Shimer (2005) and Hall (2005) have documented the failure of standard labor market search models to match business cycle fluctuations in employment and unemployment. They argue that it is likely that wages are not adjusted as regularly as suggested by the model, which would explain why employment is more volatile than the model predicts. We explore whether this explanation is consistent with the data. The main insight is that the relevant wage data for the search model are not aggregate wages, but wages of newly hired workers. Our results show that wages for those workers are much more volatile than aggregate wages and respond one-for-one to changes in labor productivity. Thus, we find no evidence for wage rigidity.JEL Codes: E24 E32 J31 J41 J64

We document two changes in postwar US macroeconomic dynamics: the procyclicality of labour productivity vanished, and the relative volatility of employment rose. We propose an explanation for these changes that is based on reduced hiring frictions due to improvements in information about the quality of job matches and the resulting decline in turnover. We develop a simple model with hiring frictions and variable effort to illustrate the mechanisms underlying our explanation. We show that our model qualitatively and quantitatively matches the observed changes in business cycle dynamics.

Was the increase in income inequality in the US due to permanent shocks or merely to an increase in the variance of transitory shocks? The implications for consumption and welfare depend crucially on the answer to this question. We use CEX repeated cross-section data on consumption and income to decompose idiosyncratic changes in income into predictable life-cycle changes, transitory and permanent shocks and estimate the contribution of each to total inequality. Our model …ts the joint evolution of consumption and income inequality well and delivers two main results. First, we …nd that permanent changes in income explain all of the increase in inequality in the 1980s and 90s. Second, we reconcile this …nding with the fact that consumption inequality did not increase much over this period. Our results support the view that many permanent changes in income are predictable for consumers, even if they look unpredictable to the econometrician, consistent with models of heterogeneous income pro…les.

Shimer (2005) and Hall (2005) have documented the failure of standard labor market search models to match business cycle fluctuations in employment and unemployment. They argue that it is likely that wages are not adjusted as regularly as suggested by the model, which would explain why employment is more volatile than the model predicts. We explore whether this explanation is consistent with the data. The main insight is that the relevant wage data for the search model are not aggregate wages, but wages of newly hired workers. Our results show that wages for those workers are much more volatile than aggregate wages and respond one-for-one to changes in labor productivity. Thus, we find no evidence for wage rigidity.JEL Codes: E24 E32 J31 J41 J64

Estimates of the effect of education on GDP (the social return) have been hard to reconcile with micro evidence on the private return to schooling. We present a simple explanation combining two ideas: imperfect substitution and endogenous skill-biased technological progress and use cross-country panel data on inequality and GDP to test these ideas. A one-year increase in the level of education reduces the private return by 2 percentage points, consistent with Katz-Murphy's (1992) elasticity of substitution. We find no evidence for reversal of this initial effect as in Acemoglu (2002). In the short run, the social return equals the private return. Copyright by the President and Fellows of Harvard College and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

We investigate unemployment due to mismatch in the United States over the past three and a half decades. We propose an accounting framework that allows us to estimate the contribution of each of the frictions that generated labor market mismatch. Barriers to job mobility account for the largest part of mismatch unemployment, with a smaller role for barriers to worker mobility. We find little contribution of wage-setting frictions to mismatch.

Purpose of Review This review aims to examine (i) the aetiology of obesity; (ii) how and why a perception of personal responsibility for obesity so dominantly frames this condition and how this mindset leads to stigma; (iii) the consequences of obesity stigma for people living with obesity, and for the public support for interventions to prevent and manage this condition; and (iv) potential strategies to diminish our focus on personal responsibility for the development of obesity, to enable a reduction of obesity stigma, and to move towards effective interventions to prevent and manage obesity within the population. Recent Findings We summarise literature which shows that obesity stems from a complex interplay of genetic and environment factors most of which are outside an individual’s control. Despite this, evidence of obesity stigmatisation remains abundant throughout areas of media, entertainment, social media and the internet, advertising, news outlets, and the political and public health landscape. This has damaging consequences including psychological, physical, and socioeconomic harm. Summary Obesity stigma does not prevent obesity. A combined, concerted, and sustained effort from multiple stakeholders and key decision-makers within society is required to dispel myths around personal responsibility for body weight, and to foster more empathy for people living in larger bodies. This also sets the scene for more effective policies and interventions, targeting the social and environmental drivers of health, to ultimately improve population health.

No abstract