. 

The article is:

http://www.nytimes.com/2000/10/01/business/01MBAS.html

Question 1: What took firms so long to realize this? Did they just
depend on the MBA as an easy signal (smart, business oriented) until
the stream of MBA's started to get diverted to the internet start ups?

Question 2: In a competitive market for labor, what value does the
MBA degree have? The NYT article reports that non-MBA pick up what they
need in a few weeks. Is there any value added?

-fabio 

Invitation

[info]

Dear Webmaster,

we learned about your site and would like to invite you
to submit your site at http://www.mapplanet.com for free!

We believe, you could benefit from the MapPlanet features:
* Submit your site at a geographical relevant position.
* Be found by MapPlanet's geographical search engine.
* Find other sites near your geographical position.
* and more ...

Enjoy the new geographic internet experience!
Your MapPlanet team

RE: RU-486

[M.A. Johnson]

McCarthy
Was the delay wholly due to political pressure?
MJ
It takes the MONOPOLY (unconstitutional) FDA ten
years and a company's $300 million on average.


Regard$,
--MJ

Regulation - which is based on force and fear - undermines the
moral base of business dealings. It becomes cheaper to bribe a
building inspector than to meet his standards of construction.
A fly-by-night securities operator can quickly meet all the
S.E.C. requirements, gain the inference of respectability, and
proceed to fleece the public. In an unregulated economy, the
operator would have had to spend a number of years in reputable
dealings before he could earn a position of trust sufficient to
induce a number of investors to place funds with him. Protection
of the consumer by regulation is thus illusory. -- Alan Greenspan