Profile picture
, 3 tweets, 1 min read
My Authors
Read all threads
This is a great video, where the authors of the Stanford study get owned by two of the most preeminent statisticians practicing today about how their sample is "indistinguishable" from the control group, and their only response is to complain about how unfair their critics are.
TIBSHIRANI: Don't you think it was incredibly irresponsible to go to the media with a preprint?
AUTHORS: No, this is open science, OK?
HASTIE: But if you use the correct error term your sample is indistinguishable from a control
AUTHORS: Wow sheesh it's just a preprint, back off!
Can't believe I missed the obvious joke about Tibshirani identifying the strongest two counterarguments to the paper instead of just combining 20 weaker ones.
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh.

Enjoying this thread?

Keep Current with Quantian

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!

Twitter may remove this content at anytime, convert it as a PDF, save and print for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video

1) Follow Thread Reader App on Twitter so you can easily mention us!

2) Go to a Twitter thread (series of Tweets by the same owner) and mention us with a keyword "unroll" @threadreaderapp unroll

You can practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @quantian1 see all

Profile picture
Quantian
@quantian1
HOW did this paper not get desk rejected?
-0.99 headline R^2 is based on regressing SMOOTHED data
-Smoothing used a two-sided LOWESS that could see values from the future
-Time window of smoothing greater than the time lag to response variable
Utterly worthless study.
Ahhh, that would be why. What a fucking worthless profession , they deserve being swarmed by idiot economists claiming they can do better
Someone got a bit tetchy during peer review I see
Read 3 tweets
Profile picture
Quantian
@quantian1
I am afraid I have played a "jape" upon my followers. The economic indicators you have forecast are used in the derivation of the Kalecki-Levy equation, and taken together they impute corporate profits exactly (not a model, it's the definition)
Based on these numbers, US corporates will see an EBIT of $4 trillion in CY 2020, vs. 2019's $2 trillion EBIT. Amazing, and all the idiots on Wall Street are forecast a huge decline! Not even the most aggressive pro forma numbers have doubled
Feel free to check my work:
+4.7 trillion (average government deficit)
-0.5 trillion (average trade deficit)
-1.6 trillion (average household savings)
+0.9 trillion (average net dividends)
+0.5 trillion (average investment net of depreciation)
_______________________
= 4 trillion
Read 3 tweets
Profile picture
Quantian
@quantian1
Below will be a series of polls. Please answer them in order. Q4/2019 numbers (SAAR) will be provided for reference, but try and estimate each number independently of it.
In 2020, aggregate US government deficits (federal + state + local, 2019 Q4 annualized number -$1.4 trillion) will be:
In 2020, the current US trade deficit (2019 Q4 annualized number -$500 billion) will be:
Read 6 tweets

Embed code for your website

×
Follow Us on Twitter!

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 ($3.00/month or $30.00/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

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

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!