Which program is better?

I would go to Stanford for several reasons. One is Stanford is strong in basically every subfield, while Chicago's strength is macro alone(and to some extent development economics also).Another is Chicago fails half of its PhD admittant in prelim, while Stanford basically doesn't fail anyone. If such a pressure is put on a student, prelim can unnecessarily be a big headache after getting admitted with that much effort.Third is , well, stanford is located in the cosmopolitan Palo Alto, while Chicago is located in a redneck backwater Chicago:-)

Actually, both choices are great, as any economist would tell you. Depends on your preference.

Tribhuvan university is much better.

Oh i also got into all the ivy leagues...which one is the best in showing off? yale? but its in a ghetto. Harvard? but summer's a racist. Columbia?I don't like the subways. Princeton?Its so lonely there. Dartmouth? too cold. Brown? is rhode island a state? jees what am i to do?

in jest ;)

on a serious note, for a person starting Ph.D you better know which one is better!all the best.

thanks for the feedback, actually for undergrad for my sibling...

fully agree with kankai river. stanford is solid for most subfields in micro - i/o, game, financial, behavioral, experimental etc., particularly game theory. chicago, on the other hand, remains the bastion for old school supply siders. surviving the chicago prelims, i've heard is extremely difficult. they are known to enroll a shitload of eager beaver phd aspirants (who fall easy prey to the chicago appeal) and make life so difficult for them that they either fail or simply call it quits. the term "cut-throat competition" is fully operationalized here. stanford environment on the other hand is quite collegial and there is a decent amount of cooperation among students and faculty.

congratulations if you've been admitted to both.

for undergrad, it doesn't matter. send your sibling to stanford. better weather, better quality of life. if he/she is serious about takin econ further than the undergrad level then ask him/her to take some hardcore classes in pure math.

send ur sibling to stanford. it's a no-brainer. btw, i don't know whether undergrad rankings in econ even exist. even if they do, no-one cares. it's all about the reputation of the undergrad insititution. and stanford is up there. for undergrad, i would put uchicago after the ivies, mit, caltech, stanford, duke. congrats.

If your sibling goes to Stanford, make sure that s/he takes a class or two with David Johnson

Several years ago, over many evening meals at a certain dorm in Boston, David -- who was then a PhD student and who is now an economics professor at Stanford -- changed and challenged my thinking about economics and policy-making, and about also taught me what matters in life in general.

He's also a really nice guy, and loves to argue and debate with such passions that one can't help but greatly admire him.

oohi
ashu

*******
Teacher Talk: Reflections of a middle-aged Midwesterner

By Prof. David Johnson
Dept. of Economics
Monday, April 19, 2004

http://daily.stanford.edu/tempo?page=content&id=13824&repository=0001_article#

I was born and raised in Cincinnati, Ohio in the only U.S. county never carried by FDR in any of his four victorious presidential campaigns. My first commercial plane ride took me east to visit colleges at the age of 17, and before my 18th birthday dinner, my mother took me to the post office to register for the draft.

If any of you know Cincinnati, you probably think Pete Rose shouldn?t be in the Hall of Fame but you fail to recognize that most of your personal hygiene routine owes its origin to Proctor & Gamble?s world headquarters on 5th Street downtown. Try to make ?Proctor & Gamble? a vanity plate and you have the name of their best-selling potato chip.

I arrived on the Princeton campus as a freshman in the fall of 1981 and made my way to Alexander Hall to hear the president?s welcome address. He began by informing us that he had just returned from Flushing Meadow where a classmate of ours had reached the women?s quarterfinals of the U.S. Open tennis tournament.

I raised my hand, proudly, when he asked how many of us were valedictorians of our high school class . . . so did about 600 others. I felt gratified I hadn?t peaked too early!

Four years later, I had to choose among seven economics doctoral programs, opted for Harvard over Stanford (in a weak moment) but deferred it a year so I could attend the London School of Economics and experience a different culture from the Midwestern ethos I had known and loved. I even heard a foreign language when I traveled to Scotland (ever seen the monument to Adam Smith in Edinburgh?).

Early in my doctoral program I began to teach the principles course (at Harvard it?s taught mostly in section by graduate students) and, using The Boston Globe?s editorial page as my guide, came to realize just how economically illiterate the public was.

