The Trouble With Macroeconomics
نویسنده
چکیده
For more than three decades, macroeconomics has gone backwards. The treatment of identification now is no more credible than in the early 1970s but escapes challenge because it is so much more opaque. Macroeconomic theorists dismiss mere facts by feigning an obtuse ignorance about such simple assertions as "tight monetary policy can cause a recession." Their models attribute fluctuations in aggregate variables to imaginary causal forces that are not influenced by the action that any person takes. A parallel with string theory from physics hints at a general failure mode of science that is triggered when respect for highly regarded leaders evolves into a deference to authority that displaces objective fact from its position as the ultimate determinant of scientific truth. Delivered January 5, 2016 as the Commons Memorial Lecture of the Omicron Delta Epsilon Society. Forthcoming in The American Economist. Lee Smolin begins The Trouble with Physics (Smolin 2007) by noting that his career spanned the only quarter-century in the history of physics when the field made no progress on its core problems. The trouble with macroeconomics is worse. I have observed more than three decades of intellectual regress. In the 1960s and early 1970s, many macroeconomists were cavalier about the identification problem. They did not recognize how difficult it is to make reliable inferences about causality from observations on variables that are part of a simultaneous system. By the late 1970s, macroeconomists understood how serious this issue is, but as Canova and Sala (2009) signal with the title of a recent paper, we are now "Back to Square One." Macro models now use incredible identifying assumptions to reach bewildering conclusions. To appreciate how strange these conclusions can be, consider this observation, from a paper published in 2010, by a leading macroeconomist: ... although in the interest of disclosure, I must admit that I am myself less than totally convinced of the importance of money outside the case of large inflations.
منابع مشابه
The Khazar region; How much Trouble for Iran?
Khazarprovide Iran with an excellent geopolitical position, while Iran's "antdomination policy" not only deprive it from these privileges but alsobring some serious security challenges for it. U.S. engagement in vasteconomic, military and political undertakings in this region is one of majorthreat for Iran's vital interests. I'm going to argue here that majordifficulty in the way of consisting ...
متن کاملCrises and paradigms in macroeconomics
Contrasts are drawn between mainstream macroeconomics (with the ›New Consensus in Macroeconomics‹ taken as the current manifestation) and heterodox macroeconomics and their abilities to comprehend the fi nancial crises and world wide recession of 2007 – 09 for macroeconomic paradigms is discussed. Specifi cally, the contrasting ways in which the two schools of thought treat unemployment, human ...
متن کاملDoes Macroeconomics Need Microeconomic Foundations?
I argue that it is microeconomics that needs foundations, not macroeconomics. Preferences need to be built on biology, and, in particular, on neuroscience. In contrast, macroeconomics could benefit from rationalizations of aggregate economic phenomena by non-equilibrium statistical physics. Special issue Reconstructing Macroeconomics JEL: B22, B41, C82, D87
متن کاملThe Transformation of Macroeconomic Policy and Research
What I am going to describe for you is a revolution in macroeconomics, a transformation in methodology that has reshaped how we conduct our science. Prior to the transformation, macroeconomics was largely separate from the rest of economics. Indeed, some considered the study of macroeconomics fundamentally different and thought there was no hope of integrating macroeconomics with the rest of ec...
متن کاملToward a Macroeconomics of the Medium Run
T hese days macroeconomics has become more respectable than it used to be. I can remember when many economists liked to say: Microeconomics is not problematic, but I just don’t understand macroeconomics. There was a definite implication that something must be wrong with macroeconomics, not with the observer. Of course macroeconomics cannot be “exact;” it has to work by rough analogy and empiric...
متن کامل