Very interesting read:
causalinf.substack.com/p/claude-cod...
03.03.2026 12:17
👍 1
🔁 1
💬 0
📌 0
Very interesting read:
causalinf.substack.com/p/claude-cod...
Sun, July 27th, 10-11 am at Bella Center Hub (Orange), Poster 101.
Heading to the AOM Meeting in Copenhagen? Interested in Climate Risks, Risk Perception, and Risk Management in the Supply Chain? Stop by my poster presentation on “Value Chain Dependencies and Climate Risks in the Value Chain”. @ifmbonn.bsky.social #AOM2025 #ClimateRisk #RiskPerception #EconSky
In that case, the subtle problem could be revealed in a comment.
Good point. In the second paper, he considers both types of beneficial MH, including the one you model.
Given these considerations and given that you model med expenses as perfectly divisible, i think that your paper models a de Meza-type of beneficial MH rather than a Nyman type.
For, if expenses are perfectly divisible, you can always afford to spend a little more on meds by reducing other consumption (ruling out corner solutions). Then it's not lack of affordability that prevents you from getting more meds but that you prefer to spend your money on other consumption.
I think a crucial difference between de Meza's and Nyman's ideas of beneficial MH is that the latter relates it to unaffordable medical expenses becoming affordable through insurance. That again requires indivisibility of such expenses.
That being said: The idea that limited savings possibilities (liqu constraints) increase beneficial MH is a cool idea, though.
I agree on its importance. Less on it being surprising given that the idea of beneficial moral hazard is around for several decades now (de Meza 1983, Nyman 1999). There is also already a literature on how it affects the evaluation of public insurance schemes like Medicaid.
Let's talk about this Nature piece in more detail.
I've rarely read something so anti-scientific anywhere short of the National Review.
www.nature.com/articles/d41...
For Bluesky-Curious Econ Lovers, a Quick Start guide to plugging into the economics community here.
It aims to lower the costs & boost the benefits for folks to engage here.
If it seems useful, please share it here & especially on X.
📉📈 #️⃣#️⃣
aaronsojourner.org/for-bluesky-...
In economics, editors, referees, and authors often behave as if a published paper should reflect some kind of authoritative consensus.
As a result, valuable debate happens in secret, and the resulting paper is an opaque compromise with anonymous co-authors called referees.
1/
Hello. I have some work on insurance decision-making and would love to be added. Thank you!
An empirical econ paper needs two things: 738 robustness checks concluding we can’t really ever fully be sure of internal validity in the appendix, and one (1) wild back of the envelope calculation indicating that the result is world-changing in the discussion section
4 weeks to the deadline for the EER special issue for Nora. It will be tremendous. We have some really excellent papers form some of the best authors in our field. And no upper limit on quantity. Consider sending us your best work that fits to Nora’s interests. www.sciencedirect.com/special-issu...
Okay, the first Women in Econ starter pack was such a success that we quickly hit the BlueSky starter pack limit (150 accounts). But, I've got a version 2.0 with even more awesome economists you should follow!
go.bsky.app/J6nhkk7
I’ve made a Women in Econ starter pack (s/o @vinisingh.bsky.social for sparking the idea!). Share, follow, and comment below if you’d like to be added! go.bsky.app/LqBPkQZ
I made a theory starter pack. It includes some CS/Econ, pol-econ, and behavioral types as well... Lmk if you'd like to be added (or removed!) and I'll do my best - the edit functionality is a bit wonky atm
go.bsky.app/KAGmZH4
I would love to be added, too. Thank you!
#Econsky 📈📉
We need more women econ professors, and we increase demand for them via measures like implicit quotas or encouragements to apply.
But we will succeed _only if_ we increase supply: train them.
To colleagues in PhD admission: some of these numbers 👇are encouraging, but let's do more.
On Tuesday, 36 US ports will be shut down by the largest shipping strike in living memory.
This could recreate the chaotic supply chain crisis of 2021-2022. Are we ready?
a 🧵 on the new economics of supply chains
1/
Pls re-skeet for reach: CALL FOR PAPERS for a special issue of EER in honor of Nora Szech editors: S. Huck, N. Schweizer, M. Serra-Garcia #econsky 📉📈 www.sciencedirect.com/journal/euro...