注册 登录  
 加关注
   显示下一条  |  关闭
温馨提示!由于新浪微博认证机制调整,您的新浪微博帐号绑定已过期,请重新绑定!立即重新绑定新浪微博》  |  关闭

汪丁丁的博客

 
 
 

日志

 
 
关于我

著名学者

网易考拉推荐

今年诺贝尔经济学奖的“临终”预测  

2008-10-12 10:00:14|  分类: 默认分类 |  标签: |举报 |字号 订阅

  下载LOFTER 我的照片书  |

不是我的预测,我也不感兴趣这类预测,不过,这里转贴的博客的作者是我喜欢的一位:

Steven D. Levitt October 10, 2008,  9:45 am

Economics Nobel Predictions

By Steven D. Levitt

I can’t believe there is much demand for it, but the online betting site Pinnacle Sports is taking wagers on this year’s Nobel Prize in economics. Here are the odds they are offering as of my writing this post:

101 Martin Feldstein +751
102 Thomas Sargent +1181
103 Robert Barro +1341
104 Paul Romer +1344
105 Jagdish Bhagwati +1359
106 Paul Krugman +1617
107 N. Gregory Mankiw +4310
108 Any other person -136

My hunch is that the bargain here is “any other person.” There is plenty of randomness in the choices each year, and this list excludes a number of people who I would think would be on the short list, e.g. Gene Fama, Peter Diamond, Oliver Hart, and Richard Posner, just to name a few.

I have a colleague who told me some time back that he had identified a strong leading indicator of economists who think they are on the short list for winning the prize: getting a haircut the week before the Nobel is announced. He claims to have many data points supporting his theory.

The economics Nobel is announced Monday. If I’m not mistaken, this very colleague is sporting a snazzy new haircut.

14 comments so far...

  • 1.
    October 10th,
    2008
    10:34 am

    Paul Krugman? I’ll take “other”, thank you.

    — Posted by Hal

  • 2.
    October 10th,
    2008
    10:39 am

    I’m surprised that the total vig only adds up to 6%.

    — Posted by Edward Lee

  • 3.
    October 10th,
    2008
    11:31 am

    I beleive that is the same Paul Krugman of textbook fame, who makes my job grading a pain. Go Mankiw!

    — Posted by Marty

  • 4.
    October 10th,
    2008
    11:40 am

    The Nobel Memorial Prize in Economics is worthless, as recently evidenced by the utter failure of many of the grand theories that have been spouted out by the laureates. Read the acceptance speech of Friedrich Hayek, one of the very few who actually deserved the award (and also wanted it abolished): http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/economics/laureates/ 1974/hayek-lecture.html

    — Posted by PDB

  • 5.
    October 10th,
    2008
    12:01 pm

    I think if Barro wins it should be shared with Summers and Heston.

    Econometricians are absent from the list, which might be dangerous given that it’s five years since Engle and Granger. I’m not a Bayesian but I suspect that Zellner might be in with a shot.

    — Posted by Hughes

  • 6.
    October 10th,
    2008
    12:43 pm

    #4 PDB

    As a fervent disciple of the information asymmetry work done by Akerlof and Stiglitz (2001 Nobel), I say shame on you, sir!

    ‘Course, no one’s figured out what to do with it yet, thus limiting its practical value… but still!

    — Posted by Hunter

  • 7.
    October 10th,
    2008
    12:54 pm

    what? no Bernanke? uh oh, we must really be in deep kimshe

    — Posted by frankenduf

  • 8.
    October 10th,
    2008
    12:58 pm

    What a useless exercise. The field is too large for a single prize - I hope that the prize is given this year to someone who helped us learn how to measure risk. This person should share the prize with whoever made the observation that there is a downside to taking a gamble.

    — Posted by S. Heaton

  • 9.
    October 10th,
    2008
    1:26 pm

    I think the vote for Mankiw is due to a) his public profile, on the blogs and in the Administration and b) his textbook.

    If it’s possible, short him.

    I would say Paul Romer, for his early work and not his developmental work (obviously). Baghwati and Krugman may win simultaneously on trade theory someday.

    — Posted by Funkhauser

  • 10.
    October 10th,
    2008
    1:41 pm

    On the other hand Heaton, there are few upsides to those who don’t gamble.

    I’m hoping for a swede :-)

    — Posted by Peter

  • 11.
    October 10th,
    2008
    8:54 pm

    Thomson Reuters’s predictions for the 2008 Nobel Prize in Economics appear at: http://scientific.thomsonreuters.com/nobel/nominees/#ec onomics

    — Posted by David Pendlebury

  • 12.
    October 11th,
    2008
    8:27 am

    I can’t comprehend why William Baumol (Princeton, NYU) has not yet won the Nobel. He is one of the greats of the 20th century and still great in the 21st. The scope of his scholarly output is awe inspiring. Perhaps that’s the problem. The Nobel Committee likes technicians, not Renaissance men or women.

    — Posted by Richard England

  • 13.
    October 11th,
    2008
    11:12 am

    Interesting that no one has even thought of naming someone who was faithful to Keynes’s analytical framework — although newspaper editorials around the world are calling for a return of Keynes’s economics in theie editorials , letters to the editor, op-ed pieces, and other articles– e.g., The Guardian, the New York Times, The Washington Post to name a few.

    — Posted by paul davidson

  • 14.
    October 11th,
    2008
    12:31 pm

    I bet on Janos Kornai of Hungary. A true maverick, Kornai developed critical models of centrally-planned economies. He’s a model of the kind of thinking we need more of as our current system morphs into something new.

    — Posted by john kadvany

  评论这张
 
阅读(1460)| 评论(1)
推荐 转载

历史上的今天

评论

<#--最新日志,群博日志--> <#--推荐日志--> <#--引用记录--> <#--博主推荐--> <#--随机阅读--> <#--首页推荐--> <#--历史上的今天--> <#--被推荐日志--> <#--上一篇,下一篇--> <#-- 热度 --> <#-- 网易新闻广告 --> <#--右边模块结构--> <#--评论模块结构--> <#--引用模块结构--> <#--博主发起的投票-->
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

页脚

网易公司版权所有 ©1997-2017