Sid Gundapaneni retweeted
Binghamton econ is hiring this year in applied micro, and I'm on the search committee. Our job posting: aeaweb.org/joe/listing.php?J…
If you are on the market and think this could be a good match, please apply! If you know someone who may be interested, please help spread the word!
I would take loans out to pay for the experience I’ve had over the last 1.5 years. I am blessed that I’ve gotten paid, well, for my job. Having access to talk to and learn from the brightest minds is invaluable. For a PhD, this is even moreso the case.
Sid Gundapaneni retweeted
Does this guy realize he's getting a Harvard PhD education for free (tuition is 60k per year at Harvard, and most PhD students don't pay it)? Does this guy realize the extensive margin effect of these strikes? At UCI, PhD enrollment fell 30.3% from F22 to F23 after the strike.
This is a bad equilibrium, actually. AI, when asked to find errors, will do so w/ near certainty*. That does not mean the errors are worth taking seriously, and says nothing about the work at hand.
Peer-reviewed journals are now more important than ever for providing signals.
Sid Gundapaneni retweeted
Woke up this morning to a clear and overwhelming repudiation of the Treasury buyback program. Wow.
Sid Gundapaneni retweeted
This time of year, as it gets dark around 430pm, I remember this Milton Friedman passage...
The argument for a flexible exchange rate is, strange to say, very nearly identical with the argument for daylight savings time. Isn't it absurd to change the clock in summer when exactly the same result could be achieved by having each individual change his habits? All that is required is that everyone decide to come to his office an hour earlier, have lunch an hour earlier, etc. But obviously it is much simpler to change the clock that guides all than to have each individual separately change his pattern of reaction to the clock, even though all want to do so. The situation is exactly the same in the exchange market. It is far simpler to allow one price to change, namely, the price of foreign exchange, than to rely upon changes in the multitude of prices that together constitute the internal price structure.
in The Case for Flexible Exchange Rates
(or, In Recognition of Sticky Prices)
Sid Gundapaneni retweeted
An honor to have @UChicago's @GregWKaplan on the @HooverInst @CapAndFreedom podcast talking history of macroeconomics from Keynes to HANK. We talk about the Hall-Woodford Nobel Prize, the importance of microfoundations, monetary & fiscal, the purpose of models, and Greg's book.
Why do some households spend their stimulus checks while others save them?
On @CapAndFreedom, Hoover Visiting Fellow @Jon_Hartley_ and University of Chicago economist @GregWKaplan explore how differences in income, wealth, and access to cash shape the effects of interest rates and fiscal stimulus—and what that means for economic policy.
Watch on Hoover+: hoover.org/plus/research/his…
Sid Gundapaneni retweeted
🗳️The entire country is watching to see if California voters will soon approve a proposed one-time, 5% tax on the state's wealthiest residents. Want to know what the fuss is all about? Tune into this fiery SIEPR Economic Summit debate, linked in 🧵 below. #Prop40 #BillionaireTax
Sid Gundapaneni retweeted
A great economist and a wonderful person.
“Meet Wharton’s Newest Faculty”
youtube.com/shorts/Bq0hq1Fuq…
Sid Gundapaneni retweeted
HAPPY PYTHAGOREAN TRIPLE DAY – the last one of the twenty-first century!!
10² + 24² = 26²
I hope your day is all right 😀📐.
QED
Economics provides an explanation much simpler than what most comments offer. People with higher IQ have a lot more productive things to be doing, and thus want to walk much faster so as to waste less time!
The craziest thing about all of this is that Zucman and coauthors themselves are campaigning around California directly and openly telling voters they’d like for the tax to be repeated and are just being pragmatic.
Yet they deny that this may be affecting migration and revenues.
In this article we make clear the simple mechanism by which people may expect future taxation, make decisions today based on those expectations, but no future taxation need actually pass.
xitter.gq/joshrauh/status/211335…
Sid Gundapaneni retweeted
Zucman’s central complaint is that our analysis violates “rational expectations” because we model departures that are in part motivated by the risk of future wealth taxes, and yet we do not add new revenues associated with those additional taxes. He refers to this as a “basic violation of rational expectations.”
But this is a basic, fundamental misunderstanding of rational expectations. 5/14
Sid Gundapaneni retweeted
Gabriel Zucman @gabriel_zucman has now for the third time criticized our research on California’s proposed billionaire tax, claiming we have provided “no answer” to his criticisms.
xitter.gq/gabriel_zucman/status/…
We have actually already responded twice on this platform, but let’s address his arguments once more in detail, with the hope that third time’s the charm. 1/14
This Hoover Institution study, which has fueled the deluge of ads (more than $200 million spent by billionaires so far) to defeat the California billionaire tax, is spectacularly misleading.
Let me explain its crucial flaw. 🧵
Readers added context they thought people might want to know
Zucman argues that the tax will raise his projected revenue because billionaires who leave CA after 1/1/26 will be taxed anyway.
At least $542B of net worth (Page, Brin, Thiel) departed the state by 12/31/25.
The entire thread is a misleading denial of this fact.
ft.com/content/d66976…
nytimes.com/2026/04/27/us/…
forbes.com/sites/forbeswe…
Sid Gundapaneni retweeted
I have not read @joshrauh analysis, but this Substack has the right economics. The @gabriel_zucman Twitter thread reads like a campaign commercial (complete w/ sketchy economic logic).
The numbers? I’d like to see a range. The baseline & dynamics of beliefs are hard-to-quantify.
Sid Gundapaneni retweeted
Let us explain why you are incorrect
fiscalrealitycheck.substack.…
This Hoover Institution study, which has fueled the deluge of ads (more than $200 million spent by billionaires so far) to defeat the California billionaire tax, is spectacularly misleading.
Let me explain its crucial flaw. 🧵
Readers added context they thought people might want to know
Zucman argues that the tax will raise his projected revenue because billionaires who leave CA after 1/1/26 will be taxed anyway.
At least $542B of net worth (Page, Brin, Thiel) departed the state by 12/31/25.
The entire thread is a misleading denial of this fact.
ft.com/content/d66976…
nytimes.com/2026/04/27/us/…
forbes.com/sites/forbeswe…

























