5
$\begingroup$

The tag is very popular, but I feel it is not precise enough. Should we rename it "economic-growth", as that is what it currently stands for?

(tag excerpt reads "An increase over time in the quantity of goods and services produced within an economy.")

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ Do you have a view of the tags growth-theory, endogenous-growth, and balanced-growth? $\endgroup$
    – Ubiquitous
    Aug 21 '17 at 16:58
  • $\begingroup$ @Ubiquitous Well, economic-growth gives room for empirical questions, which growth-theory does not. They could in principle be merged (the latter has just 29 questions), but it feels not totally necessary. I think now one would mistake "growth-theory" by anything but economic growth theory. But growth in itself is too imprecise. There is just no need for super short tags. The other tags two seem fine as stand-alone to me, as they are quite a sub-field between the growth literature. $\endgroup$
    – luchonacho
    Aug 21 '17 at 17:06
3
$\begingroup$

Another option is to merge and into a new . As in my comment to Aleco's answer, I think the latter tag would be friendly to both theory and empirical questions.

$\endgroup$
3
  • $\begingroup$ I think this is a good suggestion. Let's wait a day or two to see if any macro guys show up here to say otherwise and then do it. $\endgroup$
    – Ubiquitous
    Aug 24 '17 at 11:23
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Update: I have implemented this suggestion. $\endgroup$
    – Ubiquitous
    Aug 25 '17 at 18:35
  • $\begingroup$ @Ubiquitous Great. Thanks. Looks good! $\endgroup$
    – luchonacho
    Aug 25 '17 at 18:55
0
$\begingroup$

Users are tag consumers, and they will go for the easiest. And I totally aggree that "growth" is a useless tag, being very general.

My proposal, however tedious (but we need to get serious about tagging): re-tag all 120 questions tagged with "growth" into one of the three other related tags, and then purge the "growth" tag.

$\endgroup$
2
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ The only problem with this approach is that you are putting empirical questions into the growth-theory tag. which is misleading. Why not instead remove the growth-theory tag and merge it with growth tag into economic-growth? $\endgroup$
    – luchonacho
    Aug 23 '17 at 12:57
  • $\begingroup$ @LUCHONACHO this is also a valid approach. $\endgroup$ Aug 23 '17 at 12:59

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .