Edward Conard

Top Ten New York Times Bestselling Author

  • “Unintended Consequences represents the most cogent and persuasive analysis of the Financial Crisis to date.” - Andrei Shleifer, 1999 John Bates Clark Medal Winner
  • “…a fresh argument for the productive value of inequality.” - David Autor, Professor of Economics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
  • “…a must-read for serious students of economic policy.” - Glenn Hubbard, Dean, Columbia Business School, and former Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers
  • “There are an amazing number of good ideas and interesting points made in Unintended Consequences. The thinking underlying it, and the obvious depth of understanding of the author, are very impressive.” - Steven Levitt, coauthor of Freakonomics; 2004 John Bates Clark Medal
  • “Unintended Consequences is full of substance, it is one of the must-read books of the year, and once I finish it I will be giving it a second read through right away.” - Tyler Cowen, Professor, George Mason University
  • “…serious thinking for serious thinkers. …a thought-provoking blueprint for growing middle- and working-class incomes.” - Mitt Romney, former Governor of Massachusetts
  • “Unintended Consequences offers deep and well-argued analyses on almost every issue.” - The New York Times
  • “…serious thinking for serious thinkers. …a thought-provoking blueprint for growing middle- and working-class incomes.” - Mitt Romney, former Governor of Massachusetts
  • “…challenges misconceptions that distort our economic debates.” - Arthur Brooks, President of the American Enterprise Institute
  • “Unintended Consequences should be read by anyone who takes for granted the superiority of progressive taxation and has not thought carefully about the trade-offs involved.” - The New Republic
  • “…reminds us that inequality sends a signal of what society lacks most, in America’s case, entrepreneurship and risk taking.” - Lawrence Lindsey, CEO, The Lindsey Group, former Director of the National Economic Council
  • “…a very valuable contribution.” - Larry Summers, former Secretary of the Treasury and director of the National Economic Council, president emeritus, Harvard University
Upside of Inequality Oxford Unintended Consequences

AI Summary. The normally inverse relationship between unemployment and worker quit rates broke down during and after the pandemic, with quits far above what unemployment would have predicted, and has since moved back toward its historical norm. The author argues this fading of pandemic-era labor market distortions, rather than Federal Reserve tightening, best explains slowing wage growth and disinflation.

Paul Krugman Krugman Wonks Out
Date Posted:

.@paulkrugman argues deflation to this point has been driven by “recombobulation,” or the fading of pandemic-related shocks, not tighter monetary policy.

Does fading labor market disruption explain disinflation better than Fed tightening?

Core argument: The quit rate's inverse relationship with unemployment, a quits-based version of the Beveridge Curve, broke down during the pandemic as quits ran far above what the unemployment rate would have predicted, presumably reflecting labor market dislocation.

Normally there is a fairly close inverse relationship between unemployment and quits, a quit-rate version of the famous Beveridge Curve linking unemployment to vacancies. During the pandemic and its aftermath, however, quits were much higher than the normal relationship to the unemployment rate would have predicted, presumably reflecting the dislocation of labor markets in a time of wild and crazy changes. Here too we see recombobulation, with the relationship of quits to unemployment moving back toward the historical norm, which is probably the main reason wage growth appears to be slowing. Stories about recombobulation — the fading away of pandemic-era distortions — driving disinflation are clearly supported by the data. Claims that Fed tightening drove it are sketchier and much more speculative. Which is not to say that the Fed was wrong to raise rates.

Takeaways by Macro Roundup® AI

  1. The quit rate's inverse relationship with unemployment, a quits-based version of the Beveridge Curve, broke down during the pandemic as quits ran far above what the unemployment rate would have predicted, presumably reflecting labor market dislocation.
  2. The quits-unemployment relationship is moving back toward its historical norm, which is probably the main reason wage growth appears to be slowing.
  3. The data support explanations of disinflation that credit the fading of pandemic-era distortions, while claims that Fed tightening drove disinflation are sketchier and more speculative, though that does not mean the Fed was wrong to raise rates.

Related Articles:

  • When Should We Declare Victory Over Inflation? — Modest positive inflation makes relative price and wage adjustments easier, since cutting prices or wages outright is difficult and rising prices elsewhere can accomplish the same shift. On this basis, some economists argue it is acceptable to stop disinflation at a 3% inflation rate rather than 2%.
  • The Second Great Experiment Update — Newer macroeconomic theory using forward-looking rather than adaptive expectations holds that inflation is stable under an interest rate target and can fade on its own even when interest rates sit below the inflation rate. Under the fiscal theory of the price level, a burst of inflation devalues government debt and ends once the real value of that debt is restored.
  • Fiscal Arithmetic and the Global Inflation Outlook — Across advanced economies, core inflation is significantly positively associated with growth in government debt since the start of the pandemic, and the authors expect this decade's fiscal expansions to shift price levels permanently higher. They argue this differs from permanently higher inflation, projecting inflation to diminish as temporary deficits normalize, with medium-term inflation expectations still anchored near central bank targets.
Showing 114 database articles primarily about Inflation