AD/AS Models and Macro Policy Debates Phillips Curve Adaptive vs. Rational Expectations Policy Impotency Hypothesis Ricardian Equivalence Introduction In previous models, we assumed the price level P was “stuck” in the short run. This implies a horizontal SRAS curve. Now, we consider two prominent models of aggregate supply in the short run: Sticky-price model Imperfect-information model Introduction Both models imply: Y Y (P EP) expected price level agg. output natural rate of output a positive parameter actual price level Other things equal, Y and P are positively related, so the SRAS curve is upward-sloping. The sticky-price model Reasons for sticky prices: long-term contracts between firms and customers menu costs firms not wishing to annoy customers with frequent price changes Assumption: Firms set their own prices (i.e., firms have some market power) The imperfect-information model Assumptions: All wages and prices are perfectly flexible, so that all markets clear. Each supplier produces one good, consumes many goods. Each supplier knows the nominal price of the good she produces, but does not know the overall price level. Supply of each good depends on its relative price: the nominal price of the good divided by the overall price level. Supplier does not know price level at the time she makes her production decision, so uses EP. Lucas Island Metaphor PB = 1 PA = 1 2 PD = 1 PE = 1 PC = 1 Suppose P rises but EP does not. Supplier A thinks her relative price has risen, so she produces more. With many producers thinking this way, Y will rise whenever P rises above EP. Summary & implications P LRAS Y Y (P EP) P EP SRAS P EP P EP Y Y Both models of agg. supply imply the relationship summarized by the SRAS curve & equation. Summary & implications SRAS equation: Y Y (P EP) Suppose a positive AD shock moves SRAS2 P LRAS output above its natural rate and SRAS1 P above the level people had P3 EP3 expected. P2 Over time, EP2 P1 EP1 EP rises, SRAS shifts up, and output returns to its natural rate. AD2 AD1 Y Y3 Y1 Y Y2 Inflation Rate 5.0 The 1960s 1969 4.5 4.0 1968 3.5 1967 3.0 2.5 1966 2.0 1964 1.5 1961 1960 1965 1.0 1963 1962 0.5 0.0 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 6.5 7.0 Unemployment Rate Inflation, Unemployment, and the Phillips Curve The Phillips curve states that depends on expected inflation, E. cyclical unemployment: the deviation of the actual rate of unemployment from the natural rate supply shocks, (Greek letter “nu”) E (u u ) n where > 0 is an exogenous constant. Adaptive expectations Adaptive expectations: an approach that assumes people form their expectations of future inflation based on recently observed inflation. A simple version: Expected inflation = last year’s actual inflation E 1 Then, P.C. becomes n 1 (u u ) Inflation inertia 1 (u u ) n In this form, the Phillips curve implies that inflation has inertia: In the absence of supply shocks or cyclical unemployment, inflation will continue indefinitely at its current rate. Past inflation influences expectations of current inflation, which in turn influences the wages & prices that people set. Two causes of rising & falling inflation 1 (u u ) n cost-push inflation: inflation resulting from supply shocks Adverse supply shocks typically raise production costs and induce firms to raise prices, “pushing” inflation up. demand-pull inflation: inflation resulting from demand shocks Positive shocks to aggregate demand cause unemployment to fall below its natural rate, which “pulls” the inflation rate up. Graphing the Phillips curve In the short run, policymakers face a tradeoff between and u. E (u un ) 1 The short-run Phillips curve E u n u Inflation Rate 15.0 1980 14.0 13.0 1981 12.0 1975 11.0 10.0 1974 1979 9.0 1982 8.0 1978 7.0 1976 1970 6.0 1990 1971 5.0 1969 4.0 2006 2001 1973 1968 3.0 1967 2000 2.0 1966 19972005 1972 19961995 2007 1999 1998 1977 1986 1985 1993 2003 1994 1984 1983 1992 2004 1964 1965 1.0 1989 2008 1988 1991 1963 1987 1960 2002 1961 1962 0.0 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Unemployment Rate Shifting the Phillips curve People adjust their expectations over time, so the tradeoff only holds in the short run. E (u un ) E 2 E1 E.g., an increase in E shifts the short-run P.C. upward. u n u Rational expectations Ways of modeling the formation of expectations: adaptive expectations: People base their expectations of future inflation on recently observed inflation. rational expectations: People base their expectations on all available information, including information about current and prospective future policies. Painless disinflation? Proponents of rational expectations believe that the sacrifice ratio may be very small: Suppose u = un and = E = 6%, and suppose the Fed announces that it will do whatever is necessary to reduce inflation from 6 to 2 percent as soon as possible. If the announcement is credible, then E will fall, perhaps by the full 4 points. Then, can fall without an increase in u. The natural rate hypothesis Our analysis of the costs of disinflation, and of economic fluctuations in the preceding chapters, is based on the natural rate hypothesis: Changes in aggregate demand affect output and employment only in the short run. In the long run, the economy returns to the levels of output, employment, and unemployment described by the classical model (Chaps. 