On Moodle, find the articles entitled LevittAbortion.pdf and LevittAbortionCritique.pdf. Read both of them, in that order. How do they relate to what you wrote last week? How do reconcile the chapter in Freakonomics and the two papers. Limit your response to 600 words.
Monthly Archives: April 2012
A lot more Poor Economics in the news these past few weeks.
- Mark Rosenzweig on Poor Economics (“Thinking Small: A Review of Poor Economics: A Radical Rethinking of the Way to Fight Global Poverty by Abhijit Banerjee and Esther Duflo.” Journal of Economic Literature 2012, 50:1, 115–127) (You should be able to get this through the library)
- Berk Ozler on Mark on Poor Economics
I thought this might be of some interest. A profile of one of the economists who authored the book Poor Economics in the Guardian.
Until Poor Economics appeared last year, the debate about aid had been broadly polarised into two positions. On the left was Jeffrey Sachs, arguing that the single biggest factor keeping poor people poor is poverty. If foreign aid can lift them out of the poverty trap long enough to free them from the disease, ignorance and debt that thwart their potential, then pretty soon they will be able to solve their own problems for themselves. On the right, William Easterly argued that the real problem isn’t a poverty trap but aid itself, which creates a dependency culture that keeps the poor poor, and distorts their only real roadmap to prosperity – the free market.
Read Chapter 4 of Freakonomics. Write a short, 1-2 sentence summary of the chapter and a 3-4 sentence of critique of the chapter. What are the strong points? What questions do you have for the authors? Is there anything in the chapter that looks suspicious? Limit your response to 500 words.
This is really for those who are graduating this year, but worth a look for everyone else, as well, to see what kinds of jobs your economics degree can get you in a year or two.
For Friday, I’d like you guys to write a summary of your paper in 200 words or less. Think of this as an “elevator pitch”. If we were to meet in an elevator (0r a job interview), and I asked you about your research, what would you tell me? What is the important question? Why is it important? What is the motivation? What is the important finding?
Don’t think because this is a short post that it requires less work. An exercise in brevity is a great for preparing for future work.
The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities has a very confusing name, but it’s a great organization to work for. They do some very interesting research in health care, international development, and obviously, budgets. They hire a lot of economists and have an internship program. It might be worth looking into.