Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

No one cared about my spreadsheets

econlib.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 413 posts

Re: No one cared about my spreadsheets

#41

Post by torbTurret »

Jemaclus wrote: post #35
lamacase wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have read the book. He says that engineering degrees are basically the one exception. They're like trade schools. Also, e.g. a social science degree is useful if you're going to be a social science professor/academic, but otherwise none of the skills or knowledge are transferable. He also says that having any degree is "worth it" to an individual, monetarily. It's just not worth it to society to require everyone to…

> otherwise none of the skills or knowledge are transferable. While I understand the source of this statement and why people often say this, I'm not entirely sure I agree with this, at least anecdotally. For example, I have a degree in Theater. Which, on the surface, doesn't transfer well to, say, software engineering or law or accounting or teaching or social work. But is that really true? To pick a popular theatre-…

A fifteen year old cashier at Target can make the same value claim, minus the four year time investment and student debt.

Which I think is the author’s point.

Re: No one cared about my spreadsheets

#42

Post by nickff »

Hermitian909 wrote: post #33
civilized wrote: post #6

Just my dumb opinion here, but... there's something extremely implausible on its face about the idea that a sufficiently complex spreadsheet could calculate the difference in value generated from kids going to school versus kids not going to school. If people could be convinced that this was something more than a castle in the sky, maybe it would get more attention. I imagine a bunch of academics put their fingers to…

I think, in part, Caplan has made a fairly classic error in attempting to figure out the optimal strategy for an individual within an existing system, where small numbers of individuals deviating generally doesn't matter, and then using those results to make a policy recommendation about how to change the system en masse in a way that will radically change the system. His spreadsheets don't answer many questions I mi…

>" His spreadsheets don't answer many questions I might have about such systemic changes, for example, would the reduction in college graduates reduce our nation's economic competitiveness? If it did, how would that effect overall quality of life for average Americans? I don't find compelling answers to these questions in his spreadsheets."

His book talked about those things; the spreadsheets are just him 'showing his work'. I think Caplan is trying to highlight that despite the fact that many challenged his conclusions, almost nobody challenged his logic or calculations.

Re: No one cared about my spreadsheets

#43

Post by lucb1e »

torbTurret wrote: post #41
Jemaclus wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> otherwise none of the skills or knowledge are transferable. While I understand the source of this statement and why people often say this, I'm not entirely sure I agree with this, at least anecdotally. For example, I have a degree in Theater. Which, on the surface, doesn't transfer well to, say, software engineering or law or accounting or teaching or social work. But is that really true? To pick a popular theatre-…

A fifteen year old cashier at Target can make the same value claim, minus the four year time investment and student debt. Which I think is the author’s point.

It's a bit more terse than I'd have put it, but I was about to reply along the same lines when I reloaded and saw your comment. While the supermarket employee (for those who don't know Target, it's a USA-specific thing afaik) might not be able to prove some of those things like doing research for a 1940s soldier costume, it's indeed not that hard and doesn't need a university study. Many of GP's points will be much harder to prove than to learn in the first place. And so I would also conclude that years of study might just not be required to start doing the job. Trying to be respectful of an actor's skill, since I truly don't think I could do that job well (or at least not without months or years of trying, and even then idk), it also doesn't strike me as requiring deep study. That's just not required for showing up to work on time (I'm cherry-picking one of the points here, to be fair).

Even for IT there's an argument to be made that it's super easy to learn 80% at home and do maybe some hands-on work in a lab with 500 virtual computers (that you wouldn't easily setup by yourself in a realistic manner), then go into the job. After a magazine got me started on HTML with a 3-page explanation at 12yo, things just started rolling from there and I was basically always ahead of what I was expected to know by year x of the study because I had already done stuff out of personal interest. Don't need an N-year study there, either. Engineering (in the sense of building a bridge that stands 100 years) is probably different though.

Re: No one cared about my spreadsheets

#44

Post by RcouF1uZ4gsC »

To all the people who are criticizing the author doing it in Python, I think spreadsheets are actually superior to this for public policy.

