* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download Topic 5 Money & Investment
Production for use wikipedia , lookup
Real bills doctrine wikipedia , lookup
Economic democracy wikipedia , lookup
Early 1980s recession wikipedia , lookup
Okishio's theorem wikipedia , lookup
Money supply wikipedia , lookup
Interest rate wikipedia , lookup
Ragnar Nurkse's balanced growth theory wikipedia , lookup
Before we consider investment in the model however, we should very briefly look at what is happening to money here ys r0 yd y0 First notice that the market for goods determines real income (y) and the real interest rate (r) •So the money market determines the nominal variables in the economy: •The price level P, •Inflation p •Nominal interest rate R= r+ p First consider the Demand for Money MD = P L (y, R) L (+,-) That is, the demand for money depends on the level of real income and the NOMINAL interest rate Why Nominal? Because lose R on all money held First consider the Demand for Money P MD = P L (Y, R) e.g Suppose we figure out L(y, R)= 8 then MD = 8P MD M Finding Money Market Equilibrium For simplicity assume for now that there is no inflation, p=0 and thus R=r (that is there is no distinction) Money Demand must equal Money supply M D MS Money Market Equilibrium IF M D MS Then M D P.L( y, r ) MS L( y , r ) P Money Market Equilibrium P MD L( y 0 , r0 ) P0 Money Market Equilibrium MD P0 MbD What happens now if there is a Boom? MD rises as y rises and r goes down L(+,-) So at every P more is demanded Money Market Equilibrium MD P0 MbD P1 So where is the new Equilibrium? So the price level has fallen in a boom as predicted by the stylised facts Money Market Equilibrium MrD P1 MD P0 Similarly in a recession MD falls as y falls and r goes up Md =PL(y ,r ) And the price level rises in a recession Money Market Equilibrium Inflation! P1 MD P0 0 1 What happens if the monetary authority increases the money supply It just causes P to rise! Business Cycle Model with Investment y=f(kt-1,Lt) y y=f(kt-1) y=f(+,+) Note production depends on the capital stock in place at the end of last period kt-1 y=f(kt-1) y Note we are treating L as a constant here y=f(kt-1,Lt) kt-1 MPk t-1 Marginal Product of Capital is decreasing kt-1 y y=f(kt-1) Note we are treating L as a constant here y=f(kt-1,Lt) kt-1 y=f(L) L But we are treating kt-1 as a constant here y=f(kt-1,Lt) y y=f(kt-1) kt-1 y=f(L) L And both functions exhibit diminishing marginal returns More generally could consider changes in K & L and then would expect something more like: 2y y k&L 2k & 2L However, right now we want to focus on the investment decision so we need to focus on capital in isolation y=f(kt-1) y MPk t-1 kt-1 And on the MPkt-1 in particular Why? kt-1 However, right now we want to focus on the investment decision so we need to focus on capital in isolation y=f(kt-1) y kt-1 MPk t-1 kt-1 Because the MPkt-1 tells us the additional output we get from one more unit of Capital MPk t-1 What other consideration do we need to think about with capital? Depreciation! kt-1 MPk t-1 So true return from capital is MPkt-1 less depreciation, d. What is its cost? The real rate of interest r MPk t-1-d kt-1 MPk t-1 So we should equate the real return on capital, MPkt-1-d, with the real rate of interest r r MPk t-1-d kt-1 k̂ * t 1 k̂ MPk t-1 * t 1 Is the desired capital stock r MPk t-1-d kt-1 k̂ * t 1 MPk t-1 Note a rise in r or d results in a lower desired capital stock r MPk t-1-d kt-1 k̂ * t 1 Higher r MPk t-1 r MPk t-1-d kt-1 k̂ * t 1 Higher d MPk t-1 r MPk t-1-d kt-1 k̂ * t 1 MPk t-1 k̂ (r, d ) * t 1 k̂ (,) * t 1 r MPk t-1-d kt-1 k̂ * t 1 k̂ * t 1 Desired Capital Stock But we are interested in investment, not desired capital stock How do we get from desired capital stock to investment? Investment is the difference between the desired capital stock, and the