Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Widely Cited-Debt Study Exposed


  • Please log in to reply
21 replies to this topic

#1 Niner National

Niner National

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,358 posts

Posted 17 April 2013 - 03:29 PM

In 2010, economists Carmen Reinhart and Kenneth Rogoff released a paper, "Growth in a Time of Debt." Their "main result is that...median growth rates for countries with public debt over 90 percent of GDP are roughly one percent lower than otherwise; average (mean) growth rates are several percent lower." Countries with debt-to-GDP ratios above 90 percent have a slightly negative average growth rate, in fact.
This has been one of the most cited stats in the public debate during the Great Recession. Paul Ryan's Path to Prosperity budget states their study "found conclusive empirical evidence that [debt] exceeding 90 percent of the economy has a significant negative effect on economic growth." The Washington Post editorial board takes it as an economic consensus view, stating that "debt-to-GDP could keep rising — and stick dangerously near the 90 percent mark that economists regard as a threat to sustainable economic growth."


In a new paper, "Does High Public Debt Consistently Stifle Economic Growth? A Critique of Reinhart and Rogoff," Thomas Herndon, Michael Ash, and Robert Pollin of the University of Massachusetts, Amherst successfully replicate the results. After trying to replicate the Reinhart-Rogoff results and failing, they reached out to Reinhart and Rogoff and they were willing to share their data spreadhseet. This allowed Herndon et al. to see how how Reinhart and Rogoff's data was constructed.
They find that three main issues stand out. First, Reinhart and Rogoff selectively exclude years of high debt and average growth. Second, they use a debatable method to weight the countries. Third, there also appears to be a coding error that excludes high-debt and average-growth countries. All three bias in favor of their result, and without them you don't get their controversial result.


http://www.businessi...d-rogoff-2013-4


Whoops.

So, truly an error or is this a case of two people trying to make data fit an agenda?

#2 GOOGLE RON PAUL

GOOGLE RON PAUL

    fleet-footed poster

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,002 posts

Posted 17 April 2013 - 06:07 PM

austerity is complete bullshit

bttt

#3 Delhommey

Delhommey

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 12,408 posts

Posted 17 April 2013 - 06:08 PM

This is what happens when people with a "run the government like my checkbook" bias get a hold of bad data. Cause it's only crappy data that will prove them right.

#4 cookinwithgas

cookinwithgas

    Grey Poupon Elitest Trash

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,756 posts

Posted 17 April 2013 - 07:23 PM

Conservatives can barely figure out how to use spell check, who is letting them do math?

#5 pstall

pstall

    Gazebo Effect

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,215 posts
  • LocationMontford

Posted 17 April 2013 - 09:34 PM

what is an acceptable level of debt vs gdp? how do you want to compare? to whom? when? is it before a war or after?
what about a three tier trading partner alliance? meaning, say you compare US with their associative link to Mex and Can while comparing Eng with its link to Germany and France. what kind of apple(s) and how many do you have that you are comparing to other apples?

if the correction of confirmation bias from the 2nd paper(and we are totally trusting the 2nd is cleansed of an equal bias for a subjective outcome) is that net GDP is 2 points above and not 1 below then what are we talking about here?

#6 Delhommey

Delhommey

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 12,408 posts

Posted 17 April 2013 - 10:08 PM

I mean, who hasn't goofed their estimates by $450 billion or so?

#7 pstall

pstall

    Gazebo Effect

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,215 posts
  • LocationMontford

Posted 17 April 2013 - 10:10 PM

not the govt fo sho

#8 Delhommey

Delhommey

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 12,408 posts

Posted 17 April 2013 - 10:18 PM

The answer (in the paper at least) is 120% btw. And I think they remembered to drag their formula all the way down.

#9 GOOGLE RON PAUL

GOOGLE RON PAUL

    fleet-footed poster

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,002 posts

Posted 17 April 2013 - 10:20 PM

austerity is basically a religion at this point so tbh this story isn't going to affect its believers

#10 Jase

Jase

    Kuechold Fantasies

  • Administrators
  • 16,518 posts
  • LocationMatthews, NC

Posted 17 April 2013 - 10:26 PM

There's a time and place for austerity




During times of economic expansion, when policymakers otherwise have no incentive to do so.

Krugman, even for all of his dickishness, will admit this.

#11 GOOGLE RON PAUL

GOOGLE RON PAUL

    fleet-footed poster

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,002 posts

Posted 17 April 2013 - 10:30 PM

i'll agree with that

generally "austerity doesn't work" posts are within the context of a recession

#12 Happy Panther

Happy Panther

    Now even funnier.

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,554 posts

Posted 17 April 2013 - 10:46 PM

Conservatives can barely figure out how to use spell check, who is letting them do math?


I complettely disagree.

#13 g5jamz

g5jamz

    Is back

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,137 posts

Posted 18 April 2013 - 07:34 AM

There's a time and place for austerity




During times of economic expansion, when policymakers otherwise have no incentive to do so.

Krugman, even for all of his dickishness, will admit this.


or maybe not..

http://www.cnbc.com/id/100558455

#14 pstall

pstall

    Gazebo Effect

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,215 posts
  • LocationMontford

Posted 18 April 2013 - 07:55 AM

So if debts don't matter why has the new health care plan been touted as reducing it?

#15 g5jamz

g5jamz

    Is back

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,137 posts

Posted 18 April 2013 - 07:57 AM

Because that's the only way it got passed...

via a lie.

Reconciliation only required 51 votes.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com - IP Content Design by Joshua Tree / TitansReport.