deletions | additions       diff --git "a/Paper Replication for \"The Economic Impacts of Climate Change: Evidence from Agricultural Output and Random Fluctuations in Weather: Reply\".tex" "b/Paper Replication for \"The Economic Impacts of Climate Change: Evidence from Agricultural Output and Random Fluctuations in Weather: Reply\".tex"  index d93e3cf..57f727d 100644  --- "a/Paper Replication for \"The Economic Impacts of Climate Change: Evidence from Agricultural Output and Random Fluctuations in Weather: Reply\".tex"  +++ "b/Paper Replication for \"The Economic Impacts of Climate Change: Evidence from Agricultural Output and Random Fluctuations in Weather: Reply\".tex" 
...
\subsubsection{Climate change on farm profits}  In this section DG2012 took the estimates from the previous section to predict the impact of climate change on agricultural profits based on GCM data. Table 2 of DG2012 presented four results based on different weather data sources which leaded to similar conclusion. I am going the replicate the one with their own data source (the 4th row in Table 2, DG2012).  One argument made by DG2012 is that "allowing for" "\textit{allowing for local shocks tends to reduce the magnitude of the predicted loss, although this does NOT always come at the expense of reduced statistical precision}" observing that the estimated standard error clustered by state is 3.03 for year fixed effect (column 1a) and 2.29 for USDA region*year fixed effects. Personally I think this argument is tricky from two perspectives: 1) it is the only observation supporting this argument, and 2) noting that we are observing a larger change in the estimated mean, so it is not the case in the coefficient of variation perspective.  \subsubsection{Storage issue}