Update V: John has emailed apologising for his OTT reaction and the incorrect statements he has made regarding my publication output. That is a very decent thing to do and I thank him for his email.
Update IV: Remember when John Quiggin claimed that Alberto Alesina’s 20-year old work on economic austerity had not been published in a peer-reviewed journal?. Well he is at it again.
Davidson has managed to convince the ever-gullible Andrew Bolt that pieces in Policy (not even ranked as a peer-reviewed journal by the ARC), Agenda (ranked C, and generously so) and a bunch of CIS/IPA publications constitute a stellar publication record. There’s nothing wrong with publishing in magazines like these (I do plenty of it), but it’s supposed to be a by-product of academic research, not a substitute for it.
Having been caught out fabricating my research output, he is going for a second bite of the cherry.
But it is always the basic facts that kill. Policy was on the ARC ERA list of journals – albeit a C the ARC thought it to be a peer-reviewed journal. Agenda, where John publishes quite often, is actually ranked as a B. In all of that he hoping nobody will notice that I have published in A* and A journals too. John thought he could do a quick smear and got caught out on the facts. Now he is trying to retreat to a second set of facts, it turns out that he’s got them wrong too.
Update III: This is the sort of thing that has been going around Twitter.
To be fair many of the people who asked the question then also tweeted my reply (i.e. this post) but not Jason Wilson. After being prompted, he produced this effort.
So not content with merely repeating John’s fabrication of my research record and then not just updating with new information Jason Wilson accuses me of padding my CV.
Update II: Jim Rose asks the question:
sinclair, imagine how John would have reacted if you made a similar error about his record and employment status?
I don’t have to imagine, I know how he would react. John Quiggin and Jennifer Marohasy had a very similar altercation in 2005. Jennifer made exactly the mistake that John did:
Interestingly, John Quiggin, is paid to research the “sustainable management of the Murray-Darling Basin (MDB)” and is probably also Australia’s highest paid blogger.
He earns a massive $230,000 a year! No typo there.
I began working on MDB in July 2003 and six months later in December 2003 published “Myth and the Murray: Measuring the Real State of the River Environment”.
Since this time there have been two House of Representatives Parliamentary Inquiries on MDB issues; the Living Murray Initiative has been kick-started; and the National Water Initiative ratified.
Quiggin’s University home page gives a list of his submissions, newspaper articles, conference and journal papers. Quiggin regularly contributes opinion pieces to the Financial Review on a range of topics except the MDB. Most of his comment on the MDB appears to have been in his web-blog.
Read the comments – I don’t think John was nearly as good-humoured about that as I am being. In fact it lead to this interesting post.
Following my blog post of 26th April (Australia’s Highest Paid Blogger) John Quiggin has written to me asking that the following information be provided by way of clarification with respect to the paragraph in that blog post starting “Quiggin’s University home page gives a list of his submissions, newspaper articles, conference and …”.
“The project will develop tools for the modelling of uncertainty in the absence of probabilities and with imperfect knowledge about possible events. It will also formalise and assess the precautionary principle for the sustainable management of complex systems. Finally, the project will apply these tools to analyse and improve policies for the reform of property rights, institutions and land and water management in the Murray-Darling system. The project will assist in the formulation of sustainable responses to problems of drought and irrigation-related salinity in the Murray-Darling system.
As reported on the RSMG website, http://www.uq.edu.au/economics/rsmg/index.htm,
the project has so far produced more than 50 publications, in the Murray-Darling Basin Program and the Risk and Uncertainty Program. (The Public Policy Program relates to a separate grant). Restricting attention to the Murray-Darling, and to papers written by me, I have published 2 journal articles, 4 conference papers and 7 working papers.”Ends.
Update I: Having been caught out claiming that I had only published two articles in five years John doubles down. Now he asks would I get tenure with my publication record? But I don’t have tenure. John doesn’t have tenure either even with his track-record.
While we’re on that point he tries to wriggle out of his embarrassment by claiming my publications aren’t listed on my website. I have no control over that but again, I can point to his own situation.
On his website, his own CV needs updating! Complete lack of self-awareness, complete lack of forethought.
Original Post begins
John Quiggin isn’t going to take it any more. He is going to make a fight. Good for him. But you got to get it right when quoting numbers. One of the reasons why the RQF/ERA didn’t want to use online sources for its ranking exercise is that coverage can be patchy. So John uses a patchy resource to compare his output to mine.
Here’s Sinclair: two journal articles\, and zero working papers in the last five years.
…
Here’s me 29 journal articles and 36 working papers in the same period.
As it turns out I’m having my workplan meeting with my HoS later today – with those figures I’m very lucky to have a job. Like John, I don’t have tenure. I don’t know what his views on tenure are, but I’ve always thought that if you do your job well you don’t need tenure. On this score, I’m in a better position than John is – he is on a five year contract, I’m on a continuing contract. I can, however, be performance managed out of my job just as any other Australian employee.
Fortunately I have quite a good story to tell my HoS later today. Let’s start with my teaching:
Not bad – well actually quite good. Those class size have grown over those years. But John doesn’t teach – he is a 100% research academic. To be fair it always hard to know where to put PhD student supervision. Are they teaching or research activity? What about written output? Have I really only written two academic papers in five years? At an imputed cost of about $100,000 per publication.
2008
Sokulsky, D., R. Brooks and S. Davidson. “Untangling Demand Curves from Information Effects: New Evidence from Australian Index Adjustments”. Applied Financial Economics. 18(8) 605 – 616.
Davidson, S. Fry, T. Farrell, L. and Mihajilo, S. 2008, “Contestability of Australian federal elections”, Australian Journal of Political Science, 43(3): 1036 – 1146.
Davidson, S. “Secret Econometric Business: Watching FuelWatch and the ACCC”. Agenda: A Journal of Policy Analysis and Reform. 15(4) 5 – 18. (Lead article).
