Read on Twitter
The training one receives in a typical macro PhD program is very heavily biased by recent historical experiences. Instead of learning the whole thing, we are usually taught whatever happens to be happening in the recent past. https://twitter.com/stevehouf/status/1264966570578673664
The reason is usually bc the young faculty who possess the newest technical tools themselves often aren't familiar with what had come before a different regime ago. How are they to teach you something they themselves don't know?
Academic macroeconomics therefore evolves in waves like fashion runways in Milan. Instead of receiving a holistic training and understanding about the economic machine works, we often study whatever happens to be popular in the moment.
That's one of the frustrations I felt in grad school. That we were presented seemingly arbitrary and specific problems and seeking to answer them with precision. It took me a long time to realize this wasn't intentional but merely just how it happened.
It's very interesting for me to now look back and realize that this structure of education and knowledge production just like different styles of cooking (Italian, French, Chinese etc) is more cultural and not absolute. Maybe all of this is quite obvious.