existing capital stock Investment is the difference between the desired capital stock, and the existing capital stock Existing Capital Stock: Capital in place last period less whatever wore out. (1-d)kt-1 Investment is the difference between the desired capital stock, and the existing capital stock i k̂ * t 1 (1 d )k t 1 i k̂ * t 1 (1 d )k t 1 i k̂ (r, d ) (1 d )k t 1 * t 1 (-,-) i(r, d , k t1 ) i(, ,) But what about d? i k̂ * t 1 (1 d )k t 1 i k̂ (r, d ) (1 d )k t 1 * t 1 (-,-) i(r, d , k t1 ) i(, ? ,) r i(r, d , k t1 ) id i r Empirically we know that: di dc dr dr And… id i r c i : : is approximat ely 4 : 1 y y Id I So what does the aggregate economy look like now? r Notice id is flatter than cd r0 cd id i0 c0 And total aggregate demand is id plus cd r r0 cd id i0 yd=cd + id) c0 y0 r And equilibrium depends on aggregate demand and supply ys r0 cd id i0 yd=cd + id) c0 y0 So now we have described the model with Investment.. r ys r0 id cd yd=cd + id) i0 c0 y0 And we are now in a position to return to our business cycle shocks. 1. Lets revisit a temporary negative productivity (Supply) shock and ASSUME that the MPk has not changed r ys* ys r0 cd id i0 yd=cd + id) c0 y0 Temporary shock so what happens to cd, id &yd ? 1. Now cd falls a little but the id cirve is not affected since MPk has not changed r ys* cd* ys r0 cd id i0 yd=cd + id) c0 y0 So overall aggregate demand, yd, fall a little 1. So overall aggregate demand, yd, falls a little r ys* cd* ys r1 r0 cd id i0 yd=cd + id) c0 yd* y1 y0 And since Agg D > Agg S at r0 the interest rate must rise…. And output must fall 1. As r rises c falls a little more, BUT i falls a lot – and in percentage terms, a huge amount. ys* r cd* ys r1 r0 cd id i1 i0 yd=cd + id) c1 c0 yd* y1 y0 What happens now to c and i? 1. r i y c i y c ys* cd* ys r1 r0 id cd yd=cd + id) yd* i1 i0 c1 c0 y1 y0 And now the system matches the stylised facts 1. Investment is acting as a buffer, absorbing the bulk of the fall in output and allowing c to fall by only a small amount. ys* r cd* ys r1 r0 cd id i1 i0 yd=cd + id) c1 c0 yd* y1 y0 But we haven’t yet got our acyclical interest rate. r ys r0 cd id i0 yd=cd + id) c0 y0 ASSUME now that a temporary negative shock reduces the MPk in the future ONLY. r CASE 2 ys r0 cd id i0 yd=cd + id) c0 y0 Output today is unaffected. No change in ys ASSUME now that a temporary negative shock reduces the MPk in the future ONLY. r CASE 2 ys r0 cd id id* i0 yd=cd + id) c0 y0 But if MPk in the future is down, id shifts down today ASSUME now that a temporary negative shock reduces the MPk in the future ONLY. r CASE 2 ys r0 cd id id* i0 yd=cd + id) c0 yd* y0 …and so the yd curve must shift down also Where is the new equilibrium? At r0 we have Agg S > Agg D r CASE 2 ys r0 r1 cd id id* i0 yd=cd + id) c0 yd* y1 y0 and so r falls! As does output (it’s a recession) As r falls to r1, consumption must rise and investment recovers (slightly) r CASE 2 ys r0 r1 cd id id* i1 i0 yd=cd + id) c0 c1 yd* y0 y1 The Key Issue for us is that in this recession r falls!!!!!!!!!!! r CASE 2 ys r0 r1 cd id id* i1 i0 yd=cd + id) c0 c1 yd* y0 y1 Note this is a KEYNESIAN recession • We have a fall in the expected value of future capital returns Mpke • This is Keynes’ Animal Spirits • And it manifests itself primarily as a demand shift In general would expect a recession to have elements of both cases 1 & 2 r ys r0 id cd yd=cd + id) i0 c0 y0 – shock affect both ys today and future productivity So now do both cases together! r ys* ys cd r0 yd=cd + id) id id* i0 1. c0 ys shifts in, as does id y0 2. The temporary recession also means that cd shifts in a little r ys* ys cd cd* r0 yd=cd + id) id id* i0 c0 y0 3. So yd falls also. But now the big Q- By how much? 4. By how much does yd fall as id and cd fall? r ys* ys cd cd* r0 yd=cd + id) id id* i0 c0 y0 This is absolutely key to understanding our results 4. By how much does yd fall? r ys* ys cd cd* r0 yd=cd + id) id yd* id* i0 c0 y0 If the shift in yd (&id) is smaller than the shift in ys .. 