2009
Davidson, S. “A ‘no tax return’ scheme for Australia? Some inconvenient facts”. Agenda: A Journal of Policy Analysis and Reform. 16(4): 67 – 79.
2010
Davidson, S. and H. Spong. “Positive Externalities and R&D: Two Conflicting Traditions in Economic Theory”. Review of Political Economy. 22(3): 355 – 372.
Davidson, S. “Should we worry about sovereign wealth funds?” Policy. 26(3): 37 – 41.
Davidson, S. “Imprudent lending and the sub-prime crisis: An Austrian school perspective”. Griffith Law Review. 2010, 19(1): 98 – 108.
Davidson, S. “Bankers and scapegoats”. International Financial Review. 11: 119 – 134.
Davidson, S. “The fatally flawed Resource Super Profit Tax”. Tax Policy Journal. 6: 21 – 27.
2011
Davidson, S. “Stimulusgate”. Agenda: A Journal of Policy Analysis and Reform. 18(1) 5 – 11.
2012
Davidson, S. “The limits of property and freedom”. International Trade and Business Law Review. 15: 385 – 393.
Davidson, S. and R. Heaney. “Effective tax rates and the Political Cost hypothesis: A re-evaluation of Australian evidence”. Australian Tax Forum. 27(1) 79 – 105.
Davidson, S. “Treasury Forecasts of Company Tax Revenue: Back of the Envelope or Back to the Drawing Board?” Agenda: A Journal of Policy Analysis and Reform. 19(2): 53 – 62.
Since 1991 I have published 66 academic papers at an average of about three per year. The last five years that is down to about 2.5 per year. What’s going on? Ah, yes. Book chapters.
Davidson, S. 2009. “Tax and Welfare”. In, Keith Windschuttle, David Martin Jones and Ray Evans (eds). The Howard Era. Quadrant Books.
Davidson, S. 2009. Climategate: A failure of governance. In, Alan Moran (ed.), Climate Change: The Facts. Institute of Public Affairs.
Davidson, S. and V. Ramiah. 2010. “The information-adjusted noise model: theory and evidence from the Australian stock market. In Brian Bruce (ed.), The Handbook of Behavioral Finance. Edward Elgar.
Davidson, S. 2011. The faulty arguments behind Australia’s corporate income tax. In, Robert Carling (ed.) Taxploitation II: Tax reform for incentive, productivity and economic growth. Sydney: CIS.
Davidson, S. 2011. Fiscal Illusions: How big government makes tax look small. In, Robert Carling (ed.) Taxploitation II: Tax reform for incentive, productivity and economic growthI. Sydney: CIS.
Davidson, S. 2011. Tax competition: Much to do about very little. In, Robert Carling (ed.) Taxploitation II: Tax reform for incentive, productivity and economic growth. Sydney: CIS.
Davidson, S. 2011. Good intentions versus self interest. In Andrew McIntyre (ed.), The Greens: Policies, Reality and Consequences. Connor Court.
Davidson, S. 2012. Tax and Transfers. In Gary Johns (ed.), Right Social Justice: better ways to help the poor. Connor Court.
Now like John I can supplement that with reports, op-eds, and the like. So where does that leave us?
On my arithmetic, allowing 30 per cent of salary for research, that’s a rate of over $100k per publication.
So $200,000/22 = about $9,000 per publication.
Here’s the thing – as I always argue – government funding, which John does well, results in expensive research. For a mere $150,000 or so (paid for mostly, if not entirely, by international fee paying students, i.e. willing customers) my employer gets teaching and research, all those other things academics get to do, and my sunny disposition thrown in for free. My HoS normally just sighs and gets that long suffering look when I inform him about my sunny disposition.
Here is another thing – as Ronald Coase famously said:
An economist who, by his effort, is able to postpone by a week a government program which wastes $100 million a year (what I would consider a modest success) has, by his action, earned his salary for the whole of his life.
or George Stigler said:
… he will have saved society twice his lifetime salary, and his teaching services will have been thrown in for free.
After all the work I did to destroy the mining tax (mind you, Wayne Swan was a great help), not to mention FuelWatch, I have saved society much, much more than twice my lifetime salary.
Quiggan is too expensive at 5 millionth the price.
His two cent worth is about right – about 250 millionth the price
JamesK
14 Mar 13 at 9:25 am
Is there a single sound argument that justifies tenure? I’m aware of several and not one of them is worth a pinch of shit, especially given the toxic quackademic culture evident in pretty much all of our institutes of higher learning.
Tenure is an unaffordable anachronism.
Rabz
14 Mar 13 at 9:45 am
Surely you don’t earn your lifetime’s salary by delaying a government program for a week, more like if you end it a week early?
ar
14 Mar 13 at 9:58 am
Good stuff Sinc. Cut & Paste worthy for sure.
Rousie
14 Mar 13 at 10:00 am
Something new seems have emerged in the last 20 years or so: Academics who despise their discipline.
Economists who despise the economics where they live; Jouranlism professors who think journalists need to be put under control; Historians who think the past a barbarous wasteland or greed, oppression, hatred and misery; Philosophers who adhere to the principle that there is no truth and reason an offshoot of male hegemony; Literature professors who think literature only demonstrates colonial power structures and think advertising more worth study than Shakespeare.
And the sciences are not completely free of this either, baulking at lines of thought on political grounds.
Toiling Mass
14 Mar 13 at 10:03 am
Give up Sinc, you can’t argue with (insert choice) perfection or an idiot.
johninoxley
14 Mar 13 at 10:09 am
It is not hard to despise the discipline when you see that the Nobel Paul Samuelson published in his best-selling text book, year after year, that the Soviet economy was performing strongly and rapidly overhauling the US.
Of course he was Keynesian, a mathematician and a welfare statist (the trifecta).
Rafe
14 Mar 13 at 10:10 am
•Feminists who despise successful women if they are not leftists.
•Black-rights advocates who despise blacks if they are not leftists.
