PEN-L
mailing list archive
[ Other Periods
| Other mailing lists
| Search
]
Date:
[ Previous
| Next
]
Thread:
[ Previous
| Next
]
Index:
[ Author
| Date
| Thread
]
[PEN-L:1201] Re: Return on R&D - Cobb-Douglas macro production function
Anders Ekeland wrote:
> For short: I have a lot of naive questions about the use of C-D in general
> and also for this particular purpose. Is C-D really a valid approach to the
> measuring the return on R&D?
for short: No.
I don't think C-D is a valid approach to _anything_. It's simply a very
simple mathematical form that allows easy manipulation. Its success
among economists is one more sign that they tend to become enamored with
mathematical forms instead of trying to seriously study the economy.
--
Jim Devine jdevine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx &
http://clawww.lmu.edu/Faculty/JDevine/jdevine.html
- Thread context:
- [PEN-L:1205] Re: pen-l questions,
Michael Perelman Fri 04 Dec 1998, 00:07 GMT
- [PEN-L:1204] the quasi-fixed factor fallacy,
Tom Walker Thu 03 Dec 1998, 23:54 GMT
- [PEN-L:1203] Return on R&D - Cobb-Douglas macro production function,
Rosser Jr, John Barkley Thu 03 Dec 1998, 23:26 GMT
- [PEN-L:1202] Re: A Thought II,
valis Thu 03 Dec 1998, 22:31 GMT
- [PEN-L:1201] Re: Return on R&D - Cobb-Douglas macro production function,
James Devine Thu 03 Dec 1998, 22:27 GMT
- [PEN-L:1271] Re: Re: pen-l questions -Rep,
Tim Stroshane Thu 03 Dec 1998, 21:49 GMT
- [PEN-L:1198] Return on R&D - Cobb-Douglas macro production function,
Anders Ekeland Thu 03 Dec 1998, 21:37 GMT
- [PEN-L:1197] Re: media ownership,
sokol Thu 03 Dec 1998, 21:33 GMT
[ Other Periods
| Other mailing lists
| Search
]