121–130 of 386 posts
The scientific community needs a new safe haven. It would be 1. A country specifically tailor made for scientists and engineers. 2. A country with no first class citizens Something like Switzerland or Dubai for science and engineering, but made from scratch.
https://h1bdata.info/index.php?em=&job=economist&city=&year=...
I know this is controversial but there are so many foreign students in the PhD programs across the country. Some programs actually favor non-US students. Some professors quite explicitly pick their own race despite that being highly illegal. I think higher ed in the US became a major scam.
What does this have to do with anything here? The only common thread is that it's related to PhDs. You just have a bone to pick with our higher education being so desirable that people upend their lives to come and participate in it at great expense? This has been a significant source of soft power for the US, as both a self-reinforcing function ensuring we attract and retain top research talent, and by seeding Ameri…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can I ask you why you think that will happen?
Because the job can be done by AI. Yes, I was unprecise to the point of being wrong.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I hope they're cutting their bloated administration departments before cutting classes and lecturers, but I'm not holding my breath.
> bloated administration departments Can you demonstrate how those administration departments were bloated (in any way) edit: re-added "administration" which I had, for some reason, neglected to add, thinking that it was obvious that that was what I was talking about.
https://students.bowdoin.edu/bowdoin-review/features/death-b...
https://www.forbes.com/sites/paulweinstein/2023/08/28/admini...
Their predecessors should have done a better job managing the economy.
It tends to go the other way around; politicians and academia pick economists that favor the way they'd like economics to be managed. Consider that Ludwig Von Mises, one of the most famous economists never held a tenure track position. And Milton Friedman won a nobel prize, including a study of monetary history that damned the fed for helping bring on the great depression -- later nobel prize to Bernanke for works th…
"Let me end my talk by abusing slightly my status as an official representative of the Federal Reserve. I would like to say to Milton and Anna: Regarding the Great Depression. You're right, we did it. We're very sorry. But thanks to you, we won't do it again." - Bernanke
https://www.federalreserve.gov/boarddocs/speeches/2002/20021...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> That's not a great way to survive. Wait until you see how well setting it all on fire works.
At this point, we might be just fine. The academics won't be, but they were the ones telling everyone to wait on having kids in the first place. Demographic trickle down, biting the hand that feeds academia, is a big part of this story. At my college, birth control was as free as water. Teaching people to postpone marriage, children, for the sake of career, combined with record-high school debt... might be partly why…
"Raise house prices now or I'll send you to the principal's office!"
The gays didn't send house prices to the moon. Mexicans didn't send the jobs to China. No, it's the people with assets who pursued asset-pumping policy to great effect. You're right to be angry, but you're a fool to believe them when they point at universities as the source of the problem.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The theory you are discussing (grad micro 101 equilibrium existence) is not actually crazy if you think about what the mathematical assumptions actually imply. Really the economic assumptions boil down to "small changes in prices lead to small changes in demand" and the math is just rigorously defining small in terms of a general topology.
Small price changes don’t necessarily lead to small results. There’s a reason companies advertise 19.99 not 20 which has been experimentally verified many times. People simply act irrationally, which is a fundamental issue when trying to treat economics as math.
Or think of it like weather and climate: we cannot predict that there will be a thunderstorm on a given day 2 months from now, but we can be fairly confident that in x years, the average global temperature will be y±z°C. Because when you aggregate enough events, statistical effects become dominant.
"But reality is not linear" is not really a gotcha.
The article is focused exclusively on the US. What about the rest of the world? From what I've heard, it's a similar situation?