•Academics who despise fellow academics if they are not leftists.
•Journalists and journo-school elitists who despise fellow journalists if they are not leftists.
Is there a pattern here?
JamesK
14 Mar 13 at 10:12 am
Hilarious.
I suppose it’s too much to hope that he does his other research to a better standard.
Hole in the foot, not in the target
Cato the Elder
14 Mar 13 at 10:13 am
Sorry, Sinc, but no bronze statute for you.
dover_beach
14 Mar 13 at 10:16 am
Doesn’t matter, Sinclair. Your fall back position is still safe – Treasurer and Grand Inquisitor in the Kingdom of Winston.
And it will pay a damn sight more.
Winston SMITH
14 Mar 13 at 10:23 am
Hmmm, a sunny disposition or Quiggin. Let me think about this……
Keith
14 Mar 13 at 10:24 am
Game (well, lots of them), set and match.
Quiggan can return to his burrow before the next ball belts him. At least it would have knocked some of the egg off his face.
One wonders if any common sense kicks in before the would-be denigrator makes an utter fool of himself.
James of the Glens
14 Mar 13 at 11:03 am
I have no idea what RQF or HoS stand for, but I’m assuming you knocked Quiggin’s argument into a cocked hat.
Looks like you’re off his blog roll too.
Eddystone
14 Mar 13 at 11:07 am
Quiggin earning 400k a year is disgusting.
Any public servant earning that much is disgusting, let alone one who contributes nothing useful at all except to preach wrongology.
Yobbo
14 Mar 13 at 11:43 am
Quiggin was clearly talking about quality journal articles.
William Bragg
14 Mar 13 at 11:52 am
Hos was in Bonanza. He died years ago. You are so in trouble when I tell Conroy
WhaleHunt Fun
14 Mar 13 at 11:52 am
$400,000 a year could support 30 single mothers or unemployed people.
Or 1 John Quiggin.
Yobbo
14 Mar 13 at 11:56 am
Braggs
You need to get back to us about the envy tax you have in mind and why an interviewee with an expensive suit should pay a compensatory tax to those wearing a less expensive one, you mental midget.
——–
LOl.. I notice Harry is over there on his back with his belly showing. Talk about transparent groveling.
Hey Harry, everyone is well aware what you’re up to and they still won’t respect you in the morning. You know that, right?
JC
14 Mar 13 at 11:58 am
Shouldn’t that be – he is on his belly with something else showing?
pete m
14 Mar 13 at 12:00 pm
No, Catallaxy is still on the blog roll.
Gab
14 Mar 13 at 12:09 pm
That’s about the 30th time you’ve mentioned the suit tax, JC, even though I never did. Still, we understand you’re need to verbal opponents if you’re to stand any chance of defeating them, and if it helps you manage your psychosis I suppose there’s no real harm.
William Bragg
14 Mar 13 at 12:16 pm
Yes braggs ill keep repeating what you until you apologise to the readership. You envy ridden dick
JC
14 Mar 13 at 12:21 pm
Braggsy, if Quiggin was talking about ‘quality’ journal articles he should have made that qualifier clear.
And as someone who does nothing but contribute glib, one-line, hit-and-run posts on blogs like this, you are no doubt well qualified to judge what are quality journals and what are not.
Monkey's Uncle
14 Mar 13 at 12:22 pm
Hey not for nothing but that academia stuff looks like a great gig.
I reckon I could turf put one research paper a day if I put my mind to it. Pal review would be easy ….
I could have been one of the great ones.
JC
14 Mar 13 at 12:24 pm
Publishing quality papers and journals is obviously a very important part of being an academic (as is teaching well)!
But surely a very popular blog, while much less formal, is actually doing more to:
1. educate and inform a wider audience
2. encourage vigorous debate
3. get ideas, concepts and theories aggressively peer reviewed (as distinct from ‘lay’ commentary by the wider audience)
I would put more weight on an idea or concept that could stand the heat on a popular blog, than one that was, say, published by an academic and peer reviewed in an obscure left-wing journal.
John Mc
14 Mar 13 at 12:39 pm
Sinc, responding to Quiggers in this way is a waste of time and energy. In a public world we don’t accept the authority of dubious experts in a contentious subject. We look at the arguments and make judgments on the quality of the mind and character revealed by them. You are so far ahead of sad old Quiggers you can forget about any comparisons. The fact that he chooses to rate himself by counting publications says it all. Don’t validate this stupid criterion.
DrBeauGan
14 Mar 13 at 12:50 pm
DrBeauGan – I don’t mind him saying I’m a numbnut or whatever; but he suggested I am bone-idle.
Sinclair Davidson
14 Mar 13 at 1:10 pm
Well you do spend a lot of time on your yacht.
Gab
14 Mar 13 at 1:13 pm
Hammock, not yacht. I would like to spend time on my yacht.
Sinclair Davidson
14 Mar 13 at 1:20 pm
I drive a bus, very efficiently. I get people to work on time (or close to it) and relatively untraumatised. Some days are better than others, largely depending on whether my head has exploded (when I arise, like Louis. I used to just fall out of bed) due to the latest news of what this embarrassing government has done or didn’t do. By doing my job well I save this nation millions a year in added productivity. Hang on. A lot of my passengers seem to be public servants so maybe I’m way off beam with this. Maybe I should just park under a nice tree until the rush hour is over.
face ache
14 Mar 13 at 1:40 pm
You don’t need to buy a yacht, you just need rich friends.
Wonder what Quiggan is up to?
Dan
14 Mar 13 at 1:43 pm
Perish the thought. Pistols at dawn, Sinc.
Rabz
14 Mar 13 at 1:51 pm
Ah yes Whalehunt, the Cartwrights with Hop Sing the camp cook.
I have always wondered if any other families sat in front of the box when Bonanza was prime time and used pretend firehoses to quench the burning map?
Fire!
Pickles
14 Mar 13 at 2:20 pm
A paper on Australia’s embarrassing clutch of affirmative action Phds would hit the spot.