3-8). Both models of aggregate supply discussed in Chapter 13 imply that if the price level is higher than expected, then output ______ natural rate of output. a) b) c) d) Exceeds the Falls below the Equals the Moves to a different 0% a) 0% 0% 0% b) c) d) The classical dichotomy breaks down for a Phillips curve, which shows the relationship between a nominal variable, _____, and a real variable, _____. a) b) c) d) Output; prices Money; output Inflation; unemployment Unemployment; inflation 0% a) 0% 0% 0% b) c) d) According to the natural rate hypothesis, fluctuations in aggregate demand affect output in: a) Both the short run and b) c) d) long run Only in the short run Only in the long run In neither the short run nor the long run 0% a) 0% 0% 0% b) c) d) Stabilization Policy Should policy be active or passive? Should policy be by rule or discretion? Growth rate of U.S. real GDP Percent change from 4 quarters earlier 10 8 6 Average growth rate 4 2 0 -2 -4 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 Increase in unemployment during recessions peak trough increase in # of unemployed persons (millions) July 1953 May 1954 2.11 Aug 1957 April 1958 2.27 April 1960 February 1961 1.21 December 1969 November 1970 2.01 November 1973 March 1975 3.58 January 1980 July 1980 1.68 July 1981 November 1982 4.08 July 1990 March 1991 1.67 March 2001 November 2001 1.50 December 2007 June 2009 6.14 Arguments for active policy Recessions cause economic hardship for millions of people The Employment Act of 1946 AD/AS model shows how fiscal and monetary policy can respond to shocks and stabilize the economy Arguments against active policy Policies act with long & variable lags, including: inside lag: the time between the shock and the policy response. takes time to recognize shock takes time to implement policy, especially fiscal policy outside lag: the time it takes for policy to affect economy. If conditions change before policy’s impact is felt, the policy may destabilize the economy. Automatic stabilizers Designed to reduce the lags associated with stabilization policy. Examples: income tax unemployment insurance welfare Forecasting the macroeconomy Because policies act with lags, policymakers must predict future conditions. Two ways economists generate forecasts: Leading economic indicators data series that fluctuate in advance of the economy Macroeconometric models The LEI index and real GDP, 1990s annual percentage change 15 10 5 0 -5 -10 -15 1990 source of LEI data: The Conference Board 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 Leading Economic Indicators Real GDP 2002 Forecasting the macroeconomy Because policies act with lags, policymakers must predict future conditions. Two ways economists generate forecasts: Leading economic indicators data series that fluctuate in advance of the economy Macroeconometric models Large-scale models with estimated parameters that can be used to forecast the response of endogenous variables to shocks and policies Unemployment rate Mistakes forecasting the 1982 recession Forecasting the macroeconomy Because policies act with lags, policymakers must predict future conditions. The preceding slides show that the forecasts are often wrong. This is one reason why some economists oppose policy activism. The Lucas critique Due to Robert Lucas who won Nobel Prize in 1995 for rational expectations. Forecasting the effects of policy changes has often been done using models estimated with historical data. Lucas pointed out that such predictions would not be valid if the policy change alters expectations in a way that changes the fundamental relationships between variables. Question 2: Should policy be conducted by rule or discretion? Rules and discretion: Basic concepts Policy conducted by rule: Policymakers announce in advance how policy will respond in various situations, and commit themselves to following through. Policy conducted by discretion: As events occur and circumstances change, policymakers use their judgment and apply whatever policies seem appropriate at the time. Arguments for rules 1. Distrust of policymakers and the political process misinformed politicians politicians’ interests sometimes not the same as the interests of society 2. The time inconsistency of discretionary policy Scenario in which policymakers have an incentive to renege on a previously announced policy once others have acted on that announcement Destroys policymakers’ credibility, thereby reducing effectiveness of their policies. Examples of time inconsistency 1. To encourage investment, govt announces it will not tax income from capital. But once the factories are built, govt reneges in order to raise more tax revenue. Examples of time inconsistency 2. To reduce expected inflation, the central bank announces it will tighten monetary policy. But faced with high unemployment, the central bank may be tempted to cut interest rates. Examples of time inconsistency 3. Aid is given to poor countries contingent