Bill Stewart [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Perhaps the field has changed since I was in college, but back then,
academic econometrics had the reputation of being dominated by Marxists -
the more-Scientific Socialists who understood that if you want a
centrally planned economy, you have to
On Wed, 25 Apr 2001, Phillip H. Zakas wrote:
in other words, it's a branch of statistics that provides no real value.
Not at all, it is a young science. Of what use is a baby? You won't know
until it grows up.
there's no point in providing statistical analysis of the past if you can't
On 25 Apr 2001, Steve Mynott wrote:
Econometrics has completely failed as a predictive science and the
Austrian School has a trenchant critique of the whole idea of economic
measurement.
It's not even had a shot at solving the problems. The tools and the
datasets are only just now coming
At 05:38 PM 04/23/2001 -0500, Jim Choate wrote:
On Tue, 24 Apr 2001, Faustine wrote:
What about econometrics? It seems to belong in the same conceptual
category
as mathematics, statistics, operations research, etc. I dont think
econometricians would generally appreciate being called
On Tue, 24 Apr 2001, Faustine wrote:
What about econometrics? It seems to belong in the same conceptual category
as mathematics, statistics, operations research, etc. I dont think
econometricians would generally appreciate being called softies...
If by 'econometrics' you mean 'take real
: Re: The Well-Read Cypherpunk
On Tue, 24 Apr 2001, Faustine wrote:
What about econometrics? It seems to belong in the same conceptual
category
as mathematics, statistics, operations research, etc. I dont think
econometricians would generally appreciate being called softies
On Sun, 22 Apr 2001, Richard Fiero wrote:
James A. Donald wrote:
. . .
You are implying that libertarian analysis is unscientific and not
academically respectable. But much of it, most famously that by David
Friedman, is as hard core as anyone would wish, and on certain topics, it
is a