Alfonso
14 Mar 13 at 2:36 pm
Does anyone know how many academics there are who have no teaching load?
It does seem strange, especially in social sciences.
ken n
14 Mar 13 at 3:38 pm
Maybe this is a silly comment…. Dunno
Why not auction grants so have the players pitch bids… With obvious caveats.
JC
14 Mar 13 at 3:40 pm
Sounds like a bloke who leads with his chin.
Ozboy
14 Mar 13 at 4:57 pm
Ah yes, Quiggles Flies Again (apologies to the author of the boyzone Biggles books)
ianl8888
14 Mar 13 at 5:43 pm
I doubt that we will ever see Brian Fisher and John Quiggin jointly writing a paper (such as the 1988 paper cited)! Brian is an excellent, thoughtful and thorough climate skeptic.
Samuel J
14 Mar 13 at 5:51 pm
What a source of entertainment that old Quigs.
Gab
14 Mar 13 at 5:54 pm
Sinc – as mentioned in another thread, Quiggin has just got another ARC grant for Black Swans….
Now since he works at UQ, does this money go to UQ? Does he get extra salary because of this ARC grant? Does it employ more lackeys? Do they write many of the papers he cites?
More fundamentally. What is the function of an ARC grant for economics projects? At least for others such as astronomy and chemistry it buys access to telescopes, chemistry equipment and labs etc. But for economics, all that is required is access to journals and books (hence a library and electronic access to journals) and access to econometric software (which he would already have at the university). So do these grants defray other university expenses and pay for additional staff + increase Quiggin’s salary?
Samuel J
14 Mar 13 at 5:59 pm
Yes but things like massages, Moisturiser, trips overseas all cost money too.
Gab
14 Mar 13 at 6:21 pm
Ouch!
Oh come on
14 Mar 13 at 6:24 pm
sinclair, imagine how John would have reacted if you made a similar error about his record and employment status?
Jim Rose
14 Mar 13 at 6:27 pm
I believe it goes some thing like this:
- the largest part of the grant goes to replacing the recipients salary, freeing up the costs for the university and allowing the recipient to focus solely on research for the duration of the project (i.e., ARC pays the 150-200k salary instead of the university);
- a specified proportion, relatively small I believe, goes to admin costs (i.e., say 20-30k goes to the university/school to supplement admin costs); and
- what is left is discretionary spending, probably going to a travel fund of some sort, software packages, and paying for postdocs and PhD students who are bundled into the project (i.e., say 2 postdocs at 70k a piece and 2 PhD students at 20k a piece).
But all of this would have been covered in the grant application and subject to a number of other rules. A good gig if you can get it.
Trent
14 Mar 13 at 6:27 pm
“Now he asks would I get tenure with my publication record? But I don’t have tenure.”
The dig wasn’t about tenure. It was elitist snootiness about where you get published, as foreshadowed in the post itself:
“While we’re on that point he tries to wriggle out of his embarrassment by claiming my publications aren’t listed on my website.”
To be fair, he explained why he didn’t know about the rest of your publications – they didn’t appear on the database, or on your website. If there was no other way to find out, then it’s an acceptable error.
But then he ruined it by saying that it “didn’t change the relativities”. If he meant he was still ahead in raw numbers, that might be true, but the relativities obviously change when the numbers change.
Jarrah
14 Mar 13 at 6:41 pm
Google is your friend. Publish or Perish too. There are plenty of ways to find the information he sought. He could have asked me.
Sinclair Davidson
14 Mar 13 at 6:53 pm
Sinc
I love your work.
JC
14 Mar 13 at 6:55 pm
“Google is your friend. Publish or Perish too. There are plenty of ways to find the information he sought. He could have asked me.”
Absolutely. I’m glad I included the word ‘if’.
Jarrah
14 Mar 13 at 6:56 pm
You also know without mentioning names who loves your work too.
You were held up in various meetings as singularly providing the best defense against the mining tax.
JC
14 Mar 13 at 6:57 pm
Its about time cattalaxians got tough on Quiggin! More, more!
Annabelle
14 Mar 13 at 7:05 pm
Sinc
You say
” I don’t know what his views on tenure are, but I’ve always thought that if you do your job well you don’t need tenure. On this score, I’m in a better position than John is – he is on a five year contract, I’m on a continuing contract. I can, however, be performance managed out of my job just as any other Australian employee. ”
Yeah well thats a point Id like to put to honourable Professor Quiggin as well who has been tenured since the bloody sunb came up, before they casualiased the uni sector and now 705 are casual in fron of the classrooms and in teaching and are treated like utter crap
whilst the Quiggins of the world got their tenure decades ago and treat casuals as if they are the bottom feeders of the foood chain in unis.
His type make me want to throw up. Its alright for some in unis (lets not talk about the greedy old bastards who retire collect super and then in typical Aussie mates style give themselves fractional appountments and all travel and extra perks at half their old salary until trhey have a bloody stroke) isnt it?
Two tier bullshit in unis, and here is Quiggin talking about what he publishes likely whilst he is well looked after with a hoard of casuals and phd students to keep him in the manner to which he should never have been allowed to become accustomed.
Aliice
14 Mar 13 at 7:23 pm
705 just in case you are wondering should read 70%
I will also say this – I nwrote and wrote to the dear Professor Qu\iggin about the growing casualisation in unis and the poor treatment of its teachers and those who actually do the work at the coalface
His response? Bloody nothing. Not even a pos or a comment. He is quite happy with his tenured position and is a damn hypocrite (Pretend leftie??)
So many like that in unis (where is the broom?)
Aliice
14 Mar 13 at 7:26 pm
Aliice – deep breath. Count to ten. He doesn’t have tenure.
Jim – I have answered your question as an update.
Sinclair Davidson
14 Mar 13 at 7:26 pm
Well Sinc – I do have to take a deep breath when I think about POrofessor Quiigin.
