What am I talking about? My perception of his movement toward recognizing macro foundations as the driving force in reality and any model that presumes to approximate it.
Evidence?
This piece, in which he says "pah...all that micro trade theory doesn't have anything to do with reality." He doesn't really say that, I am imputing that. Here's what he did say "The case for free trade is about microeconomics, about raising efficiency. There’s no particular reason to think that trade liberalization is good for fixing problems of inadequate demand."
And this piece, (which I promise to find) in which he admits to becoming increasingly interested in macro somewhere in the 90's.
And he's almost there...,almost as in this piece, where he, among others, takes Barro to task for his ridiculous labeling of micro as "regular economics," implying that, well, read the piece.
So, Paul, keep going, you are on the road to the promised land. We're really happy that you got your Nobel for micro trade theory...that wonderful event appears to have freed you to follow the path of truth. Now just take the final step and follow Vernengo et al. into explaining microeconomics using macro foundations.
No comments:
Post a Comment