Sunday, November 11, 2007

Goolsbee Responds and My Reply

EDH,

Thanks for the comments. Actually the Greenstone paper uses the tradesports probabilities of democrats winning the election to show that the confounding explanation you raise is not the source of the big run up in iraqi bond yields. They wouldn't let me discuss that due to space constraints but you should check out the study.

A.G.

[I assume by "They" he means the NYT. -EDH]

Austan,

Thank you for your prompt and courteous reply. I didn't know the Greenstone study was available on the Internet. I've got it now and will review.

You have to admit, the NYT could have found a better place to edit-down your article. As published, it seemed longer than most pieces.

I don't think it was a "leap" for me to look to a "political" explanation for your economic analysis following such a glaring omission, especially given the NYT's editorial stance and the foreign policy position of the candidate you advise.

My initial take on the study is that I still find the data set somewhat stale and abbreviated.

Nevertheless, I'm sorry for any misunderstanding or if my comments impugned your intellectual honesty.

Best regards,

EDH

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home