Show #27 BitCoin & Reinhart-Rogoff Austerity research sloppy at best

Posted: 2013/04/21 by Punkonomics (@dearbalak) in Podcasts
Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

Chris Garlock and Jay Gordon joined Jesse & i

Links:

Bitcoin (anonymous, peer-to-peer, electronic payments system)

The Reinhart-Rogoff fiasco in which the seminal paper behind austerity policies (tax cuts for rich + cost-cutting for everybody else) is exposed as shockingly sloppy.

Comments
  1. Garlock says:

    It was great to be back on the show! The Reinhart/Rogoff articles you linked are great, and there’s been a lot of discussion around the econ blog crowd, here are some other good ones:
    http://www.nextnewdeal.net/rortybomb/researchers-finally-replicated-reinhart-rogoff-and-there-are-serious-problems
    http://www.nextnewdeal.net/rortybomb/guest-post-reinhartrogoff-and-growth-time-debt
    http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/how-much-unemployment-was-caused-by-reinhart-and-rogoffs-arithmetic-mistake
    http://jaredbernsteinblog.com/the-reinhartrogoff-mistake-and-economic-epistemology/
    http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2013/04/reinhartrogoff-episode-shows-us-why-data-openness-so-important
    http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/ (I’ll just link his whole site because he’s done numerous posts on it lately and you can ready pretty much all of them from the one page)

    In addition, here is a piece on Bitcoin by John Quiggin that I thought was interesting: http://nationalinterest.org/commentary/the-bitcoin-bubble-bad-hypothesis-8353

    Hope to be back on the show soon!

    Like

  2. Thanks for this list of links!

    I think the Reinhart-Rogoff replication scandal has not only consequences for how we think about debt. It might well change the way we think about replication and data sharing in the social sciences.

    Reproducibility issues in the social sciences had already become more prominent after the twitter hype on #overlyhonestmethods (http://tinyurl.com/cv7za9o), but now I’ve talked to a few journal editors and fellow scholars and it seems things are moving. More and more journals in the social sciences are rethinking their replication policies, and I think the social sciences can learn much from the natural sciences’ guidelines. So far, most journals do not ask authors to give proof that they uploaded their replication data somewhere. I think changing this would be the way forward: http://wp.me/p315fp-fZ.

    Like

    • dearbalak says:

      This is a great proposal notnicolajames. I think there are some methodological particularities to the social sciences that make it a bit harder to employ some of the heuristics of the natural sciences but I cannot stress enough how dysfunctional economics is methodologically (most of my scholarship is on this topic BTW). Even worse, economists specializing in this are excluded from resources and literally pushed to the margins based on the notion that it’s unimportant(!)
      Why? I’m leaning towards the political-economic interests that shape most everything social including science. This is also why I’m skeptical your excellent proposals will be very popular among the leadership of academic economics simply because many (most?) of them are getting handsomely paid to produce this nonsense.
      But we must keep up the struggle & I would be very happy to collaborate with you on this–keep in touch

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.