No abstract

We propose a general equilibrium model of industry where consumers learn about firms' unobserved product quality over time. Because consumers learn through purchase decisions, price setting is a crucial lever through which firms manipulate future demand. We map equilibrium policies to a range of empirical evidence on industry, firm, product and price dynamics. We then study how firms respond as consumer information varies. Specifically, we show that firms exacerbate information problems by constraining learning more aggressively in those markets where consumers are less informed. Developing an indicator of consumer information by product category, we find these are typically markets for consumer durables. Finally, the efficiency implications of this behavior and interaction with size-dependent policies are explored.

The labor share may be declining in the data, but it is often assumed constant in neoclassical growth models (NGM). We assess the quantitative importance of this discrepancy by comparing alternative calibration approaches featuring constant and declining labor shares. We find little difference in model performance. Our results derive from strong general equilibrium effects: while a declining labor share mechanically lowers wage growth, the investment response pushes wages back up. Hence, different models deliver nearly identical paths of macro aggregates. Numerous robustness checks (including a CES production function, different time periods, and calculations of the labor share) reinforce the similarity of performance across model specifications. We conclude that the NGM with a constant labor share is still an appropriate choice to study many standard macro aggregates.

We study a labor market where firms have private information about their ex-ante heterogeneous productivities and search is random. In this environment, a binding minimum wage can be efficiency-enhancing-we show that setting it using a version of the Vickery-Clarke-Groves mechanism delivers full efficiency. In a dynamic, stochastic version of the model calibrated to the Routine Manual labor market in the U.S., our proposed mechanism generates sizeable welfare gains. The resulting minimum wage is procyclical, dampening the response of unemployment to aggregate shocks.

The labor share may be declining in the data, but it is often assumed constant in neoclassical growth models (NGM). We assess the quantitative importance of this discrepancy by comparing alternative calibration approaches featuring constant and declining labor shares. We find little difference in model performance. Our results derive from strong general equilibrium effects: while a declining labor share mechanically lowers wage growth, the investment response pushes wages back up. Hence, different models deliver nearly identical paths of macro aggregates. Numerous robustness checks (including a CES production function, different time periods, and calculations of the labor share) reinforce the similarity of performance across model specifications. We conclude that the NGM with a constant labor share is still an appropriate choice to study many standard macro aggregates.