Ok, so something that's common to the econometrics literature is that we interpret the coefficients in OLS log-linear models like such. To spell it out in the main body:
$ln(y_i)=\beta_0+\beta_1X+u_i \Rightarrow \text{if } \Delta x = 1, \text{then } \text{%}\Delta y \approx 100\beta_1 $
I think that this is a very bad approximation, although my reasoning is probably incorrect (although I do understand the derivation of why this approx holds).
Ok, so an aside:
$\frac{\dot{y(t)}}{y(t)} = g \Rightarrow ln(y_t) = gt + c $
It also follow that:
$y_{t+1} \approx y_t (1+g \Delta t) $
So here, if I plug in a change of t = 1, and let g = 1, y would be doubling with each unit change in t, and so we should approx y as 2^x instead of something of the form e^x. Of course, large-ish changes in x mess up the calculus.
However, isn't plugging in a unit change in t (in the econometrics textbook, x is t) what the econometrics textbooks are doing? A unit change in x -> 100% change in y (g and beta_1 are analogous, so g = 1 -> beta_1 =1) -> y approx doubles with each change in x -> y should be modelled as something of the form 2^x, not e^x, and there's a sizeable difference between the two, and so this contradicts that fact that the specification implies that y is in the form e^x (rather than 2^x).
I hope this makes sense.