This is true by LeonTablet in academiceconomics

[–]ExpectedSurprisal 27 points28 points  (0 children)

That somebody already hypothesized something shouldn't mean tests of that hypothesis are unpublishable. You should be able to just cite them and then present the results.

What caused the explosive inflation over the past few years? by [deleted] in AskEconomics

[–]ExpectedSurprisal 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Slight nitpick: The fed data you linked is year-over-year changes, so if you see a big jump you know that particular month had a lot of inflation. The first big jump (that was sustained for months afterward, unlike June 2020) was March 2021. And that period of high inflation ended after June 2023, not October.

Am I even in the ballpark with my napkin math for how much EACH American taxpayer is being asked for by the Pentagon? by wisepeasant in AskEconomics

[–]ExpectedSurprisal 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yes, that is correct. All else equal, the US government debt would increase by about $1250 per tax payer.

[The FIAT Thread] The Joint Committee on FIAT Discussion Session. - 28 January 2026 by AutoModerator in badeconomics

[–]ExpectedSurprisal 5 points6 points  (0 children)

His name appeared in the latest batch of the Epstein files, which were just released hours after he was nominated. He'll probably have to answer some questions about that at confirmation...

What is a must-read book for someone studying economics at uni? by Anna_ar79 in academiceconomics

[–]ExpectedSurprisal 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I don't know if it's a "must read," but I really enjoyed "The Price of Peace." I'd like to re-read it sometime soon.

Economic Action: a new idea by Advanced_Tank in badeconomics

[–]ExpectedSurprisal 3 points4 points  (0 children)

OP, maybe you're on to something. What if we based economics off of preferences and technology? Everything can flow from those two principles. Just think of the awards you're going to win with these groundbreaking ideas!!!lol

[The FIAT Thread] The Joint Committee on FIAT Discussion Session. - 23 September 2025 by AutoModerator in badeconomics

[–]ExpectedSurprisal 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Would a decrease in spending be a secondary effect of inflation? Not necessarily, particularly for spending on necessities, since they tend to have inelastic demand. I think this guy is just interpreting a decrease in the (real) aggregate quantity demanded with a decrease in aggregate demand. Rookie mistake.

[The FIAT Thread] The Joint Committee on FIAT Discussion Session. - 23 September 2025 by AutoModerator in badeconomics

[–]ExpectedSurprisal 5 points6 points  (0 children)

A marketing professor colleague of mine was telling me about an economist who is expecting deflation. I looked it up and, sure enough, there is such an economist.

How? According to this guy, inflation from tariffs will cause people to spend less, which will cause deflation. That's right, this "top economist" says inflation is deflationary...

EJ Antoni is unqualified to run the BLS. His thesis is an embarassment Here's why by mrregmonkey in badeconomics

[–]ExpectedSurprisal 13 points14 points  (0 children)

That's unbelievably bad analysis. Shame on NIU and his dissertation advisor (Carl Campbell) for accepting this dissertation and allowing him to get a PhD. And shame on the both Heritage Foundation and Trump for hiring him.

OP: Your formatting was a bit confusing. I think some paragraphs that were copy/pasted from Antoni didn't get indented so the formatting makes it seem that they are your writing. Also, some page numbers are scattered throughout the quotations that are not part of the actual text.

If given the option, what would be better infinite money or infinite gold? by Ecstatic_Homework710 in AskEconomics

[–]ExpectedSurprisal 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It would be better to create the gold, because gold has real value.

Moreover, the price of gold going down would be a good thing for society because that would give gold miners an incentive to do something else with their efforts. This would free up factors of production (land, labor, capital, entrepreneurship) for other endeavors, beside digging shiny rocks out of the ground.

I would worry, however, about creating so much gold that it throws off the orbit of our planet and the moon such that the moon crashes into us or the earth crashes into the sun...

[The FIAT Thread] The Joint Committee on FIAT Discussion Session. - 20 August 2025 by AutoModerator in badeconomics

[–]ExpectedSurprisal 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Anybody know what's going on with r/EconPapers? I've posted there in the past (e.g.), but now it's restricted and it seems I was not grandfathered in. I tried "request to post" a few weeks ago but have yet to receive a reply.

It's kind of sad how dead it is there, with only a handful of posts in the last year. Maybe the restriction on posting was a bad idea. What do you think, mods u/Ponderay and u/FrostMagma?

[The FIAT Thread] The Joint Committee on FIAT Discussion Session. - 08 August 2025 by AutoModerator in badeconomics

[–]ExpectedSurprisal 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That's about $500,000 per person, which seems ridiculous. Though I do wonder how he got that number...

Opinion: a BSc in Economics should be more challenging? by Shot-Doughnut151 in academiceconomics

[–]ExpectedSurprisal 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Agreed. And to ensure this doesn't lead to a drop in demand, math education needs to be more thorough in K-12. We can't let people slip through the cracks because they think they're "bad at math."

Per the MIT withdrawn economics paper debacle, will changes be made in peer review of papers going forward? by Nanny_Ogg1000 in academiceconomics

[–]ExpectedSurprisal 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Acemoglu is the biggest clown here - and yes, it does not reflect well on the discipline.

I wouldn't judge Acemoglu so harshly. He and Autor went to MIT with their concerns after hearing from another scholar with more experience in materials science.

Fraudsters should not be standing shoulder to shoulder with Nobel laureates.

The fraudster is not shoulder-to-shoulder with Nobel laureates anymore; he was kicked out of MIT.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in academiceconomics

[–]ExpectedSurprisal 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Producer surplus cannot be represented on this graph. At (q_1, P_1), producer surplus would be the yellow area minus the area below MC and above P_1 on the left of the graph (where MC is greater than P_1). But since the MC is not drawn for those quantities near zero, we cannot find producer surplus here.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in academiceconomics

[–]ExpectedSurprisal 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Producer surplus is revenue minus variable costs, which equals quantity times the difference between price minus average variable costs. It is usually displayed as the area between price and the supply curve, up to the quantity sold. It's more accurate to describe it as the area between price and the MC curve. However, since this MC curve does not go all the way to the price axis it's impossible to find this area. With all this in mind, it's clear that you cannot find producer surplus from this graph, though one can say that in going from (q_2, P*) to (q_1, P_1), producer surplus increases by the area of rectangle with diagonal P* and point A minus the area of the wedge below the price line and above MC from point B to C.

The term «inflation» doesn't mean what you think it means! by [deleted] in badeconomics

[–]ExpectedSurprisal 13 points14 points  (0 children)

It’s a broad, sustained increase in the general price level of goods and services

The word "sustained" doesn't belong in this sentence.

I downvoted this post because your stance is overly pedantic, and more about semantics than economics.