They are easier for the average person to grasp and play around with than is python.

Almost any person who works in an office, can download a spreadsheet, look at the formulas, and then change a single cell and immediately see the results.

Re: No one cared about my spreadsheets

#45

Post by Brian_K_White »

nickff wrote: post #42
Hermitian909 wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think, in part, Caplan has made a fairly classic error in attempting to figure out the optimal strategy for an individual within an existing system, where small numbers of individuals deviating generally doesn't matter, and then using those results to make a policy recommendation about how to change the system en masse in a way that will radically change the system. His spreadsheets don't answer many questions I mi…

> " His spreadsheets don't answer many questions I might have about such systemic changes, for example, would the reduction in college graduates reduce our nation's economic competitiveness? If it did, how would that effect overall quality of life for average Americans? I don't find compelling answers to these questions in his spreadsheets." His book talked about those things; the spreadsheets are just him 'showing h…

Probably because any attempt to even reduce the topic to a spreadsheet is a case of "not even wrong".

When someone says that they proved that say, studying art doesn't matter, with math, you don't bother arguing with their math.

Re: No one cared about my spreadsheets

#46

Post by csours »

robbedpeter wrote: post #29
epgui wrote: post #14

I bet a spreadsheet that thoroughly analyzed the profitability of going out for a run every day would also find a negative ROI.

Then you'd lose that bet. Running, even just a little, results in such clear improvements to general health and lowering of all cause mortality that the spreadsheet creator would have to work really hard to push the effects into the negative, and anything you did to frame running as a negative would be trivially dismissed.

People who can run every day are much healthier than people who can't run every day. People who continue to be able to run every day beyond middle age are exceptionally healthy compared to their peers. It's really hard to disentangle the cause from the effect.

Between that and running injuries, car/bike accidents, skin cancer, etc, it probably wouldn't be tooo hard to show that running is not worth it.

Mind you, I'm NOT MAKING THAT ARGUMENT, I'm just saying it's probably easier to do than you imagine.

Re: No one cared about my spreadsheets

#47

Post by lozenge »

civilized wrote: post #6

Just my dumb opinion here, but... there's something extremely implausible on its face about the idea that a sufficiently complex spreadsheet could calculate the difference in value generated from kids going to school versus kids not going to school. If people could be convinced that this was something more than a castle in the sky, maybe it would get more attention. I imagine a bunch of academics put their fingers to…

If the spreadsheet showed education was a net positive, would Caplan accept this and rewrite the book, or would he go looking for more factors and adjustments that could "correct" its result.

If he can't accept a spreadsheet showing a positive impact of education, why would the world accept a spreadsheet showing a negative impact of education.

Re: No one cared about my spreadsheets

#48

Post by chrispeel »

zwieback wrote: post #7

Has anyone here read the book? I have a hard time imagining that a technical education (e.g. engineering, physics, forestry, chemistry) would be worthless if someone wants to work in that field. Social sciences however... but of course I'm biased there.

My bias is also to think that social science degrees are not as useful as technical degrees. My guess is that we'd be much better off in adding real science (including some humility) to those degrees, rather than abolishing them. I'd prefer incremental improvement over revolution.

BTW, what is the value of a university degree is to someone's self-worth?

Re: No one cared about my spreadsheets

#49

Post by lucb1e »

VictorPath wrote: post #26
lamacase wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have read the book. He says that engineering degrees are basically the one exception. They're like trade schools. Also, e.g. a social science degree is useful if you're going to be a social science professor/academic, but otherwise none of the skills or knowledge are transferable. He also says that having any degree is "worth it" to an individual, monetarily. It's just not worth it to society to require everyone to…

> He also says that having any degree is "worth it" to an individual, monetarily. It's just not worth it to society to require everyone to have education they don't use. Half of Finnish people between 35 and 44 have a degree, whereas only 7% of people in that age range from South Africa do, so South Africa must be much better off than Finland.

Not sure if you are serious or trolling, but if I'm not mistaken the fallacy here is correlation vs. causation: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Correlation_does_... (see specifically section 3)
Post reply on HN