What do you mean he doesnt have tenure? What does it matter? He probably has a gentlemans agreement they will keep rolling it over. Quiggin has been very comfortably appointed for decades.
Well not withstanding I can think of a few old farts who do have it (tenure) and contribute very damn little and have abused the system and rip out more than they are entitled to (some by making eveyone elses lives miserable with cost cutting) Sinc.
Aliice
14 Mar 13 at 7:37 pm
You also make a salient point Sinc.
When was the last time John Quiggin stood in front of a class of undergrads and tried to make his subject interesting for them? That is an art indeed.
There are too many “researcher” onlys in unis now running econ in the barest least interesting fashion known to man and the reality is they couldnt give a damn about the teaching when they are on research contracts.
What they do is use the text supplied lecture slides. The entire text answers and they make no attempt to focus the students or even answer their questions – seeing teaching as beneath their monumental egos.
Been there recently. Done that. Wont teach for pratts like that.
Aliice
14 Mar 13 at 8:00 pm
Well, yes. I’m not a fan of research only academics. I can’t work out why they work in universities and not think tanks, or merchant banks etc. At the same time I’m a fan of teaching only academics either.
Sinclair Davidson
14 Mar 13 at 8:08 pm
DrBeau ays it all
” The fact that he chooses to rate himself by counting publications says it all.”
Yes it does – he is part of the system not critical of it.
Quiggin is doing ok by pumping out papers…thats what the unis want. How useful it is in questionable given many are just variations on a theme already played somewhere else and unis are now excelling themselves at pumping out very short pithy or “replicate a previous study in a different location” type stuff (as long as it is PUBLISHED), pieces with not much depth. Cant even get a half decent textbook written these days.
Aliice
14 Mar 13 at 8:11 pm
Old dowagers go at each other with handbags, dons pelt chalk and paper at each other. The Festival of Slight Cuts and Dust.
Pickles
14 Mar 13 at 8:13 pm
Yes, you could never accuse him of espousing quality over quantity.
Gab
14 Mar 13 at 8:15 pm
I am not a fan of either research only or teaching only academics.
As a classrom teacher (yes the lackey at the coalface), teaching only academics can also drive you bonkers with totally hair brained schemes for running class time (seeing students as a pack of guinea pigs to experiment on).
But research only academics drive you even madder for having no interest in students or their learning whatsoever.
Sometimes I just am relieved to get into the class and get away from both kinds.
Aliice
14 Mar 13 at 8:16 pm
thanks Sinclair, If you were a fan of behavioural economics, which John might be, you are in a position that errors of recollection and in processing of information and inattention to detail will be common.
In such a situation, you would be more forgiving of human error and disagreement because they are due to the cognitive quirks we all have rather than bad intention?
Jim Rose
14 Mar 13 at 8:19 pm
“Yes, you could never accuse him of espousing quality over quantity.”
Don’t be too quick to judge:
Jarrah
14 Mar 13 at 8:23 pm
sinclair, do good teaching evaluations count for much in the academic rat race?
Jim Rose
14 Mar 13 at 8:24 pm
Without a doubt John Quiggin’s intention was “bad” – the whole ‘starting out as I intend to go on’ theme, especially after the previous post when he wrote ‘So, from now on, I plan to give as good as I get and, if possible, a bit more’ raises no doubt in my mind that he intended to do serious damage to my reputation. The ‘fact’ that I have published only two articles in 5 years is all over twitter.
Sinclair Davidson
14 Mar 13 at 8:24 pm
SD welcome to the world of ALP smear.
stackja
14 Mar 13 at 8:26 pm
Fixed.
Gab
14 Mar 13 at 8:27 pm
stackja – I have been smeared by the ALP before.
Sinclair Davidson
14 Mar 13 at 8:28 pm
John Quiggin is, frankly, despicable on this issue of spreading it about that you ahve only two papers sinc but really if you ask me, I think secretly he is more jealous of your more popular blog that gets more hits than his terribly polite (but boring) well policed (by him) blog.
Aliice
14 Mar 13 at 8:30 pm
many leading papers were initally rejected for publication or published in a minor journal.
Tullock’s 1967 rent seeking paper was rejected in different places because his points were well-known, the paper was wrong, and it made no new contribution.
after been unread for over a decade, this paper is now one of the most widely cited papers in economics – an ultimate triumph of science over ideology.
Coase’s great 1937 paper lay dormant for decades.
Jim Rose
14 Mar 13 at 8:31 pm
see http://www.forbes.com/forbes/97/0922/6006073a_print.html on tullock
Jim Rose
14 Mar 13 at 8:33 pm
Jim asks
“sinclair, do good teaching evaluations count for much in the academic rat race?”
The unis pay lip service to teaching but they are all out there buying visiting research academics, paying for their relocations, letting them sit on a beach in Australia produce one paper in three months and then piss off again (at great expense).
Its about the research paper count and heads you win if you have more tails you lose etc
NO Matter how crappy the papers are…
Aliice
14 Mar 13 at 8:33 pm
Isnt Quiggin a green anyway?
Aliice
14 Mar 13 at 8:36 pm
They are counting for more. Right now we’re in a research bubble – as Aliice describes – but I can’t see it lasting.
Sinclair Davidson
14 Mar 13 at 8:38 pm
Cant possibly last Sinc. There is a profusion of utter meaningless tripe being mass produced research wise.
Aliice
14 Mar 13 at 8:40 pm
Wouldn’t surprise me if he was. He’s no fan of the free market and prefers quantity over quality as a measure of his academic performance.
Gab
14 Mar 13 at 8:41 pm
Visiting teachers do not bring prestige to a department
Jim Rose
14 Mar 13 at 8:43 pm
Sinc, why has Quiggin acted so disgracefully? I don’t recall you doing anything that would have made such a response seem appropriate.
dover_beach
14 Mar 13 at 8:53 pm
Disgraceful and defamatory, Dover.
