Live data from Hacker News

Incentives in economics are wrong, but how?

wyclif.substack.com

11–20 of 163 posts

Re: Incentives in economics are wrong, but how?

#11

> We should stop trying to pay for good work, and instead, try to hire people who like doing good work and damn the pay. This is in line with the traditional folk wisdom of Cambridge: “hire good people and let them get on with it”. > Lastly, to make the economists less greedy, they should be paid less. Ha, I needed a good chuckle in the morning. I'll be damned if I accept a job where they except high-quality work for…

[flagged]

Re: Incentives in economics are wrong, but how?

#12

> We should stop trying to pay for good work, and instead, try to hire people who like doing good work and damn the pay. This is in line with the traditional folk wisdom of Cambridge: “hire good people and let them get on with it”. > Lastly, to make the economists less greedy, they should be paid less. Ha, I needed a good chuckle in the morning. I'll be damned if I accept a job where they except high-quality work for…

Yeah this reads like some nonsense wankery, and subscribed to nonsense ideas like “Great Men of History”, eg in the part about preferring the output of sexual harassers over the output of many more less problematic researchers.

There’s a reason the saying is “Science progresses one death at a time”, and not “Science progresses by being sexual-harassment apologists”

Re: Incentives in economics are wrong, but how?

#13

> We should stop trying to pay for good work, and instead, try to hire people who like doing good work and damn the pay. This is in line with the traditional folk wisdom of Cambridge: “hire good people and let them get on with it”. > Lastly, to make the economists less greedy, they should be paid less. Ha, I needed a good chuckle in the morning. I'll be damned if I accept a job where they except high-quality work for…

The moment any economic argument is made that relies on human altruism is the moment it should be rejected. Some people may act altruistic some of the time, but in aggregate people refuse to be scammed to help the “greater good”.

Re: Incentives in economics are wrong, but how?

#14
Maybe the incentives for universities are all wrong. In the early 1900's only 4% of the US went to university. There ended up being a big push to get more people into college with the assumption that it would benefit society. Eventually we ended up with a notion that everyone should go to college and this has been buttressed with government support but what if this idea is wrong? What if the incentives created lots of university departments that were superfluous, producing nothing that was actually benefitting society. This may show up as lots of superfluous/unreproducible papers and journals many not even based on the scientific method. Maybe the incentives focused universities on creating more "education" so they could rake in the cash made readily available through government subsidies targeting those who could not complete STEM degrees. Have we reached a state of elite-overproduction?

Re: Incentives in economics are wrong, but how?

#15

Maybe the incentives for universities are all wrong. In the early 1900's only 4% of the US went to university. There ended up being a big push to get more people into college with the assumption that it would benefit society. Eventually we ended up with a notion that everyone should go to college and this has been buttressed with government support but what if this idea is wrong? What if the incentives created lots o…

This is basically my feeling as well. I would prefer that we (at least in the U.S.) focus on making high school much much better, to the point that fewer people have any need to go to college/university. And then, if we still need to, figure out what to do about University.

(Saying this as someone who never finished college/university, largely because I was trying to pay for it myself and couldn't make it work.)

Re: Incentives in economics are wrong, but how?

#16

Maybe the incentives for universities are all wrong. In the early 1900's only 4% of the US went to university. There ended up being a big push to get more people into college with the assumption that it would benefit society. Eventually we ended up with a notion that everyone should go to college and this has been buttressed with government support but what if this idea is wrong? What if the incentives created lots o…

Agree with your larger point but:

> This may show up as lots of superfluous/unreproducible papers and journals many not even based on the scientific method.

seems very STEM-centric. It sounds like you're saying academia outside of the realm of science is useless which I completely disagree with.

Re: Incentives in economics are wrong, but how?

#17

> We should stop trying to pay for good work, and instead, try to hire people who like doing good work and damn the pay. This is in line with the traditional folk wisdom of Cambridge: “hire good people and let them get on with it”. > Lastly, to make the economists less greedy, they should be paid less. Ha, I needed a good chuckle in the morning. I'll be damned if I accept a job where they except high-quality work for…

There are an unfortunate amount of people out there who think everyone else should do their jobs out of love of the work and not worry about pay. I've found they rarely hold themselves to this standard, though, and try to find excuses for why it shouldn't apply to them. You hear people who aren't teachers say this about teachers quite often, especially when they're complaining about the yearly education budget.

Re: Incentives in economics are wrong, but how?

#18

Maybe the incentives for universities are all wrong. In the early 1900's only 4% of the US went to university. There ended up being a big push to get more people into college with the assumption that it would benefit society. Eventually we ended up with a notion that everyone should go to college and this has been buttressed with government support but what if this idea is wrong? What if the incentives created lots o…

This is basically my feeling as well. I would prefer that we (at least in the U.S.) focus on making high school much much better, to the point that fewer people have any need to go to college/university. And then, if we still need to, figure out what to do about University. (Saying this as someone who never finished college/university, largely because I was trying to pay for it myself and couldn't make it work.)

Elementary and middle school is far more important than high school. The earlier you go, the more important it is.

Re: Incentives in economics are wrong, but how?

#19

Maybe the incentives for universities are all wrong. In the early 1900's only 4% of the US went to university. There ended up being a big push to get more people into college with the assumption that it would benefit society. Eventually we ended up with a notion that everyone should go to college and this has been buttressed with government support but what if this idea is wrong? What if the incentives created lots o…

This is basically my feeling as well. I would prefer that we (at least in the U.S.) focus on making high school much much better, to the point that fewer people have any need to go to college/university. And then, if we still need to, figure out what to do about University. (Saying this as someone who never finished college/university, largely because I was trying to pay for it myself and couldn't make it work.)

I read an interview[1] with the general secretary of German trade and he lamented that in Germany for many, many years the consensus was that more and more people had to study. Thias was also because the OECD said so, not just German politicans. He says we don't need so many people who go to university, and I wholeheartedly agree. And this is coming from Germany where the education system is a lot more forgiving than in the US/UK etc. (in that you don't need to study STEM to earn good money, and studies are cheap) But I think in the coming years there will be a lot of rethinking about these things.

[1]https://www.spiegel.de/start/ausbildung-im-handwerk-in-den-k...

Re: Incentives in economics are wrong, but how?

#20

Maybe the incentives for universities are all wrong. In the early 1900's only 4% of the US went to university. There ended up being a big push to get more people into college with the assumption that it would benefit society. Eventually we ended up with a notion that everyone should go to college and this has been buttressed with government support but what if this idea is wrong? What if the incentives created lots o…

Agree with your larger point but: > This may show up as lots of superfluous/unreproducible papers and journals many not even based on the scientific method. seems very STEM-centric. It sounds like you're saying academia outside of the realm of science is useless which I completely disagree with.

I'm suggesting that we may be overinvesting in some parts of academia outside the realm of science and that publishing in a journal may not be the best way to measure how to tune those investments. Sokal's work in 1996 was interesting and "Sokal Squared" seems relevant to the topic. A journal's ability to filter out parody seems like a good test for evaluating the overall quality of investments in a field.
Post reply on HN