Talk:John Muth
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
Additional information
editJohn Muth was later affiliated with Michigan State University from 1964 to 1969 and Indiana University from 1969 until his retirement in 1994.
Un-cited usage?
editIt appears that chunks of the article are nearly directly copied from Chapter 1 (and perhaps more) of "Rational Expectations (Cambridge Surveys of Economic Literature)" by Steven Sheffrin. The section on Holt et. al. (1960), for example, appears in the first pages of Ch 1: http://www.amazon.com/Rational-Expectations-Cambridge-Economic-Literature/dp/0521474000 [click "look inside" if that doesn't automatically appear]. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.252.49.201 (talk) 22:01, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
Legacy?
editThe legacy part says:
It has hard to point to one substantial area of economic research which has not changed as a result of the publication of Muth's works at GSIA. Almost paradoxically, the only viable alternative to Muth's hypothesis is the research agenda put forward by Herb Simon and his concept of "bounded rationality".
The article doesn't describe the relevance of rational expectations to game theory. Is there any connection? If not, the first sentence seems unjustified, given the huge impact of game theory on many branches of economics, including say, Industrial Organization. (I can't see how expectations play any role Harsanyi's Bayesian games, which is the usual way of modeling beliefs and uncertainty in game theory.)
Secondly, why would bounded rationality be a relevant (let alone the only viable) alternative? Wouldn't the obvious first step be to introduce more moments (e.g. variance)?
Hyper-POVy
editWow! Quite the POV-push in this article! “the only viable alternative to Muth's hypothesis is the research agenda put forward by Herb Simon and his concept of ‘bounded rationality’”? Hardly. —SlamDiego←T 04:14, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
agreed 128.12.64.26 (talk) 03:07, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
Missing 1960 article and the origins of rational expectations
editThere are two articles dated 1960 using the name John F. Muth, yet in this Wikipedia article the major works include only one dated that year.
It should also be noted that Franco Modigliani has claimed that REH is based on his and Emile Grunberg's work, which is not true since the idea is clearly and already in Oskar Morgenstern's "Vollkommene Voraussicht und wirtschaftliches Gleichewicht" where he shows the idea of economic-model-consistent expectations, which is based on an idea old thousands of years. It shows also that Perfect Foresight is not a Lucas invention despite the commonly held belief.
The name John F. Muth is at the same time a wordplay and it is interesting that there are no photos available of him, just a drawn picture and links to libertarian think tanks. The "htum" can be found in the German word "Reichtum" which corresponds Frank H. Knight's claim that the word liberty meant previously wealth. Ayn Rand's (Alisa Rosenbaum's) book Atlas Shrugged includes a line telling that the pieces connected to nothing.
The Nobel memorial prize receivers have no John F. Muth among them, despite Herbert A. Simon's recommendation that "Jack" Muth should get it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Noise Superimposed (talk • contribs) 13:09, 11 September 2016 (UTC)