Thus was born my passion for introducing students to the wonderful world of economics. This role has taken me from the Harvard Westlake School in Los Angeles, to Saint Ann?s School in Brooklyn, where I taught both principles and intermediate economics to juniors and seniors for three years. (It was also there that I met my wife!) From Brooklyn, I went on to Duke for six years where my wife completed her doctoral degree in botany and genetics and where our daughter Zoe was born.

Finally, I made it to Stanford, where Penelope came eight days late so she could provide me an excuse to miss the Econ 1 final last spring.

In many ways, I have led a charmed life, but I thought I?d leave you with two rather important pieces of advice. First, as all of you chose Stanford over East Boise State or Pepperdine or UC-Davis or Cal, please take full advantage of the choices afforded you with this degree. For the two years following your graduation, be bold; do something radical; namely, service that passion you?ve held ever since junior high ? to join the Peace Corps, to teach middle school, to work for the Republican National Committee (radical, indeed!), to go undercover as a dancer in Vegas . . . believe me, law school or Wall Street can wait.

The pressure for the killer job or the killer graduate school experience often obscures one of the main reasons you opted to come here ? choices. Pity so many students feel the need to pursue immediately that one career that will please Uncle Henry or Dad or Grandma over those options that meet only furrowed brows at Thanksgiving your senior fall.

I?ve never known anyone with a Stanford-caliber degree who?s serviced a true passion and NOT been successful. How many of you who?ve just scoffed at this fortune cookie logic are busy puckering up for your Merrill Lynch interview?

Second, don?t forget to have children. Don?t find yourself at Le Cirque celebrating that partnership wondering, divorced at 42, what?s next. The births of my two daughters trump even the ?75 World Series. You will find no more difficult or more frustrating or more gratifying or more joyous role than that of parent. And certainly none more important in your life.

As you channel surf and reject ?My Big Fat Fianc?e,? you?re wistful for Sesame Street with recent special guests Kofi Annan and ?N Sync. You laugh at your daughter who refuses to accept the letter ?N? ? it?s just a Z that?s confused! You rejoice when your younger child takes her first steps knowing this milestone opens yet another Pandora?s box of potential dangers.

You spend most of your adult life securing for them the choices you had ? among which will be the one that fuels their passion and makes you proud of the freedom you gave them, a freedom some loved one is currently giving all of you.

David Johnson is a professor of Economics.

That's what I did. As soon as i got my MPP degree from U of Southern Cal, I became a truck driver and did that for two and a half years.I enjoyed it thoroughly but had to give it up for ghar and wife. Crisscrossed US and went to Canada, Mexico. It was fun. Reading that article just bought it back.
Must admit, GC from DV helped a lot.

Took a course on microeconomics with David johnson. Didn't do well. Decided not to do economics :-)

Nepalikanchi, I know a nepali majoring in economics here. Send me an email if you want your sibling to have someone to talk to for more info about econ undergrad at stanford.

university of chicago offers good programs pertaining to humanities and social sciences....stanford is more technical...courses of artificial intelligence in stanford beats MIT and princeton

Here is one young U Chicago economics profressor praising an older U Chicago economics professor.

Enjoy,

oohi
ashu
************************

Wednesday, April 06, 2005
An ode to Gary Becker

My friend and colleague Gary Becker is arguably the most influential economist of the last fifty years. I published a study in the American Economic Association Papers and Proceedings a few years back that attempted to identify which economic theories and economic theorists were having an influence on cutting edge, data driven economic research today.

The most amazing finding was that papers Becker had written in the 1950s, 1960s, 1970s, 1980s, 1990s, and 2000s were all actively influencing research today. Becker came out head and shoulders ahead of any other economic theorist in terms of impact.

No one else had more than a couple of papers (typically published just a few years apart) that qualified as influential. Becker is not only the Michael Jordan of economics, he is the Gordie Howe of economics as well.

What is Becker's secret? It doesn't hurt to be incredibly smart. That isn't really what sets him apart, though, I don't think. He has four other traits that are just as important: he works harder than anyone else, he loves what he does, he is not afraid of criticism, and he has never stopped learning new things.

A case in point about learning new things. At the age of 73 or 74, Becker decided to stop writing a monthly Business Week column he had been doing for twenty years. Is he slowing down? Retiring? Nope. The reason he stopped is because he felt like he could have a greater impact writing a blog with the renowned legal scholar Judge Richard Posner. And judging from the fact that they have received over 2000 comments on their postings in the first few months, my guess is he might be right about the power of the Blog vs. print media.

posted by Steven D. Levitt at 11:17 AM

If you love to party all the time and yet get an undergrad degree in economics I will definately advice you to go to Northwestern University in Evanston, Illinois which is located just north of Chicago in suburban sttting which is less than an 45 minutes away from downtown Chicago.

If you are very conservative minded person with no intention of partying for any reason whatsoever,l then Andrews University in Berrien Springs, Michigan will be one the most suitable choice for you.

Goodluck

Oh trust me, people who graduate from a school of hard knocks are in a much better shape. And they tend to be more individualistic.
What good is Stanford or U Chicago if you can't even replace a broken light bulb or a blown up gasket?

sour grapes?

I haven't gone to college, nor am I planning to. Some of these ivy leaguers just amuse me. I don't need nobody to replace my tires. I can do it myself. Don't need nobody to fix up my clogg up toilet. Can do it myself. Me personally, I take the handson approach. I work in the docks these days. And it's good pay and a very challenging job. Been to all 50 states, to 5 different continents. Just love the outdoors.
4 years of grinding and what do most people achieve? Nothing really. I'm completely a laid-back guy, don't care diddly squat about how others are doing--no jealousy. Colleges only spit out sheep, no thinkers.
Just remember, Bill Gates was a college dropout.

power to you bro.

"Just remember, Bill Gates was a college dropout."

---> So is the burger flippin Billy in 33rd Street. :)

I see only one advantage an ivy leaguer has over regular ( non ivy but accredited) schools. That is : Name. Generally speaking, one who secures 3.9 GPA from non ivy is better than the one with 3.8 GPA. Please note, it is not a case of sour grapes, but a fact I have come to know.

Anyone who can secure 3.9, 3.9, 4.0 GPA in no ivy league will secure almost identicle GPA in ivy schools too. The name, recoznition of the school is the only difference. Trust me the ivy league school does not teach you stuffs from mars or venus. It is the same shit. But ain't bad to get some name behind you. But not many care when you come to the field if you've excellent resume to back you.

Isn't Bush an ivy leaguer?

IndisGuise:)

Lol Indi bro, BUsh manchhe ta khatara chha ni. Jhutho bole ko bole chha tara ek thopa kasle haluanna sake hoina. Budhi ta uska chha ni pakkka businessman ko

"So is the burger flippin Billy in 33rd Street. :) "

The cab-driving Ramesh fresh out of India probably has a Master's degree from some Indian university. College education does not guarantee $$$, trust me on that. People who can think out of the box are in a much better position. Think innovation.
Me, I'm interested in starting my own business. Been saving every cent so one day a million bucks would just be pocket change for me. Will happen some day. The process is slow, but I'm already starting.
While some people waste 4 straight years going to college, I have been busy planning my future. In the grand scheme of things, just remember, the hare always wins over the turtle. What probability is there that a turtle beats a hare in a race? Almost zero probability. Now in fairy tales the reverse is true. And a fairy tale is but an old wives' tale that's supposed to make us feel good. I hardly know any fairy tales that are depressing. There are, but they all got so-called "morals". Ehh, who needs morals.

After applying the old questions:

"Are you beautiful because I love you? or
Do I love you because you are beautiful?"

to

"Are you smart because you go to Stanford? or
Are you at Stanford because you are smart?"


it's worth noting that, all things being equal, selective colleges/ universities tend to
admit students with intrinsic traits/characteristics that high-paying jobs (say, investment banking, strategy consulting in America, etc) tend to value.

Bill Gates was admitted to Harvard because Harvard admissions officers thought
he was/is smart (regardless of how they defined smartness to serve their admission purposes).

Even without his degree, Bill Gates has gone on to make tons of money, BECAUSE,
well, he has remained smart.

In either case, Bill Gates' instrinsic smartness was/is pretty much the same, and that
has made all the difference.

Bottom line?
Regardless of whether you go to Harvard or Tri Chandra college, it pays to be intrinsically smart (in both academic and practical sense) to make the most of
life's opportunities.

******

That said, for Nepali students from Nepal though, I would say though I have no hard proof, graduating from pretty much ANY college/university in America leads to a
higher income down the road -- either in Nepal or in America -- IN COMPARISON
to (similar-trait) peers who stay back in Nepal for college/university studies.

So:

Advice to smart young Nepali students:

Go to America or institutions in other countries (except India's Bihar) to earn more later.
Go to more selective colleges in America and other countries to earn even more.

oohi
ashu