م :

رثا را برای مرگ کسی می‌نویسند.

م - August 3, 2006 09:50 PM

ا.ا :

در بلاگ‌نیوز لینک داده شد/ ابوالفتحی

ا.ا - August 3, 2006 10:52 PM

یک خواننده :

جفنگ مثل همیشه!

یک خواننده - August 4, 2006 12:40 PM

فاطمه عليزاده :

سلام ... ان شالله هميشه پيروز و سربلند باشيد ...
ازين گذري ها و سبز ها نيستم ... اما مجالي نبود يا نشد كه برايتان پيغام بگذارم ... از خيلي از نوشته ها استفاده ميكنم ... دكتر طبیبیان را نميشناسم ... اما ميدانم جنس اين سطرها چيست ... دوستشان دارم بپاس مقام و حرمت استادي ... انشالله هميشه سلامت باشند و باشيد ...

فاطمه عليزاده - August 4, 2006 02:47 PM

Farman :

You write well... I Like it and I try to read all of them, but there is one small problem here. Your essays are a little bit too long and a busy person like me who by the way is fan of you, can't catch up with that. I suggest to make your essays a liitle bit consise or break them up into several parts (if possible) so people like me can follow up

Farman - August 4, 2006 04:23 PM

انشا :

اگر این مرثیه انشا نیست چیست؟

انشا - August 4, 2006 05:02 PM

Enkratic :

1)اینگونه مدح نوشتن اصلا کار سختی نیست. یعنی لازم نیست که اقتصاد خوانده باشی تا بتوانی در مدح دکتر اینگونه بنویسی ازآنجا که سیر فکری و اقتصادی ایشان به هیچ وجه مورد اشاره قرار نگرفته است و به زعم این حقیر قبل از انکه نقد باشد موضع گیری است. لهذا خواندن خط اول آن کفایت می کند !
2) گاهی نوشته هایت بیشتر حدیث نفس است تا سخن از اقتصاد. این را یک خواننده ی عامی از چند جمله ی اول این پست می فهمد. نفی حکمت مکن از بهر دل عمی چند!
3) این گروه بندی کسانی که کامنت می گذارند بچه گانه است. نمی دانم چرا اینها که اینجا می آیند و بعضا آدم های متوسطی نیستند بدان اشاره نمی کرده اند

Enkratic - August 4, 2006 07:49 PM

رسوای جماعت :

در نشریات و یا ماهنامه های اقتصادی هر از گاهی مقاله یادبود و بزرگداشتی از اقتصاد دانهای مرده و زنده می توان یافت. در اینگونه مقالات دیدگاه اقتصادی این افراد و جایگاه آنان در علم نظری و عملی اقتصاد به کاوش گرفته میشود و سهمی که آن اقتصاددان در پیشبرد علم اقتصاد داشته است مورد کنکاش قرار میگیرد. نویسندگان اینگونه مقالات نیز به نظریه های اقتصادی تسلط دارند. نوشته آقا حامد اما تهی از تمامی این اجزاست. تنها وجه مشخصه این دو آنستکه به بازار آزاد اعتقاد دارند. در دورانی که در مدارس اقتصادی اروپا و آمریکا ویژگیهای اقتصاد آزاد از زاویه (a disequilibrium approach ) و اقتصاد بازار مالی مورد کنکاش قرار دارد، اینان هنوز بدنبال تعادل عرضه و تقاضای بازار آزاد سرگیجه گرفته اند و مرثیه خوانی میکنند.

رسوای جماعت - August 4, 2006 08:30 PM

reza :

the basic approach in "ALL" US schools is "equilibrium", in the sense that no one can get phd from a good US/Europe university unless he knows the supply, demand, and equilibrium concepts "very well", actually no one will be admitted to good phd programs without such a basic knowledge
.... there are other approaches that meant to complement the basic approach, but there is "NO" comprehensive substitute for "equilibrium" in the economics and finance yet

reza - August 5, 2006 01:51 AM

disequilibrium approach :

Mr.
Obviously you neither belong to any of the top 20 programs, nor are familiar with the works of
disequilibrium theorists published by Ivy League University publishers. A disequilibrium researcher has excellent knowledge of the equilibrium concepts, but criticizes the bottlenecks and shortcomings of the main stream (neoclassical) economic concepts. Using sophisticated tools from dynamic analysis, this approach introduces a consistent, integrated framework for disequilibrium macroeconomic dynamics and explores its relationship to the competing--and currently dominant--equilibrium dynamics. This approach keeps alive the older tradition, while modernizing it in the light of recent developments in techniques of dynamic modeling.

disequilibrium approach - August 5, 2006 04:37 AM

روزبه :

Mr/Mis. Disequilibrium,
Apparently you have no idea what you are talking about. At least check out the top programs, take a look at publications in top journals, check out recent leading and path breaking pulication, check out leading textbooks and then open your mouth with this arrogant rubbish. As Reza correctly mentioned, there is no substitute to the equilibrium theory. All things you mentioned are about " frictions" and moving away from standard classical assumoptions. But they all have some equilbrium notions to hang their hat on. There is no "coherent" theory of economic that does not have a wel-defined equilibrium notion in it. Next time, fist read and do a little bit of research then write comment.
Roozbeh

روزبه - August 5, 2006 04:55 AM

:

Mr. or Miss Roozbeh et al:
Have you heard of Disequilibrium theory? Where I work and study this is part of the curriculum. Look at my department description. It might not be as good as yours.:

Anonymous - August 5, 2006 05:21 AM

روزبه :

Mr/Mis Anonymous
Please do me a favor. Stop by Daron's office and ask him for a reference to a recent paper that has a "coherent" economic analysis without appealing to any kind of equilibrium notion
thank you
Roozbeh

روزبه - August 5, 2006 05:35 AM

:

Shall I repeat once again that "This approach keeps alive the older tradition, while modernizing it in the light of recent developments in techniques of dynamic modeling"
It is obvious that any new model and theory is driven from the old ones.

