TL;DR
Get business pricing on office and shipping supplies
- Business-only prices and quantity discounts
- Tax-exempt purchasing
- Multiple users, one account, clear invoices
Noah Smith’s Noahpinion post reports that this year’s economics Nobel went to Robert “Bob” Hall and Michael Woodford, whom Smith describes as central figures in New Keynesian macroeconomics. The supplied source explains their intellectual contributions, but does not provide an official Nobel citation or independent confirmation of the award details.
Economists Robert Hall and Michael Woodford have received this year’s economics Nobel, according to Noah Smith’s Noahpinion post, which presents the award as recognition of work foundational to New Keynesian macroeconomics. The supplied report calls the prize long overdue, but does not include the Nobel committee’s announcement or official citation, so the award details cannot be independently verified from the material provided.
Smith identifies Hall and Woodford as two of the theory’s most important creators. He singles out Hall’s broad influence on macroeconomics and Woodford’s role in developing the framework, including his authorship of a major book on New Keynesian economics. Smith says economists he knows expected Woodford to be included if the field received the prize.
The post traces a key strand of modern macroeconomics to the debate over rational expectations and the foundations of economic models. It highlights Hall’s influential 1978 research on consumption: drawing on an idea developed by Milton Friedman, Hall tested whether changes in consumption could be predicted from earlier information, including past income. Smith says Hall found that many seemingly relevant variables did not help predict those changes, though stock prices did.
Smith argues the research mattered beyond its specific finding. If households and firms plan ahead and form expectations about policy, then a government’s future promises can affect economic decisions in the present. The article links this insight to a broader shift toward models built from individual and business behavior, rather than relying only on observed relationships between aggregate measures.
How Expectations Shape Policy
The award, as reported by Smith, places expectations and policy credibility at the center of the story. New Keynesian models examine how decisions by households and companies interact with prices, wages and economic policy. That framework is relevant to how economists and policymakers think about interest rates, inflation and economic activity over time.
Hall’s consumption research, as Smith describes it, offered a way to think about how people use available information when planning their spending. If past developments are already known and factored into plans, policy effects may depend not only on what officials do, but on what people expect them to do. This makes the timing and credibility of policy commitments important questions for economic analysis.
The source does not claim that one paper or one school of thought settled those questions. Smith notes that Hall’s result had limits, including the finding that stock prices predicted future consumption changes. The significance is instead the contribution to a research program: building macroeconomic explanations that account for decisions and expectations at the level of individuals and firms.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
From Aggregate Data to Microfoundations
Smith’s account places the rise of microfounded macroeconomics against the difficulties economists faced in the 1970s. Earlier approaches often used relationships among large-scale indicators to anticipate outcomes—for example, how spending might respond to income, or how inflation and unemployment might move together. A relationship observed in past data, however, may not persist after policymakers change the conditions behind it.
Smith uses the Phillips Curve as an illustration: a historical association between inflation and unemployment cannot automatically show that deliberately raising inflation will lower unemployment. He says the period’s stagflation prompted economists to reconsider the foundations of their models. This is a simplified account, he cautions, rather than a full explanation of what caused the decade’s economic outcomes.
Researchers increasingly sought microfoundations—models grounded in how consumers and businesses make decisions. The framework typically gives attention to technology, preferences and expectations about the future, while recognizing that these assumptions are not perfectly unchanged when policies shift. Smith credits Hall’s 1978 paper with helping persuade economists that rational expectations belonged in this line of inquiry.
“Without hesitation, he answered “Bob Hall”.”
— Noah Smith, recounting a 2009 conversation with his PhD adviser, Miles Kimball
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Official Citation and Award Details
The supplied material is a Noahpinion commentary, not an official Nobel announcement. It does not give the award date, the committee’s formal citation, prize-sharing details or the committee’s explanation of how Hall’s and Woodford’s work was assessed. Those particulars should not be treated as confirmed on the basis of this source alone.
Smith’s description of the award as a Nobel for New Keynesian macroeconomics is his characterization. The material does not establish that the Nobel committee used that label or presented the prize as recognition of one unified school. The post also does not give a full account of the recipients’ work or the broader scholarly debate around the field.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Awaiting the Nobel Committee’s Rationale
The next step for readers seeking confirmation is the Nobel committee’s official announcement and citation, which would establish the stated basis for the prize and the precise award details. The supplied report does not say when those details will be published or provide links to a committee statement.
Further reporting can clarify how the committee describes the relationship between Hall’s research, Woodford’s contributions and New Keynesian macroeconomics. Until then, Smith’s article provides an account of the intellectual significance of the reported award, while the formal rationale and complete prize details remain unverified in the source material here.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Key Questions
Who does the report say received this year’s economics Nobel?
Noah Smith’s Noahpinion post says the prize went to Robert “Bob” Hall and Michael Woodford. The supplied material does not include an official Nobel announcement for independent confirmation.
Why does Smith connect the award to New Keynesian macroeconomics?
Smith describes Hall and Woodford as major creators of the theory and explains how their work relates to models that combine economic behavior, expectations and policy. That connection is Smith’s framing; the source does not reproduce the committee’s formal citation.
What was important about Hall’s 1978 consumption research?
As Smith recounts it, Hall tested whether earlier information, especially past income, could predict changes in consumption. Many variables that appeared relevant did not help make that prediction, although the source says stock prices did.
What details are not confirmed by the supplied source?
The material does not provide the award date, official citation, prize-sharing arrangements or the Nobel committee’s reasoning. Those details require confirmation from an official announcement or other reliable reporting.
Source: rss
Columbus Day / Indigenous Peoples' Day Picks
long weekend sales
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
