Claims by incumbent presidents and challengers about how many private-sector jobs can be created in a four-year period by sector-level or other targeted policies should be viewed as rough guesses, because overall macroeconomic conditions drive aggregate employment in ways that dominate any net effects of polices that focus on specific industries or households.
Responses
Responses weighted by each expert's confidence
Participant | University | Vote | Confidence | Bio/Vote History |
---|---|---|---|---|
Daron Acemoglu |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Alberto Alesina |
Harvard | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
||||
Joseph Altonji |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
Broad macro conditions and macro policy matter most, but targetted policies have a role.
|
||||
Alan Auerbach |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
David Autor |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Katherine Baicker |
University of Chicago | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Marianne Bertrand |
Chicago | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Raj Chetty |
Harvard | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Judith Chevalier |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Janet Currie |
Princeton | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
David Cutler |
Harvard | Bio/Vote History | ||
Sometimes sectoral policies turn out to be very large -- as with the auto industry and the health care industry.
|
||||
Angus Deaton |
Princeton | Bio/Vote History | ||
A politically unfettered federal government could do a lot, so there are presumably implicit side conditions here?
|
||||
Darrell Duffie |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Aaron Edlin |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Barry Eichengreen |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
"Viewed as rough guesses" is a very polite and understated way of putting it, guys.
|
||||
Ray Fair |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Pinelopi Goldberg |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
What does "macroeconomic" mean? The "macro" economy is an aggregation of micro untis. Of course the effects of any policy are uncertain.
|
||||
Claudia Goldin |
Harvard | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Austan Goolsbee |
Chicago | Bio/Vote History | ||
only question is whether 'rough guesses' is too generous
|
||||
Michael Greenstone |
University of Chicago | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Robert Hall |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
No doubt about this whatsoever!
|
||||
Bengt Holmström |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Caroline Hoxby |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Kenneth Judd |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Anil Kashyap |
Chicago Booth | Bio/Vote History | ||
POTUS macro choices matter somewhat but most sexy attempts to pander to get votes are inconsequental & shocks they can't control are big.
|
||||
Pete Klenow |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
In the short run durability = cyclicality across industries. In the long run it's technology and preferences (Engel curves).
-see background information here -see background information here |
||||
Edward Lazear |
Stanford | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
||||
Jonathan Levin |
Stanford | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Eric Maskin |
Harvard | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
William Nordhaus |
Yale | Bio/Vote History | ||
"Rough guesses" misses the point. I would say "large overestimates" as they are usually not effective ways of increasing either AD or AS.
|
||||
Maurice Obstfeld |
Berkeley | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Emmanuel Saez |
Berkeley | Did Not Answer | Bio/Vote History | |
|
||||
José Scheinkman |
Columbia University | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Richard Schmalensee |
MIT | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Hyun Song Shin |
Princeton | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Nancy Stokey |
University of Chicago | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Richard Thaler |
Chicago Booth | Bio/Vote History | ||
Agree. More generally too much weight is given to the jobs numbers. How about if we evaluate a president by the return on the stock market
|
||||
Christopher Udry |
Northwestern | Bio/Vote History | ||
|
||||
Luigi Zingales |
Chicago Booth | Bio/Vote History | ||
|