ノアピニオン氏の「クルーグマン一揆は失敗したのか?(Did the Krugman insurgency fail?)」というエントリクルーグマンが「まだ終わっちゃいねえ(The Macro Wars Are Not Over)」と反応したが、その中の以下の一節に今度はStephen Williamsonが激昂した

...my sense is that a lot of younger economists are aware, even if they don’t dare say so, that freshwater macro has been a great embarrassment these past four years, and that liquidity-trap Keynesianism has done very well. This will affect future research; it will, over time, break the stranglehold of decadent Lucasian doctrine on the journals.


そのWilliamsonのエントリのコメント欄は、David Andolfattoを初めとするWilliamson擁護派と、Williamson批判派が入り乱れてかなり荒れ模様となっている(Williamson自身も積極的に参戦している)。その中で、「火付け役」となったノアピニオン氏をWilliamsonがたかが選手院生とくさしたのに対し、Andolfattoがノアピニオン氏を2人のうすのろ(=クルーグマンとデロング)と一緒くたにしては気の毒だ、と諌め、Williamsonがそれはそうだがクルーグマンはノアピニオン氏を同志と見做しているようだ、と反応したのが面白い。


Hey, y'all.

I wouldn't say I have my finger on the pulse of young macroeconomists worldwide, but I know a bunch here at Michigan.

Mostly, they think that RBC models don't explain the macroeconomy, but they intend to use microfounded DSGE and (occasionally) VARs because that's what everyone uses and they don't know of any alternatives. They seem eager to incorporate search frictions and heterogeneity into DSGE models, and seem to have very little interest in fiscal policy, liquidity traps, or other elements of the Keynesian revival. Though they don't like RBC, they generally use technology shocks as the drivers of their models because these are much easier to use than demand shocks, especially in big complex models that already have a lot of heterogeneity and/or search stuff going on. There is also some interest in financial frictions, though not as much as I would have expected.

Generally, though, there is a pessimistic, downbeat feeling that macro is useless - I have heard this more than once, from people who intend to spend their lives doing it. It's basically the idea of "Yeah, well, macro hasn't done society a lot of good, but this is the best we can do, and anyway I need a job."

A lot of this is probably specific to Michigan, though.

Also, remember, when you consider what young economists think, it's important not to only look at young macroeconomists, because that's a self-selected set. The attitude that "macro is useless" is quite prevalent among, say, game theorists (both young and old). Not that those people especially know or care about IS-LM Keynesianism...they just tend to regard the entire enterprise as a joke. "Are you going to be a macro guy?" one young theorist asked me. "What's the oldest model that macro people use? It keeps changing because they haven't found anything. Why are you going to waste your intelligence on that?"

Finally, I would not say that my own ideas are representative of young economists. My physics background and general combative nature make me much quicker to condemn whole disciplines...






また、若い経済学者の考えについて語る時に気をつけなければならない重要なことは、若いマクロ経済学者だけを見てはならない、ということだ。彼らは自分でその道を選んだ人たちだからね。「マクロ経済学は役に立たない」という態度は、たとえば(老若を問わず)ゲーム理論家に極めて良く見られる*1。彼らがIS-LMケインズ経済学について特に詳しいとか気に掛けているというわけではない。彼らはその分野全体を馬鹿にしているのだ。「マクロ経済学の道に進むつもりかい?」とある若い理論家は僕に尋ねたものだ。「マクロ経済学の人々が使うモデルで最も古いものは何だっけ? 彼らは何も見つけられないんでモデルがしょっちゅう変わるんじゃなかったかい。何でそんなことに君の知性を無駄遣いするの?」



*1:cf. 日本の代表的な若手ゲーム理論家の4年前のエントリ(その後続エントリはこちらこちら)。