There was a piece on Huffpost today (the link for that is on my Facebook page) where the guy was parsing a recent Greenspan talk and then accusing him of being a bunch of things. As with these pieces generally, rather than say what was not said, he just rips the guy and implies deceit. If you are doing your homework, then you should understand what he is saying and what he is not saying. Remember Parsing the FED? In order to understand clearly, you need to have the Greenspan perspective. You get that from his testimony to the Senate Banking Committee in Oct 08 where he explains very very clearly that the best of the best (supposedly those working at the FED) in Forecasting (what Greenspan does now privately and essentially what he did publicly at the FED) are wrong 40 percent of the time.
The implication of that is what?
Got the answer?
Watch
Thursday, March 25, 2010
Saturday, March 13, 2010
Are you a scientist? Are you willing to experiment on yourself?
.....So Easterlin as an economist caused some distress in the profession with these results.So what is the puzzle here? The puzzle is related to the affective forecasting that most people believe that circumstances like becoming richer will make them happier. It turns out that people's beliefs about what will make them happier are mostly wrong, and they are wrong in a directional way, and they are wrong very predictably. And there is a story here that I think is interesting. ......
So if you are intrigued i.e. a scientist, you need to go here and read the whole series of talks.
This guy is a scientist (if you are unfamiliar with him, Wikipedia or links in the link are good places to learn more) so what he is doing here is proposing a theory and claiming that there is empirical evidence to support his conclusions. If you are a scientist, you will work with him and through the process of self reflection (free for everyone) analyze his theories and change your mind (or not).
Oh, the contra-positive, you are a sheep. You choose.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)