Anonymous - August 5, 2006 06:12 AM

روزبه :

Mr/Mis Anonymous
You seem a little bit lost. None of the authors of the book you mentioned have a single paper in a half-decent journal. I would be very cautuous making prediction about overal direction of leading research in a scientific field based on such books. The fact that their book is published by MIT-press does not mean it is a good book and/or this is good economic analysis or this is in anyway a good and coherent contribution to the theory of economics. If you are a grad student at MIT, please do what I told you. You will thank me later on for this advice.
Good Luck

روزبه - August 5, 2006 06:42 AM

Ahmad Reza :

I searched the www.jstor.org which is a library of 43 economic journals, 40 political science journals, and 10 public policy ones (among other things). I searched the above categories for the phrase "disequilibrium theory" between years 1995 and 2006; I only hit 4 results

Ahmad Reza - August 5, 2006 08:25 AM

sdfs :

dig googol scholar out with disequilibrium theory or "disequilibrium theory". it returns
31,500/724 results.
not so bad!
http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=disequilibrium+theory&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en&btnG=Search
http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&lr=&q=%22disequilibrium+theory%22&btnG=Search

sdfs - August 5, 2006 09:57 AM

Ahmad Reza :

while the same search for "equilibrium theory" returned 119 results.

Ahmad Reza - August 5, 2006 10:45 AM

سورنا :

دوست عزیز کاش از بلایا و فجایعی که به علت توصیه های ناسنجیده این استاد در دهه 70 و 80 بر اقتصاد ایران نازل شد هم می نوشتی!!!
این نسل بیش از اینکه مایه افتخار باشد یادمان فجایع برنامه تعدیل و ساخت بزرگترین کانون رانت جویی اقتصاددانان ایرانی است.

سورنا - August 5, 2006 12:21 PM

:

There is a whole host of research on the "business Cycles" and "financial Markets" that deal with "disequilibrium". If a grad student uses terms such as "Rubbish" or "dead wrong" before reading these literature, then one would not expect any civil exchange. Apparently these comments highlight a sort of static"dogma" that point to "there is no substitute to the equilibrium theory".

Anonymous - August 5, 2006 02:02 PM

اختاي :

گفتن چون رشتم مكانيك و اقتصاد خرد نخوندم نمي تونم بيام كلاس تئوري بازيها.
خوشحال مي شدم بيام و از مطالب استفاده كنم.
موفق باشي.

اختاي - August 5, 2006 02:05 PM

روزبه :

Annonymous,
As I said before, you are lost and confused. Talk to your professors. They will help you. Apparently you are spending too much time on google and less on reading and doing your graduate research.
BTW, no! I don't have time to read every piece of B.S that I find on google and then make bold and bogus statement like yours. Instead of googling go and study papers in major publications.
good luck

روزبه - August 5, 2006 03:48 PM

reza :

Here is an excerpt from the web page you provided

reza - August 5, 2006 04:00 PM

:

In the schools that I have attended (NYU & MIT), grad students proceed beyond core curricula, and faculty is involved in advanced research concepts way beyond the basic scope you are referring to. It is is by no means an "unholly" concept to go beyond
the conventional scope of "supply side economy" and deal with the traits of monetary economy. I am dumbfounded to understand why any reference to such concepts should be perceived as a "betrayal". Who is being threatetend here? you or the readers? Who are you trying to control? In the economic departments these approaches are interacting with each other and respect the research process withouout jumping the gun.

Anonymous - August 5, 2006 05:06 PM

reza :

I really hope that you become more precise, and pay more to what other people have to say/offer, in your professional studies and later in your career

reza - August 5, 2006 06:22 PM

Roozbeh :

Anonymous,
Name "one" paper from "one" professor at MIT or NYU that has a decent and coherent analysis based on "disequilibrium". You either don't know what you are talking about or you are confused over the concept of equilibrium.
If you think I am a dogmatic person, don't take it from me. Ask you favorite professor over there.

Roozbeh - August 5, 2006 07:15 PM

reza :

since i am obssessed by my comments :) and read them a couple of times at least, i realized that in my previous comment i forgot to mention "roozbeh" at a point that was quite due & appropriate and i want to make sure that it is clear that our "anonymous" does not seem to get "roozbeh" main points as well, it is not just HAMED and me

reza - August 5, 2006 09:07 PM

آشفته :

رسيدن به اصلي مانند اصل 44 در كشور و ابلاغ آن از سوي بالاترين مقام كشور به مقامات اجرايي مرهون سالها تلاش و بحث دكتر و شاگردانش با دولتمردان ايران است...

آشفته - August 6, 2006 09:45 AM

از زندگی :

استفاده کردیم. و مشتاق دیدار

از زندگی - August 10, 2006 12:41 PM