![]() | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
umm, unfamiliar with the subject. indirect utility function defined differently than written. 'w' or 'I' and what does that mean? also is that a standard del operator? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.56.201.199 ( talk) 20:37, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
this article was just reassessed from High importance to Mid. I would argue that the demand function that is the basis for all welfare analysis is of the highest importance. Pdbailey ( talk) 12:52, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
[unindent]Certainly seems like a mid-level importance thing. This certainly isn't emphasized at the undergrad level in the US, probably in part because undergrad economics is not heavily quantitative. We studied the Hicks substitution effect in my micro theory class, but it only received a few pages. Incidentally, I like the assessment scheme; good work, Frank. Wikipedia is primarily written for lay readers. Economists get their information elsewhere, and we should not categorize articles mainly useful for economists as high-importance. II | ( t - c) 21:31, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
Hmm, maybe this wasn't a great example if none of you have heard of the Hicksian. It also suggests ways that this article might be expanded. i.e. why consumer surplus can not be accurately calculated with the Marshalian demand function. Pdbailey ( talk) 23:30, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
What is the practical use of Hicksian demand function? Why do we compensate income to study the preference of goods? Are we trying to ignore income elasticity and focus only on price elasticity of demand? If so, how relevant is this approach with all firms, organizations, governments, individuals talking daily about budgets? I'm raising these question not as an economist, but as a normal person who suffers from daily routines, just like everyone else. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MinosHT ( talk • contribs) 03:26, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
the intro is not at the level needed for a general encylopeida; almost insulting so it is written for someone who has at least a solid 1 year college course in econ most of the econ articles seem to be like, really badly written shame on the authors for spending hours on hard to read math notatation but not taking 20 minutes to put the intro into english — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:192:4700:1F70:D889:4C2C:9221:FFC7 ( talk) 02:06, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
umm, unfamiliar with the subject. indirect utility function defined differently than written. 'w' or 'I' and what does that mean? also is that a standard del operator? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.56.201.199 ( talk) 20:37, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
this article was just reassessed from High importance to Mid. I would argue that the demand function that is the basis for all welfare analysis is of the highest importance. Pdbailey ( talk) 12:52, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
[unindent]Certainly seems like a mid-level importance thing. This certainly isn't emphasized at the undergrad level in the US, probably in part because undergrad economics is not heavily quantitative. We studied the Hicks substitution effect in my micro theory class, but it only received a few pages. Incidentally, I like the assessment scheme; good work, Frank. Wikipedia is primarily written for lay readers. Economists get their information elsewhere, and we should not categorize articles mainly useful for economists as high-importance. II | ( t - c) 21:31, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
Hmm, maybe this wasn't a great example if none of you have heard of the Hicksian. It also suggests ways that this article might be expanded. i.e. why consumer surplus can not be accurately calculated with the Marshalian demand function. Pdbailey ( talk) 23:30, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
What is the practical use of Hicksian demand function? Why do we compensate income to study the preference of goods? Are we trying to ignore income elasticity and focus only on price elasticity of demand? If so, how relevant is this approach with all firms, organizations, governments, individuals talking daily about budgets? I'm raising these question not as an economist, but as a normal person who suffers from daily routines, just like everyone else. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MinosHT ( talk • contribs) 03:26, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
the intro is not at the level needed for a general encylopeida; almost insulting so it is written for someone who has at least a solid 1 year college course in econ most of the econ articles seem to be like, really badly written shame on the authors for spending hours on hard to read math notatation but not taking 20 minutes to put the intro into english — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:192:4700:1F70:D889:4C2C:9221:FFC7 ( talk) 02:06, 27 February 2021 (UTC)