This blog consistently emphasizes the importance of microeconomics over macroeconomics. Indeed, I argue that macroeconomics is not economics but rather a part of either history or statistics or some other field. It is merely the summary of past aggregates. In that sense it is both history and statistics. It summarizes economic data.
Economics, however, is the study of individual human behavior. Methodologically, anything that does not use the individual, his motivations and his incentives as its building block cannot be economics. Just as the history of science is not science, so macroeconomics is not economics. For a more detailed discussion of this issue, see Why Obamanomics will not Improve the Economy.
Although not an economic article per se, John F. Di Leo provides insight as to why jobs are not being created and will continue to be lost. It deals with what appears to be a trivial regulation, but illustrates how clumsy government do-gooders ruin an economy. Senseless, but repeated by governments everywhere, at all levels and every day.
It is a wonderful illustration of microeconomic analysis. None of what Mr. Di Leo discusses has anything to do with macroeconomics. Nor does macroeconomics even consider the concerns outlined by Mr. Di Leo.