Hey!

My sister's band - The Sharp Things' first album just got reviewed by NPR:
http://discover.npr.org/features/feature.jhtml?wfId=1232037

Check out their website and buy an album:
http://www.thesharpthings.com

So, it's 3am. I've been working on this damn applied econometrics problem set half the day. I just wasted a hour because the author of this textbook is careless. Let me explain: In this book, one of the questions is, "State and test the identification assumption". For me, the term "identification assumption" is ambiguous. So I look in the glossary. not there. I look in the index. Not there. So I look on the web. It's everywhere. Apparently, the term "identification assumption" is one of the most common and generic terms in the world of empirical economics. Consequently, it's virtually impossible to use google to find out what the hell Mr. Wooldridge (author of the textbook) means when he asks me to "State and test the identification assumption". Finally, after racking my brain for an hour, I've figured it out. It was just a poorly worded question.

However, in my hour waste of time, I did come to several conclusions:

There are a whole lot of really boring and potentially useless econ papers written out there. I guess this is generally known - there is an excess supply of writing coming out of academia - this is a symptom of the over-stressing of writing and publishing as an indicator of the quality of a person in academia. I once heard the statistic that there is so much (original) material written and published, that the volume produced in a single day would exceed the amount that you would be able to read in a lifetime. Crazy huh? And to think that this dribble I'm writing contributes to it.

I've told myself over this past year that I might want to pursue a PHD in economics. I haven't gained any clarity over that question, but I do know that I am much farther away from being at an academically advanced level of economics than I previously thought.

I'd been told before to avoid law school unless I really want to become a lawyer, or I'm really interested in the subject matter. My experience in this class, Applied Econometrics, has brought clarity to that statement. I took this class not because I particularly wanted to, or because I was particularly interested in the subject matter, but only because it was the only other class I needed to obtain a "Advanced Quantitative Theory and Methods" specialization on my diploma when I graduate. In other words, I didn't really care. And it's made me completely slack and not do the reading/work when I should have, and it's made it extremely painful to waste an hour of my life looking up the term "identification assumption". I can only imagine how painful it is to go through 3 years of law school if you're not really interested in it, and you're only doing it because you want a law degree...

Blech. Shit. better get back to this problem set.
Adios.

(3.20 am Comments (0) >> )

Here is a link to my sister's band in NYC:
http://www.thesharpthings.com/
I went up to hear them two weekends ago, and I can say without bias, that they're really good. They remind me a bit of REM, but better. Anyways, they just came out with a CD that you should buy. The link's off their website.

A bill just passed in the house, and is being voted on in the senate that would grant immunity to gun manufacturers, distributors, dealers, or importers of firearms or ammunition from lawsuits dealing with misuse (i.e. wrongful death, etc).*

Regardless of your stance on gun control, you should consider this to be a bad thing. The bill prejudges in an issue of law that should be in the domain of courts. In other words, it removes due process that we as citizens are granted in the constitution.

It is my personal opinion that the gun industry is knowingly and purposefully lax in their rules and application of rules which allow much more ease of handguns getting into the hands of criminals, and other people who aren't supposed to own handguns. The know that the level of sales of handguns far exceeded the projected demand from legitimate gun use.

HOWEVER, by refusing to grant them immunity (i.e. not passing this bill), congress would not be pre-judging the case. They would only be saying, "whether or not the gun industry has committed wrongdoing should be determined in a court of law where facts are presented and cases are put forth, and due proccess is carried out." just like every other issue of the law is addressed.

What can you do about this?
Click on this link and send your congresspeople an email. Give them a call too...

---

* You can read the official bill proposal here. (click on the S.659 link under the heading "G" next to "Gun manufacturer civil liability (protect from lawsuits in cases of gun violence".