ajaxp91

Supportive friend

Thank you for responding so quickly, Eigen! I definitely respect your stance. Naturally, I wasn't trying to be a proponent of strict censorship, but was instead worried about where this discussion may inevitably lead. So long as you and the other kind moderators are responsive if things get rocky, I'm happy regardless. Thanks again.

Cold feet

Hamburger helper **ha, changed my mind**

Bee sting

Loric, I agree that universities do have a firm-like aspect. But perhaps they are not firms whose revenue and costs are affected in standard ways. There are four key differences: (1) They have annual interview and search committees regardless of whether a student drops out. This means that the concept of "onboarding" new students is already factored into standard procedure. The way this differs from a traditional firm is that a new individual will be taken in, in either case (e.g. whether someone does/does not drop out). Thus, the cost of posting, collecting, and reviewing applications is not tied to student completion rates. (2) Another atypical situation would be tuition. We could say that this is a a direct cost to a fully funded program. But this overlooks labor that graduate students regularly provide in teaching, grading, and research assistance. This sort of labor should, in theory, be handled by professors who are already paid for the job. In the economics and business departments of top universities, the average tenure track professor will make six figures annually. The average student will bear a five figure annual tuition cost. To hire an additional professor, the university would have to be willing to bear the higher cost. However, admitting two graduate students to absorb the labor a new professor would provide is a huge boon in both cost and productivity. When you view a fully funded program, the dynamics most likely reflect this (e.g. your tuition is defrayed by TA or RA work and so the cost is transferred back upon you in a standard pay labor scheme). Even if a student departs after one year, the university will have benefited financially from performed labor. (3) Another issue is that the programs may have spread the loss of potential exits into the larger tuition cost. Meaning that it in fact costs less to take on a graduate student, but tuition is increased to absorb this loss. Knowing the drop out rate, you could calculate how much additional tuition it would take to mitigate the cost, and then factor that in. For terminal master's degrees, which are commonly unfunded, students completing their program may end up covering for those who leave. For funded doctoral programs, increased research duties and teaching aid can provide benefits that cover the cost. I think this is the most likely scenario, especially if you assume that universities are creative and will ensure their preservation. (4) I agree with liddy that universities are working on a short time frame. Students leave anywhere from 5-7 years after commencing studies. This is far too short of a time frame to imbue someone with job specific training and then simply let them leave. Why do universities do this? Forget the student who exits a program prematurely, why would this scenario of leaving after 5 to 7 yrs be okay? I think, in a larger sense, it mimics the human capital and long-term development aspects of a firm. Universities can make certain that the labor pool in their respective fields are excessively stocked with talent. This means that even after training and releasing many students, a program knows that it has increased the labor supply in size and talent. In the future, when replacing faculty, they have a larger applicant pool which provides the added benefit of lower wages due to heightened competition (something many people aren't happy about). (Tangent) Why is it that students who do not complete a program have made a mistake? Considering that cost to the university is not as large of an issue as it may seem, I am uncomfortable saying they made a mistake. Considering that a student may exit a program to accept a higher salary or to enjoy other non-quantifiable returns, I am again uncomfortable saying they made a mistake. I feel like I am missing something...

Stuffed animals

Kind spirit

Dust devil

Turkish language

Slow dance

Heart valve

Try either using a different browser, closing your web browser, or clearing your web history/cookies/cache (doing all three would be best). Sometimes incorrectly closing a web browser will cause problems with an application log-in.

Wide eyes

Bad boy

Crime scene

Ice cake

Fried ice

First lady

Court order

Social revolution

Something new

If you still would like someone to peer-review your SOP, I would be happy to help. Just PM me.

Strangely enough this has already been studied (e.g. GIS links, production networks, network topology, graphing, etc.). I distinctly remember this issue obtaining "pop-culture" status when the New Scientist magazine wrote an article about a 2011 PLOS One study by Battiston, Glattfelder, and Vitali (http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0025995). It was released right around the time that OWS protests began, so naturally the media was overly excited about it. The research identified a significant number of transnational corporations which had ownership of global companies. There was some overlap in ownership, and additionally these core organizations controlled a large share of the global economy (approx. 40%, I think). This is a very interesting economic subject, but I doubt it holds the potential for any stock market prowess. But there has been research modeling the interdependence of stock markets and assets to predict market shifts: (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378437112004190). You also may want to look into electronic trading algorithms, which are becoming more dynamic and may incorporate this sort of modeling into their structure. What ignited this question? Are you planning to do any work like this? I do think the cross-over between subjects (e.g. genome mapping and market mapping) is really exciting. But I wonder what it will do, especially for economics... in the long run I suppose we'll all find out, eh? Also, perhaps there is someone more senior (in educational rank, not in age) than I who can chime in. I've only a BS in economics and BA in philosophy to my name, so I'm not some expert.

Bus driver