Gab
14 Mar 13 at 8:54 pm
But often visting researchers dont bring any value at all to teaching or to students (and how can that be good seeing as unis earn the damn income to pay for these people from students – its the students who are getting ripped off). The problem unis have is that once the visiting researcher arrives the uni often insists on on giving them a teaching role also…often as a convenor, which these days is no small job with student numbers being the way they are.
Really some of them (research academics) should be quarantined as far away from students as possible.
Its the unis that cant get their head around that fact that good lecturers and teachers do not necessarily make good researchers and very much vice versa.
skills mismatch.
Aliice
14 Mar 13 at 8:56 pm
“and prefers quantity over quality as a measure of his academic performance.”
Did you not see my 8:23 quote of our good host?
Besides, Quiggin thinks he has it over Davidson in both areas.
Jarrah
14 Mar 13 at 9:03 pm
DB – he has decided to play the man and not the ball. This is a long time coming. In February 2011, for example, he put up a post called “This time it is personal”. Then yesterday, “So, from now on, I plan to give as good as I get and, if possible, a bit more.” Then today, “As I said in my last post, I’m giving as good as I get from now on, and today I seem to be getting plenty”. And so he did.
Sinclair Davidson
14 Mar 13 at 9:03 pm
Sour grapes from Quiggin.
But if its any consolation, “his bit more” will be like cold weak tea so I wouldnt worry too much if I were you Sinc.
Aliice
14 Mar 13 at 9:08 pm
[...] It’s Professor Sinclair Davidson vs Professor John Quiggin on who is the most useful. [...]
climate tax commissar gets pwned … | pindanpost
14 Mar 13 at 9:11 pm
And your decision to post about the amount JQ has received in grants was done purely in the interests of public discussion of what ball, exactly?
I bet there would have been a tweet or two about that post, too.
steve from brisbane
14 Mar 13 at 9:21 pm
Small difference Steve – I posted a public document that is correct. He posted private information that is false.
Sinclair Davidson
14 Mar 13 at 9:27 pm
1 is factual steve – the other is misleading and untruthful.
But that seems to be the same thing in your world.
pete m
14 Mar 13 at 9:29 pm
Lefties have never not played the man – they can’t imagine objective ideas and concepts separate from the man or individual. So they will always play the man – and it’s probably rooted in Plato’s ideas, I venture, which is why they invariably murder their intellectual oppositions.
Louis Hissink
14 Mar 13 at 9:37 pm
Well done, Sinclair.
C.L.
14 Mar 13 at 9:43 pm
Well, you would hope so – the $2 million man with a 100% research weighting? Compared to the 30% research weight? Mind you his 29 actual publications isn’t much more than my 22 actual publications. So 70% more time and about $21,000 more per publication – how much quality can you get?
Sinclair Davidson
14 Mar 13 at 9:48 pm
How will this end?
Will it end?
How will we know it has ended?
Pickles
14 Mar 13 at 9:49 pm
Que????
Louis Hissink
14 Mar 13 at 9:51 pm
“How much quality can you get?”
Don’t worry about the quality Prof. Feel the width.
Pickles
14 Mar 13 at 9:52 pm
SD you are in good company.
stackja
14 Mar 13 at 9:53 pm
For 2 million, not a lot apparently.
Carpe Jugulum
14 Mar 13 at 9:54 pm
If you work as an academic in a university you should teach and research, not just one or the other.
Sinclair Davidson
14 Mar 13 at 9:58 pm
Oh, FFS.
dover_beach
14 Mar 13 at 10:08 pm
The last “either” cornfused me
Louis Hissink
14 Mar 13 at 10:11 pm
Childish arguments from two economists – one aligned to labor and the other to Libs.
All these statistics about journal publications, without economics background no one will know what their citations are, what is the impact factor of the journals etc.
I will urge both of you to stop personal arguments and keep doing what your core core expertise – economic analysis.
And for society’s sake – try to be apolitical please.
neutral
14 Mar 13 at 10:13 pm
DB, Plato “informs” their whole philosophy – the rule of philosopher kings guiding the great unwashed, and as they only come to an intellectual conclusion from intellectual consensus, then it’s the man who becomes important, not the idea itself.
Oppose the consensus and suffer the Socratic end, I suppose.
Louis Hissink
14 Mar 13 at 10:14 pm
neutral – yes, you’re right. I’m taking far too much enjoyment from Professor Quiggin’s mistake.
Sinclair Davidson
14 Mar 13 at 10:19 pm
You need to read the Republic more careful. If you want to see who actually ‘informs’ the Left, look to Bacon’s New Atlantis.
dover_beach
14 Mar 13 at 10:22 pm
DB. Bacon’s New Atlantis? I suppose the 19th century wits would have found Plato a bit too old fashioned, hence a more modern exposition. Another to refresh the grey cells – sigh.
Louis Hissink
14 Mar 13 at 10:29 pm
Sinclair, if you were serious about defending your record there is a fairly straightforward way to do so. Journal quality comparisons using any one of a number of accepted objective measures and citation counts.
As an aside, if you are not responsible for updating your website (by liaising with your web people at RMIT) then who is? Seems very sloppy …
BasicFinance
14 Mar 13 at 10:41 pm
Not at all. As I said, read it more carefully.
dover_beach
14 Mar 13 at 10:44 pm
BasicFinance – I’m not interested in defending my record, just stating the facts. John Quiggin claimed I had published two articles in 5 years – that was a lie.
Preaching to the choir. I must rant about this at least once a year.
Sinclair Davidson
14 Mar 13 at 10:46 pm
The amusing thing coming out from this saga are the Catallaxy rejects.
Mel (steve Munn) who used to post comments here and appeared genuinely mentally disturbed. He was finally banned.
Then there’s Rog (wodge). Wodge literally went to bed one Friday as a right winger and by Monday he was citing Sparrow at Matilda. If wodge has an IQ over 70 I’d eat my hat twice.