4. By how much does yd fall? r ys* ys cd cd* rup r0 yd=cd + id) id yd* id* i0 c0 y0 Then r rises to rup, and y is down to y1 And c falls, and i falls by even more, as r rises r ys* ys cd cd* rup r0 yd=cd + id) id yd* id* i1 i0 c1 c0 y1 y0 4.b But if the shift down in yd is bigger than the shift in ys r ys* ys cd cd* r0 yd=cd + id) id yd* id* i0 c0 y0 4.b But if the shift down in yd is bigger than the shift in ys r ys* ys cd cd* r0 rdn yd=cd + id) id yd* id* i0 c0 y0 And r falls to rdn The r falls to rdn, as does y i falls a little and c? r ys* ys cd cd* r0 rdn yd=cd + id) id yd* id* i1 i0 C1? c0 y1 y0 TIME FOR A BIG SUMMARY 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Negative productivity Shock Causes ys and id to shift in cd shifts in a little due to PIH yd shifts in as cd and id shift in HOW MUCH DOES yd SHIFT IN TIME FOR A BIG SUMMARY 5. HOW MUCH DOES yd SHIFT IN 6. If the shift is small (MPk effect is small) 7. AD > AS 8. r rises, y falls 9. c falls a little 10. i falls a lot TIME FOR A BIG SUMMARY 5. HOW MUCH DOES yd SHIFT IN 6. If the shift is BIG (MPk effect is big) 7. AS > AD 8. r falls , y falls 9. c may fall (could even rise-intuition?) 10. i falls In repeated shocks what would we see? 1. y falls 2. Sometimes r up, sometimes down (acyclical) 3. c would fall a little 4. i would fall al lot 5. y down, and change in r = 0 on average L(y,R) = L(-,0), Md down, so P up 6. Hours worked fall if MPL effect strongest - from earlier in module So Now We Have a Theoretical Model Capable of Explaining All the Stylised Facts So Now We Have a Theoretical Model Capable of Explaining All the Stylised Facts In fairness, some results depend on some effects being greater or less than others (e.g. hours worked, interest rates etc) It is an empirical question whether this is actually the case. So Now We Have a Theoretical Model Capable of Explaining All the Stylised Facts So we need to build a model economy like Chapters, 2, 4, 5 and 12, with realistic parameters for the production function, tastes for work and leisure, and investment function etc and check whether such an economy can replicate the observed stylised facts. Non-Assessed Test Results 40.0 30.0 20.0 10.0 0.0 30< 30-39 40-49 50-59 60-69 More Most common mistake: Not answering all questions Evaluation and Assessment • Readings (on reading list): • Ryan & Mullineux- The Ups and Downs of Modern Business Cycle Theory in Reflections on the Development of Modern Macroeconomics, Snowden & Vane eds For a contrary view see paper by Dixon in same volume Evaluation and Assessment • Additional readings which I have placed on the J drive: • Ryan - Business Cycle Theory: The Real Business Cycle in Encyclopaedia of Macroeconomics (Forthcoming 2002) • Ryan – Business Cycle Theory: The Stylised Facts Real Business Cycle in Encyclopaedia of Macroeconomics (Forthcoming 2002) What follows is no substitute for reading Ryan & Mullineux Origins of the Real Business Cycle Theory 1. Theoretical Failures & Add ons 2. Lucas Critique Origins of the Real Business Cycle Theory 1. Theoretical Failures & Add ons r LM IS y 1970’s No Supply side in ISLM Model Demand Side model Only r LM IS y P1 P0 AD y1 y0 Then expected that if y went down P would fall. So when observed P rising and y falling needed new construct r P1 P0 LM Added on Supply IS which when we had rational expectations had to be vertical y AS1 AS0 AD y1 y0 No real Microeconomic Foundations Origins of the Real Business Cycle 2. Lucas Critique Can’t use reduced forms to evaluate policy e.g. recall macro last year y=c+i+G-T If c=a+byd where yd is disposable income and yd=(1-t)y Then dy 1 dG 1 b(1 t ) 40.0 30.0 20.0 10.0 0.0 30< 30-39 40-49 50-59 60-69 More