Should we keep these very very broad tags, even if it means that most questions end up with one or the other of them?
I think they are worth keeping.
- Even though they are broad, Macro and Micro are very much part of the usual branching of economics. I think not having them as tags would be confusing.
- They can be combined with other, more specific tags, so you can express what the question represents. For example, macroeconomics labor-economics.
- Macro and Micro represent two different approaches to an issue, so it might be worth differentiating a question with a top-down approach (macro), or a bottom-up approach (micro), depending on what kind of answer you expect.
Even though they may not be useful for browsing through, they will help the sidebar bring up related questions. For this to work both the macro/micro and topical tags will be needed.
I think that they should stay but should be used relatively sparingly. We should come up with a good excerpt that limits what they do. For example, there are a lot of rather basic results that come up during introductory courses. Questions related to those kinds of things should get the tags. Things that can be approached from either direction should not get the tags, e.g. international trade should have its own tag.
The problem is that we could end up with every question being tagged at least one. That makes for a pretty useless tag. If we keep them, then we need to find definitions that limit their scope.