Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

Several recent papers provide strong empirical support for the view that an expansionary monetary policy disturbance generates a persistent decrease in interest rates and a persistent increase in output and employment. Existing quantitative general equilibrium models, which allow for capital accumulation, are inconsistent with this view. There does exist a recently developed class of general equilibrium models which can rationalize the contemporaneous response of interest rates, output, and employment to a money supply shock. However, a key shortcoming of these models is that they cannot rationalize persistent liquidity effects. This paper discusses the basic frictions and mechanisms underlying this new class of models and investigates one avenue for generating persistence. We argue that once a simplified version of the model in Christiano and Eichenbaum (1991) is modified to allow for extremely small costs of adjusting sectoral flow of funds, positive money shocks generate long-lasting, quantitatively significant liquidity effects, as well as persistent increases in aggregate economic activity.

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

I present an undetermined coefficients method for obtaining a linear approximating to the solution of a dynamic, rational expectations model. I also show how that solution can be used to compute the model's implications for impulse response functions and for second moments.

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

No, and maybe not. [additional text from author's introduction] To us, the possibility of providing a compelling case that real GMP is either trend or difference stationary seems extremely small, certainly on the basis of post-war data. This is because there is only one difference between these two types of processes and that difference is completely summarized by the answer to the question. How much should an innovation to real GMP affect the optimal forecast of real GMP into the infinite future? If the answer is zero, then real GMP is trend stationary. If the answer is not zero, then real GMP is difference stationary. The competing hypotheses have no other testable differences. Once we pose the question in this way, it seems clear that economists ought to be extremely skeptical of any argument that purports to support one view or the other. Simply put, it's hard to believe that a mere 40 years of data contain any evidence on the only experiment that is relevant.

Gross national product.

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

Recent experience has given rise to the financialization view: increased trading in commodity fu--tures markets leads to an increase in the level and volatility of spot prices. We construct a large panel data set which includes commodities with and without futures markets. The data do not support the financialization view. We also find that futures returns are positively correlated with open interest and not correlated with net financial flows. The facts on spot and futures prices and volume necessitate a new view, which we develop, of the economic role of futures markets. Our model is consistent with the key facts.

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

In the l93Os, Dunlop and Tarshis observed that the correlation between hours and wages is close to zero. This classic observation has become a litmus test by which macroeconomic models are judged. Existing real business cycle models fail this test dramatically. Based on this result, we argue that technology shocks cannot be the sole impulse driving post-war U.S. business cycles. We modify prototypical real business cycle models by allowing government spending shocks to influence labor market dynamics in a way suggested by Aschauer (1985), Barro (1981, 1987) and Kormendi (1983), This modification can, in principle, bring the models into closer conformity with the data. While the empirical performance of the models is significantly improved, they still fail to account for the Dunlop-Tarshis observation. Accounting for that observation will require further advances in model development. Consequently, we conclude that theory is behind, not ahead of, business cycle measurement.