And of course there’s Homer. What can we say about Homer?
JC
14 Mar 13 at 10:50 pm
“Small difference Steve – I posted a public document that is correct. He posted private information that is false.”
Hang on – what’s that got to do with man and ball?
“Mind you his 29 actual publications isn’t much more than my 22 actual publications.”
I didn’t say he was right.
“I will urge both of you to stop personal arguments and keep doing what your core core expertise – economic analysis.”
Hear, hear.
Jarrah
14 Mar 13 at 10:53 pm
Who did I forget? Of course, how can I forget old harry.
The only deadbeat who hasn’t tried to lay the boot in from afar is of course Shiny. I think we all know why.
JC
14 Mar 13 at 10:57 pm
I know Sinc has urged us not to pile on Quiggin previously but bloody hell the man paints a massive target on his back at times. He’s a sensitive wee flower too. If one is going to go to “print” with untruths about someone else, one should expect to be called out on it. He, like Krugman, has crossed the line between economist and political commentator.
tbh
14 Mar 13 at 10:58 pm
Jarrah – I’m making conversation.
Sinclair Davidson
14 Mar 13 at 11:12 pm
@ Jim Rose @ 8.31 – recall this: http://www.unifr.ch/wipol/assets/files/PhD%20Course/gans_shepherd1994.pdf
Pyrmonter
14 Mar 13 at 11:21 pm
“To be fair, he explained why he didn’t know about the rest of your publications – they didn’t appear on the database, or on your website. If there was no other way to find out, then it’s an acceptable error.” – Jarrah
Yes, there was no other way of finding out. There are no other databases to search. There would be no reference to the publications anywhere on the internet that a search engine could pick up. Someone capable of handling large research projects like this is apparently not capable of doing a bit of googling and searching a few databases. To simply search one database and assume all publications would be listed there is sloppy. I am sure an undergraduate who made such assertions on the basis of just searching one database would be marked down.
As an academic economist of some experience, you would expect Quiggin to have more awareness of what material is being published and who is publishing extensively within his own academic field. And yet he apparently was not aware that Sinclair has published far more extensively over the past few years than Quiggin claims. I suspect he just ignores material that is not to his ideological preferences and largely lives in his own echo chamber.
Your attempts to shill for Quiggin are becoming tiresome.
Monkey's Uncle
15 Mar 13 at 12:36 am
John Kwiggin sounds like he is getting punchy. When I see someone shouting on a blog like that, I’d be taking precautions.
Fisky
15 Mar 13 at 2:40 am
He could always have asked. But instead he made false professional accusations and was predictably beclowned.
Fisky
15 Mar 13 at 2:41 am
‘Theft’ just doesn’t have enough nuance….
Forester
15 Mar 13 at 9:42 am
Seems like Quiggans has a bad case of publishing envy.
Gab
15 Mar 13 at 4:05 pm
Serious question Sinclair. Do you have grounds to sue for professional defamation?
Because it’s the only way to stop these idiots.
Winston SMITH
15 Mar 13 at 5:16 pm
Tenured Austrian Economists vs. Murray Rothbard
Problem is where to fit Quiggin in this scenario.
If at all.
Louis Hissink
15 Mar 13 at 8:13 pm
Winston – My discipline leader is suggesting just that. But I’m very reluctant – our courts have have far more important issues than two academics having a spat. Bottom line is this – I’m happy for the market for ideas to clear. Those people who dislike me will still do so, those who dislike Quiggin will still do so, those who were previously indifferent are more likely to think that John got this horribly wrong. He has more to lose than I have, he started this, he keeps getting the facts wrong, and he can end this anytime he likes.
Sinclair Davidson
15 Mar 13 at 9:14 pm
Sinc
Bugger Quiggin. He is an old woman who measures academic worth by the numbers of papers.
(without even counting yours properly???).
Doesnt that say it all?? He is part of a flawed systen and and not a critic off it (does that mean he has lost his true creitical faculties or has been so rewarded within the flawed uni system he has become co-opted?). He is the original leftie who sold his soul years ago and now is only a charicature of a leftie.
He is a hypocrite Sinclair – thats all he is. He wouldnt even do one post aboput the obscene and growing casulistaion in the uni sector – so obviously his part time conytractual gig is repeating and he is the token leftie publishing economist who doesnt want to rock the boat.
Aliice
15 Mar 13 at 9:26 pm
Sue him Sinc.
Aliice
15 Mar 13 at 9:27 pm
Ask the bastard when the last time was he fronted a class to pass on his expertise?
Aliice
15 Mar 13 at 9:30 pm
huh Clarke? Who is he?
Aliice
15 Mar 13 at 9:39 pm
He posted a comment there under HC.
JC
15 Mar 13 at 9:39 pm
He used to be right wing, sort of Tory right and over the past coupla years has veered off as a fully dedicated Greenslimer.
How do you go from literally believing one set of principles one day and the next attacking those who you once agreed with.
JC
15 Mar 13 at 9:42 pm
Aliice – as I said before, “deep breath”. Slagging John Quiggin for a systemic problem isn’t going to get you far or anyone else. Yes, I agree that research only academics are a drain on the system – but as long as universities are prepared to pay for such things he should take advantage of them as best he can. I have no problem with John maximising his income within the system – good for him. Adam Smith ended up working as a tax collector. The solution is to change the system.
Sinclair Davidson
15 Mar 13 at 9:45 pm
Oh I just checked what the orecious John Qhiggin had to say over at John Quiggins moring econ blog
” my Australian Laureate Fellowship (total budget, including lots of postdocs, PhD students etc, $2 million over 5 years) as an imposition on the taxpayer.”‘
Well fancy that. You know something?
I think its a damn drag on the taxpayer as well. No wonder he can put out twenty or more papers a years when he collects $400,000 a yer to pay a couple of research students peanuts to do all the writing and research for him.
Really and John Quiggin thinks he isnt a drag on the taxpayer??
