Share this page!

Enter URL or ID to Unroll

You can paste full URL like: https://x.com/threadreaderapp/status/1644127596119195649
or just the ID like: 1644127596119195649

How to get URL link on X (Twitter) App

  1. On the Twitter thread, click on or icon on the bottom
  2. Click again on or Share Via icon
  3. Click on Copy Link to Tweet
  4. Paste it above and click "Unroll Thread"!
  5. More info at Twitter Help
Justin Wolfers Profile picture
@JustinWolfers
Oct 29, 2019 • 5 tweets • 4 min read • Read on X
Scrolly
BIG NEWS: You can use my new introductory econ textbooks -- written with @BetseyStevenson -- for FREE in Spring 2020.

It's a great opportunity for you to see what we've done.

To be clear: FREE for you and FREE FOR YOUR STUDENTS.

Deets ==> forms.gle/u9U6vX2YcUzUjp… #TeachEcon
@BetseyStevenson We have an Introductory Micro book, Macro, or combined Principles of Econ. Choose the book you need.

It'll be free for you (the instructor) & we’ll provide free (digital) copies for all of your students. Plus instructor resources.

Your students will see you as a superhero...
@BetseyStevenson Read the fine print: Obviously, I can’t persuade my publishers to do this forever. The free textbooks are just for Spring 2020. After that, it’ll back to usual retail pricing (though @MacmillanLearn is usually more competitive than its rivals).
@BetseyStevenson @MacmillanLearn Where’s the economics in all this?

It’s a signaling game.

My publisher knows whether the book is high quality. Instructors don’t. This offer loses money unless folks who try the book end up loving it. It's a costly signal worth sending only if you believe the book really works.
@BetseyStevenson @MacmillanLearn If you just want to have a look at our new textbook, we'll hook up any economics instructor or journalist with a free review copy. Just fill in your deets here: forms.gle/jqbdoC1ALFv4bb…

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
　

Keep Current with Justin Wolfers

Justin Wolfers Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @JustinWolfers

Justin Wolfers Profile picture
Nov 4
This counter-response essentially says that any form of weighting in survey research is herding. If so, I love herding!

He's right about the motivation: All weighting is done to ensure that you don't get crazy results. But that's a feature of a good poll, not a bug!
After all: Is there a principled difference between weighting on age (to ensure that your sample includes youngs and olds) and weighting on past vote (to ensure you get folks from across the political spectrum)?
Both age and past vote are:
- Predetermined (before this poll)
- Non-manipulable
- Though self-reported
- And we have good population estimates to weight them to.

What principle would make one of these a legitimate survey design weight and the other "herding"?
Read 9 tweets
Justin Wolfers Profile picture
Nov 4
Lately @NateSilver has been arguing that pollsters are "herding" —tweaking or hiding their results to avoid publishing outliers.

I don't know any (reputable) pollsters who do this.

And I think the problem here is Nate making a simple math/stats error 🧵 Image
Let's explore binomial distributions and the standard errors of weighted samples.

TL, DR: Weighting across groups with different voting patterns should change how you calculate confidence intervals.

Fail to do so, and you'll falsely accuse pollsters of herding.
First, what @NateSilver538 does:

In a “vanilla” poll—a simple random sample—the standard error of an estimate of a candidate’s vote share, p, in a two horse race is √[p(1-p)/n].

This is the perspective that animates Nate's analysis of "herding". Image
Read 34 tweets
Justin Wolfers Profile picture
Oct 24
Focusing for a moment on the POLICIES at play.

Voters were asked whether they supported 100 different policies, but weren't told whether the policy was from Trump or Harris.

Nearly all of Harris' policies got majority support from the public, and... 🧵 Image
Far fewer of Trump's policy proposals garnered majority support, and almost none were broadly popular (say, >75% support). Image
Most undecided voters like most of Harris' policies (left graph).

Most undecided voters dislike most of Trumps policies (right graph). Image
Read 5 tweets
Justin Wolfers Profile picture
Oct 13
Senator, I think it's worth acknowledging that violent crime actually has falllen, and indeed it is lower today than it has been for decades. Image
This decline in violent crime is evident in not just the FBI reports, but also an independent survey by the BJS. Image
If you don't trust data from G-men, the decline in homicide rates the FBI reports is also evident in a count of death certificates in which coroners cute homicide as the cause of death. Image
Read 6 tweets
Justin Wolfers Profile picture
Oct 4
Wowza: HUGE jobs report.

September payrolls grew +254k, well above expectations.

August payrolls revised up +17k to +159k, and July revised up +55k to +144k.

Unemployment fell to 4.1%

This economic expansion that is motoring along.
Honestly, there's not much to say here other than that fears the job market had slowed turned out to be a statistical illusion due to incomplete data.

Over the past three months, payrolls is motoring along at +186k per month, on average, which is pretty much where you want it.
(The conspiracy theories on revisions to economic numbers confuse me, and I can't remember whether numbers getting revised up to look good is evidence of a conspiracy, or numbers later get revised down is evidence of an initial conspiracy that falls apart.)
Read 12 tweets
Justin Wolfers Profile picture
Oct 2
Senator, you're misleading folks again. I just read the CBO report you recommend. It actually says that an immigration surge boosts federal revenues quite dramatically, and has only a small effect on mandatory spending and interest.
Image
The CBO study @JDVance cites analyzes how immigration improves the *federal* budget.

Yet he pulls a misleading quote, talking about the effects of *state and local* budgets and ignoring the (likely larger) federal govt impacts.

Here's the CBO directly saying this isn't okay: Image
Of course, you might ask: How could @JDVance have known that this was a study of *federal* budgets, not of what's happening to *state and local* budgets?

Well, the title yields a vital clue. Image
Read 5 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

Send Email!

:(