January 1997, Version 1.01 Prepared for the American Economic Review Papers and Proceedings , May 1997. See also "The Productivity of Nations"

Much recent thought has been devoted to the macroeconomic importance of the existence of wage contracts. Still, some puzzling features of the most conspicuous form of wage bargaining, that done formally by employers and labor unions, deserve further theoretical attention. Among these important features are: 1. Collective bargaining agreements are rarely contingent on outside events even though the parties have very imperfect knowledge of prospective economic conditions during the period of the contract. The only important exception is the indexing of wages to the cost of living. 2. Employers are permitted wide discretion in determining the level of employment when demand shifts unexpectedly. As employment varies, total compensation varies according to a formula established in the agreement. 3. Agreements are not permanent but are renegotiated on a regular cycle. 4. In the process of renegotiation, the current state of demand has little impact on the new wage schedule. On the other hand, current wages in other industries have an important influence. This feature especially has been denied or ignored by economic theorists even though it is a prominent part of the thinking of labor economists on wage determination.

When a job-seeker and an employer meet, find a prospective joint surplus, and bargain over the wage, conditions in the outside labor market, including especially unemployment, may have limited influence. The job-seeker's only credible threat during bargaining is to hold out for a better deal. The employer's threat is to delay bargaining. Consequently, the outcome of the bargain depends on the relative costs of delays to the parties, rather than on the payoffs that result from exiting negotiations. Modeling bargaining in this way makes wages less responsive to unemployment. A stochastic model of the labor market with credible bargaining and reasonable parameter values yields larger employment fluctuations than does the standard Mortensen-Pissarides model.

We use a rich new body of data on the experiences of unemployed job seekers to determine the sources of wage dispersion and to create a search model consistent with the acceptance decisions the job seekers made. We identify the distributions of four key variables: offered wages, offered nonwage job values, job seekers’ nonwork alternatives, and job seekers’ personal productivities. We find that, conditional on personal productivity, the standard deviation of offered log wages is moderate, at 0.24, whereas the dispersion of the offered nonwage component is substantially larger, at 0.34. The resulting dispersion of offered job values is 0.38.

the 1970s there was no organized effort to keep Kiss, or other immigrant-headed bands such as Abba or the Village People, out of the United States.) In a similar fashion, pressure from U.S. farmers and other employers may account for why it is that each year 300,000 illegal immigrants succeed in entering and finding work in the United States (Passel, Capps, and Fix 2004). For any presidential administration, globalization is likely to be a tricky subject. The gains from international economic integration are spread among a diffuse group of consumers, while the losses are concentrated in specific industries and regions. Into the debate, economists can interject dispassionate analysis of the costs and benefits associated with cross-border flows of goods, capital, and labor. On immigration and trade, the ERP gets many things right, but it falters when discussing the distributional consequences of globalization. This may be driven in part by the report's predictable but still discomforting tendency to cheerlead for the president's policy proposals. In the end, we are left with a discussion of globalization's consequences that is less balanced and complete than one might have hoped. REFERENCES

The Journal of Economic Literature (JEL) regularly reviews books of interest to the economics profession. The Economic Report of the President (ERP) falls under that purview and beginning this year, the JEL will be reviewing the ERP. Toward that end, I have asked a handful of very prominent economists to review the 2005 ERP. Reviewers were chosen to reflect expertise on what I guessed would be key issues. Reviewers were given the following instructions: The ERP in principle should provide an accurate assessment of the consensus professional views of economists on any given issue, based on the research to date. Does the discussion in the ERP in fact accurately summarize what we as economists know? Reviewers were given free rein over what material they would review in the ERP but were urged to focus on their areas of particular expertise. In the reviews that follow, Joel Slemrod reviews the discussion of tax reform. Joe Farrell reviews the ERP's chapter titled “Innovation and the Information Economy.” Gordon Hanson reviews the chapters on international trade and on immigration. Robert Hall reviews the discussion of the adverse macroeconomic impact of rising oil prices while Jonathan Gruber reviews the ERP chapter titled “Expanding Individual Choice and Control.” Many thanks to the reviewers for the quick turnaround.