Aliice
15 Mar 13 at 9:45 pm
Sorry Sinc
Im taking a deep breath.
But Quiggin is a drain on the taxpayer and a pseudo leftie as well.
Aliice
15 Mar 13 at 9:47 pm
Clarke believes in AGW, JC the climate scientist thinks he’s wrong.
sdfc
15 Mar 13 at 9:54 pm
Irrespective of AGW or not, the policy is contestable. Over the last few years in public debate, I have always started by conceding the “science” and the AGW types at that point have nothing to say.
Sinclair Davidson
15 Mar 13 at 10:02 pm
What policy? The carbon tax? I agree it’s silly policy.
The world is not serious about global warming so why should we shoot ourselves in the foot with a half arsed effort.
sdfc
15 Mar 13 at 10:09 pm
Well yes.
Sinclair Davidson
15 Mar 13 at 10:11 pm
Atmosphere is a global asset. The only way to value it is with a consistent global rent.
Pretending it is a local or national situation just displaces the problem if there is one.
Rent isn’t real high at this time.
Driftforge
15 Mar 13 at 10:15 pm
Dep breath or no deep breath
Quiigin mentions in all respectability that out of that 400k a year in grants he earns he has to pay a couple of research students.
Would it be too rude to ask what he pays them because every research phd student I know earns bugger all.
Would it be too much to ask Quiggin how exactly he spends the $400 k a year?
Are we as taxpayers entitled to some transaprency here?
Aliice
15 Mar 13 at 10:16 pm
yes SDFC, there is a lack of a discussion of plan B.
The BRICs have made it clear that they will not be holding up their economic development for the sake of the rich.
The only case for even a token carbon tax is to avoid EU green tariffs on exports. We may as well collect the revenue for ourselves rather than let the EU get it.
It is safe to say that green tariffs are more likely in the USA than carbon trading.
Jim Rose
15 Mar 13 at 10:42 pm
Not only the BRICS.
The front contract in the EU Energy exchange is trading at 3.70 Euros if you want to hit the bid. Convert at the current rate of 1.2600 Euro/Aussie and that means a contract can be bought right now at A$4.66.
Our fucking carbon tax is around 5 times the international price.
Any deplorable dickhead who suggests that such a huge gap won’t have a seriously detrimental impact on the Australian economy and therefore living standards are either total fuckwits or liars.
We are currently paying 5 times the internationally traded price for carbon!
It’s so deplorable there are no words to describe this debauchery.
JC
15 Mar 13 at 10:57 pm
This is what a Greens/Labor Alliance has got us into.
JC
15 Mar 13 at 10:58 pm
Alice, given that John Quiggin writes a lot about the evils of rising income inequality, I have no doubt that he would never do anything to perpetuate inequality in his own professional life.
Monkey's Uncle
15 Mar 13 at 11:15 pm
Martin Weitzman stole manure. Simply incredible.
Sinclair Davidson
15 Mar 13 at 11:24 pm
Good point, Monkey’s.
We have a prime example of the gleaming cue ball, Clive Hamilton having written countless scrawl on da inequality and he’s lifting a salary from the university he works from while getting a directors fee for sitting on the Glimate Authority.
Add it all up and the cue ball would be lifting around
University professorship $180,000
Glimate Authority $ 170,000
Total $350,000 by my estimate.
Last time I looked, the average wicket in oz was around $35,000. So the cue ball is earning 10 times Australian average earnings, yet not a peep out of him about how his own earnings are adding to da inequality.
On what he’s earning we could hire 9 other little Clive Hamiltons at $35,000 if he did the right thing and cut his earnings.
So what about it Clive, how about drawing a total of $35,000 and returning the rest of the money to the university and the government?
Clive? Ummmm.
JC
15 Mar 13 at 11:27 pm
I know. I was flabbergasted.
And CL reported it here at the cat in that unique tone of his… not too loud and not to quiet. …. just right.
JC
15 Mar 13 at 11:29 pm
Of course, that’s just being hypothetical. I wouldn’t dream of suggesting the uni and the government actually hire 9 other little clives. That would just be horrific.
JC
15 Mar 13 at 11:32 pm
JC
15 Mar 13 at 11:37 pm
JC LOL
“You can’t make this shit up… Literally.
(Harry went apeshit on that one. He lost it).”
No you cant make that stuff up! LOL that is the wackiest story I ever heard.
Aliice
16 Mar 13 at 10:38 am
John, like many, are too ready to attribute errors to personal moral failings because they subscribe to what Popper called the conspiracy theory of ignorance:
The truth is plain to see but for malevolent forces.
The possibility that ignorance is large in the social sciences and many consequences are unintended is not as an exciting an explanation.
Jim Rose
16 Mar 13 at 11:26 am
I shouldnt raise this topic again but I just have to
The right honourable Professor Quiggin posts this crap
” Davidson has managed to convince the ever-gullible Andrew Bolt that pieces in Policy (not even ranked as a peer-reviewed journal by the ARC), Agenda (ranked C, and generously so) and a bunch of CIS/IPA publications constitute a stellar publication record. There’s nothing wrong with publishing in magazines like these (I do plenty of it), but it’s supposed to be a by-product of academic research, not a substitute for it.”
So Sinc according to JQ only ARC approved journals matter do they? God, last time I looked it was only Yankee journals they were approving by order of the yankee journal industry. Apparently Australia has lost its ability to produce journals according the the US journal industry and now ARC. What are we here – a bunch of followers (or is this approval list by ARC part of the FTA bwith the US – nothing would surprise me. Australia realli is losing its intrelligence when people like Quiggiin, supposedly intelligent starts measuring himself on appealing to foreign journals)?
This is such a monumental wank from Quiggin I can barely swallow even a thought at how big his ego is. Do they have to enlarge doors so he can fit his “obedient to the system” head in when he goes to wank…sorry work?
Aliice
16 Mar 13 at 7:49 pm