home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
/ NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #27 / NN_1992_27.iso / spool / talk / politics / misc / 61190 < prev    next >
Encoding:
Internet Message Format  |  1992-11-20  |  1.5 KB
  1. Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:61190 sci.econ:8790
  2. Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,sci.econ
  3. Path: sparky!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!linac!uchinews!ellis!thf2
  4. From: thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu (Ted Frank)
  5. Subject: Re: Look Back in Anger
  6. Message-ID: <1992Nov21.050749.28105@midway.uchicago.edu>
  7. Sender: news@uchinews.uchicago.edu (News System)
  8. Reply-To: thf2@midway.uchicago.edu
  9. Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
  10. References: <1992Nov16.131926.5633@desire.wright.edu> <92322.071734DGS4@psuvm.psu.edu> <1992Nov17.180536.5664@desire.wright.edu>
  11. Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1992 05:07:49 GMT
  12. Lines: 20
  13.  
  14. In article <1992Nov17.180536.5664@desire.wright.edu> demon@desire.wright.edu (Stupendous Man) writes:
  15. >    (1982-1990)
  16. >> Can you say, "selection bias"??
  17. >
  18. >    Sure I can say it, but it's not meaningful.  We're discussing
  19. >supply-side and Reaganomics.  Which were ineffect from 1982-1990.  Thus the
  20. >selection period.  Now if I wanted to talk Keynesian, I would pick a different
  21. >time frame.
  22.  
  23. Leaving aside that Reagan *was* Keynesian, I question your selection of
  24. dates.  Why does the period begin in 1982 instead of 1981?  If you're
  25. arguing that 1981 should be attributed to the residual effect of Carter,
  26. then why isn't 1991 attributed to the residual effect of Reagan-Bush?
  27.  
  28. Or do "bad things" take effect immediately?
  29.  
  30. -- 
  31. ted frank                     | thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu 
  32. standard disclaimers          | void where prohibited
  33. the university of chicago law school, chicago, illinois 60637
  34.