![]() | History of macroeconomic thought has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
Index
|
||
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
I expanded the New Palgrave article, using Stigler and other sources.
Both these issues have been discussed on this page. Kiefer. Wolfowitz 21:03, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
The obvious question is whether anybody has tried to evaluate the ABC theory, deductively (e.g. by its consistency with Arrow-Debreu GE theory) or empirically (e.g. by econometric competition against a competing theory, for example). What have critics said about the ABC theory? (Stigler mentioned errors and sectarianism---nasty misrepresentation of others, particularly the German Historical School---as faults.) Kiefer. Wolfowitz 15:22, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
I would like to nominated History of macroeconomic thought as a featured article again. I nominated it once before, but it mainly failed over content disputes. I have tried to improve the article further, gotten it listed as a "Good Article," and it should be ready for another FA nomination. Please let me know what you think of the article. I'd like to resolve any disputes or other issues before making a nomination.-- Bkwillwm ( talk) 05:00, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
{{
cite book}}
: |access-date=
requires |url=
(
help); Unknown parameter |coauthors=
ignored (|author=
suggested) (
help) Quoting
Walter Heller) is nowhere near Marxian. I would also like to know how it got up from 4.0 to 5.3 in such a short time.
EllenCT (
talk)
03:33, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
Should we subject this article to peer review? Lbertolotti ( talk) 15:16, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
I was thinking of adding a new section on the role of institutions and political economy in recent macroeconomic thought. The section would cover Thomas Piketty's Capital in the Twenty-First Century, focusing on inequality and Piketty's r>g insight, and Daron Acemoglu's work including Why Nations Fail. I would trim the 2008 financial crisis section since much of its content is no longer pertinent to make "room" for the new content. Is there anything else that should be included? Does it make sense to include these topics as recent developments in macroeconomic theory?-- Bkwillwm ( talk) 06:33, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on History of macroeconomic thought. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 03:37, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
![]() | History of macroeconomic thought has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
Index
|
||
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
I expanded the New Palgrave article, using Stigler and other sources.
Both these issues have been discussed on this page. Kiefer. Wolfowitz 21:03, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
The obvious question is whether anybody has tried to evaluate the ABC theory, deductively (e.g. by its consistency with Arrow-Debreu GE theory) or empirically (e.g. by econometric competition against a competing theory, for example). What have critics said about the ABC theory? (Stigler mentioned errors and sectarianism---nasty misrepresentation of others, particularly the German Historical School---as faults.) Kiefer. Wolfowitz 15:22, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
I would like to nominated History of macroeconomic thought as a featured article again. I nominated it once before, but it mainly failed over content disputes. I have tried to improve the article further, gotten it listed as a "Good Article," and it should be ready for another FA nomination. Please let me know what you think of the article. I'd like to resolve any disputes or other issues before making a nomination.-- Bkwillwm ( talk) 05:00, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
{{
cite book}}
: |access-date=
requires |url=
(
help); Unknown parameter |coauthors=
ignored (|author=
suggested) (
help) Quoting
Walter Heller) is nowhere near Marxian. I would also like to know how it got up from 4.0 to 5.3 in such a short time.
EllenCT (
talk)
03:33, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
Should we subject this article to peer review? Lbertolotti ( talk) 15:16, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
I was thinking of adding a new section on the role of institutions and political economy in recent macroeconomic thought. The section would cover Thomas Piketty's Capital in the Twenty-First Century, focusing on inequality and Piketty's r>g insight, and Daron Acemoglu's work including Why Nations Fail. I would trim the 2008 financial crisis section since much of its content is no longer pertinent to make "room" for the new content. Is there anything else that should be included? Does it make sense to include these topics as recent developments in macroeconomic theory?-- Bkwillwm ( talk) 06:33, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on History of macroeconomic thought. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 03:37, 5 November 2017 (UTC)