I'm not going to be cool about this. This is a huge deal for me. I still can't believe it's real. I've somehow rolled this Trojan horse of a paper past the gates of the Top 5. Under its nerdy exterior hides answers to some of the most fundamental question of monetary econ. 1/.

I'm planning a small US seminar tour in mid-November. My work covers my travel expenses, so I'm easy on your seminar budget. Invite me if you're interested in hearing about rationing in sticky price models!.

After all this, the actual answer was pretty reasonable:

The descent into insanity was complete:

Until @grok gave up with sentences altogether:

Longer and longer:

Gradually the number of "up" and "out" in each "sentence" increased:

Again, this went on for a long time, until it got to "kicking out data" after which it became obsessed with the word "out", and shortly after, also with the word "up".

This went on for a long time, until it decided to tell me about Chart.js:

But a bit later on it started printing the biggest number it could imagine:

Grok's chain of thought went completely crazy following a math question. Read on to watch @grok's entertaining descent into insanity. It started off reasonably enough:

RT @robin_j_brooks: @joehas The moral superiority of the EU over the US is painful to watch. Russia is able to keep fighting in Ukraine bec….

This is less easy than you might think. Like most people in Germany, I rent, which means I cannot make the holes in the wall necessary to install proper AC. And, since our windows open inwards (rather than sliding up and down as in the US), nor can I install window AC units.

(And of course this kills the Euler equation, and with it much of the effects of household heterogeneity, but this is a good thing for simplicity, transparency, robustness, etc.).

(Of course this is the discretionary optimum in the basic NK model, but it's reasonable more generally. Implementation of such targeting conditions with interest rates rules is a solved problem.).

Most papers using a basic Taylor rule would be better off just specifying a CB targeting condition of the form πₜ = - α yₜ. Low α (≥0) captures CB inflation aversion much more directly than high φ in a Taylor rule, and is far more transparent.

For a country like Germany that already has joint taxation of couples, getting public support for the following seems possible:. 1) Kids are treated like adults in the tax system, in particular they have the full tax free allowance. 2) Any group of people residing at the same.

The thread below is extremely clear on the reasons for AI growth scepticism, but the original @EpochAIResearch paper is better than you might have expected. AI is meaningfully different to previous general purpose technologies, as it has the potential to increase research output.

Typo. Oops.