Friday, September 18, 2015

5 million thanks


OK, it's not Marginal Revolution. It's not even tops in my own family -- My kids' high-school animation videos do better (8 million here, 5.8 million here). But this blog has worked out far better than I hoped when I started, and I appreciate all of you who read, comment, or otherwise participate.

17 comments:

  1. Congratulations John! I think your readers need to thank you, not the other way around

    ReplyDelete
  2. Dear John, I hope this does not come out as brown nosing. It is an honest expression of gratitude. I remember the first papers by you that I read as a grad student. While some of them would be considered usual suspects (on the random walk in GNP and on the application of unit-root tests) two of the most useful to me at the time were your response to Campbell and Mankiw's test of the Permanent Income Hypothesis, which motivated me to write a field paper showing that their results are consistent with the PIH under imperfect information and gradual learning and don't prove the existence of liquidity constraints, and your manuscript on how to write a research paper, without which (and Deirdre McCloskey's contributions) I don't think I would have published anything in my life. Of course, since then I have read much more.

    The point I am trying to make is that, especially for those of us who have not graduated from top schools and whose sparse scholarly contributions put us far from the research frontier, it is a privilege, an honor, and quite enjoyable to have access to your thoughts and ideas in real time through this blog. Thank you!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Hi professor,

    Thank you really so much for writing!! :)

    ReplyDelete
  4. you are welcomed.....we need more intelligent independent analysis....as the current group think is leading to disaster. Just look at the low interest vortex destroying Japan. Saw where a FED member wants NIRP

    ReplyDelete
  5. This is one of the three or four economic blogs that are life-lines to my sanity. Keep up the good work.

    ReplyDelete
  6. A lot of your traffic is due to Econ 101 assignments. Undergrad programs around the world use my comments as negative examples.

    Pornhub gets 20,000,000 hits/day. Maybe you should try taking your shirt off.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Thank you for writing. The posts and comments here are always interesting and thought provoking.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I don't know of any other "mainstream" economist who is willing to share their thoughts in such a format. Thanks! (Thus, the "others" get stuck in their insular world). We benefit from John's insights and both John and we can benefit from different points of view. Most all of us are well intentioned but sometimes we are wrong. None of us have thought of everything. Thus everyone benefits.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Professor, I check out your blog daily. ^_^

    ReplyDelete
  10. Your blog is much appreciated. I'm an econ PhD student and I regularly discuss your posts with other students.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Professor, your kids' videos are cool! Neat work over there in YouTube!

    ReplyDelete
  12. Congratulations!

    ReplyDelete
  13. Thank You very much for being open with your thoughts and work through this blog. I view it as giving people and access to an on-going online conference, where you can choose which of your "talks" you want to "listen" to, and then either stay silent and "listen" what other people "say", or "raise a hand" with a comment/question.
    Internet is a great chance to make such "online conferences" possible, and I believe and hope we will see more of those (including video or 3D ones) in the nearest future.

    ReplyDelete
  14. I think the claim of too-low interest rates is more subtle than presented here. The crisis effectively swallowed the MBS market, and tighter lending standards and weak economic performance have also worked against supply. On the other end, we have demand effects from higher capital requirements, QE, and recently a strong dollar, so rates should be low overall. The question is whether, given this low rate environment, Fed-induced liquidity has produced 'exuberance' in certain channels - such as corporate bond issues purposed for share buybacks, and foreign dollar-denominated debt. The mechanism is probably less important than the perception that the Fed will act to prevent a higher dollar or a downturn in corporate earnings - much as it was believed, ten years ago, that policymakers would act to prevent housing price declines and bank failures.

    Perhaps that's wrong, but in any event it is striking to see the difference between those who view central banking through the lens of theory, and those who view central banks as market institutions.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Cool stuff! still many more need to read Prof. Cochrane's blog. Viral is the name of the game. Kudos on the animated cartoons too.

    ReplyDelete

Comments are welcome. Keep it short, polite, and on topic.

Thanks to a few abusers I am now moderating comments. I welcome thoughtful disagreement. I will block comments with insulting or abusive language. I'm also blocking totally inane comments. Try to make some sense. I am much more likely to allow critical comments if you have the honesty and courage to use your real name.