Whilst entire media & political class meltdown over rapper at Glastonbury. Worth reminding ourselves of what the IDF has been up to last 2 years:

This is an incredibly important paper, recently published in China Economic Review. It finds that China’s low-carbon technology exports *significantly* reduce partner countries’ CO₂ emissions. China’s clean energy push is clearly a key driver of global decarbonisation.

Israel is beautiful. #jaffa #israel #visitIsrael

@cacrisalves Have you considered that the critiques you offer are not interesting because your ability to read, write, and do research is bad?

@ProfHall1955 @jbsteinberg @cacrisalves ideological one. Therefore, it makes no sense to criticize it instead of helping to overcome the technical challenge. In the same way that it makes no sense to criticize space engineering for not being able to build interplanetary rockets.

Plenty of papers using Indian data are published in top journals. Examples: - Donaldson (AER 2018): "Railroads of the Raj..." - Asturias et al. (JEEA 2019): "Competition and Welfare Gains..." - Kabir et al. (JME 2025): "Quantifying the Allocative..." Maybe write better papers?

Lunch with Nobel prize winner Peter howitt!

@AngusBylsma @mean_field_zane It’s sad to see people resort to questioning one’s commitment to reading & words such as stupidity. In any case, Let me be clear: the practice of assuming highly unrealistic premises & then relaxing them does not answer the question, why adopt such assumptions in the first place?

1️⃣When economists say there is “voluntary unemployment” it means that, if unemployed workers wanted, they could work for a lower wage (I’m not talking about fairness, this is not a philosophical debate). 2️⃣Economists claim that people act as if they were maximizing utility, not

What have econs done over the last 70 years? -Treated eqm like the stock-pattern key for every problem in the market -Built on shaky assumptions, then relax them -Flooded papers w/ hypotheses & tweaks where their view of human behaviour in actual market situation are not seen

@cacrisalves In EE we don’t relax the standard assumptions. We start literally in a different universe from the orthodoxy, with different assumptions. We let mathematics impose coherence, create a wholly different model world, and then assess how well it resembles reality.

Economists: ‘math imposes coherence with the assumptions’ Assumptions: rational behaviour, maximising behaviour, scarcity, ceteris paribus, eqm, perfect information , perfect competition, transitivity of preferences, fixed technology Economists: ‘ but but we relax them’ Me:

There are already papers that relax those assumptions — like imperfect competition models — and some of them are even taught in undergraduate Economics. But ok, you can keep using a straw man fallacy.

There are already papers that relax those assumptions — like imperfect competition models — and some of them are even taught in undergraduate Economics. But ok, you can keep using a straw man fallacy.

@AlexSchwartsman Por trás de todo heterodoxo há uma grande falta de compreensão da ciência econômica moderna.

@Jackbmeyer the neoclassical/rational expectations methodology is extraordinarily subtle. That's why Lucas, Prescott, Sargent had to fight so hard. I doubt many heterodox can actually explain why rational expectations equilibria are the appropriate beliefs-outcomes fixed point. The burden