on fiscal reforms. The reforms do not occur, but aid is given anyway, because the donor countries do not want the poor countries’ citizens to starve. Monetary policy rules a. Constant money supply growth rate Advocated by monetarists. Stabilizes aggregate demand only if velocity is stable. Monetary policy rules a. Constant money supply growth rate b. Target growth rate of nominal GDP Automatically increase money growth whenever nominal GDP grows slower than targeted; decrease money growth when nominal GDP growth exceeds target. Monetary policy rules a. Constant money supply growth rate b. Target growth rate of nominal GDP c. Target the inflation rate Automatically reduce money growth whenever inflation rises above the target rate. Many countries’ central banks now practice inflation targeting, but allow themselves a little discretion. Central bank independence A policy rule announced by central bank will work only if the announcement is credible. Credibility depends in part on degree of independence of central bank. average inflation Inflation and central bank independence index of central bank independence Government Debt and Budget Deficits The size of the U.S. government’s debt, and how it compares to that of other countries. Problems with measuring the budget deficit. How does government debt affect the economy? Deficit = G – T Gov’t Debt = Σ Deficits Indebtedness of the world’s governments Country Gov Debt (% of GDP) Country Gov Debt (% of GDP) Japan 173 U.K. 59 Italy 113 Netherlands 55 Greece 101 Norway 46 Belgium 92 Sweden 45 U.S.A. 73 Spain 44 France 73 Finland 40 Portugal 71 Ireland 33 Germany 65 Korea 33 Canada 63 Denmark 28 Austria 63 Australia 14 Ratio of U.S. govt debt to GDP 1.2 1.0 WW2 0.8 0.6 Revolutionary War Civil War Iraq War WW1 0.4 0.2 0.0 1790 1810 1830 1850 1870 1890 1910 1930 1950 1970 1990 2010 The U.S. experience in recent years Early 1980s through early 1990s debt-GDP ratio: 25.5% in 1980, 48.9% in 1993 due to Reagan tax cuts, increases in defense spending & entitlements Early 1990s through 2000 $290b deficit in 1992, $236b surplus in 2000 debt-GDP ratio fell to 32.5% in 2000 due to rapid growth, stock market boom, tax hikes The U.S. experience in recent years Early 2000s the return of huge deficits, due to Bush tax cuts, 2001 recession, Medicare expansion, Iraq war The 2008-2009 recession fall in tax revenues huge spending increases (bailouts of financial institutions and auto industry, stimulus package) The troubling long-term fiscal outlook The U.S. population is aging. Health care costs are rising. Spending on entitlements like Social Security and Medicare is growing. Deficits and the debt are projected to significantly increase… U.S. population age 65+, as percent of population age 20-64 40 Percent of pop. 35 age 20-64 30 actual projected 25 20 15 10 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 U.S. government spending on Medicare and Social Security, 1950-2009 Percent 8 of GDP 6 4 2 0 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 Projected U.S. federal govt debt in two scenarios, 2000-2035 200 “Alternative fiscal scenario” incorporates widely-expected changes to current law, such as extension of Bush tax cuts 180 Percent of GDP 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 “Extended baseline scenario” – assumes no changes to current law Actual 20 0 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 Problems measuring the deficit 1. Inflation 2. Capital assets 3. Uncounted liabilities 4. The business cycle Is the govt debt really a problem? Consider a tax cut with corresponding increase in the government debt. Two viewpoints: 1. Traditional view 2. Ricardian view The traditional view Short run: Y, u Long run: Y and u back at their natural rates closed economy: r, I Crowding Out The Ricardian view due to David Ricardo (1820), more recently advanced by Robert Barro According to Ricardian equivalence, a debt-financed tax cut has no effect on C, S, r, I, and Y, even in the short run. The logic of Ricardian Equivalence Consumers are forward-looking The tax cut does not make consumers better off, so they do not increase consumption spending Instead, they save the full tax cut in order to repay the future tax liability Result: Private saving rises by the amount public saving falls, leaving national saving unchanged Problem Set #21 Problems with Ricardian Equivalence Myopia: Not all consumers think so far ahead, some see the tax cut as a windfall. Borrowing constraints: Some consumers cannot borrow enough to achieve their optimal consumption, so they spend a tax cut. Future generations: If consumers expect that the burden of repaying a tax cut will fall on future generations, then a tax cut now makes them feel better off, so they increase spending. Evidence For/Against RE Reagan tax cuts (1980s) National saving fell, real interest rate rose Private saving may have fallen for reasons other than the tax cut, such as optimism about the economy Consumers may have expected the debt to be repaid with future spending cuts instead of future tax hikes Bush I withholding experiment (1992) Income tax withholding reduced to stimulate economy This delayed taxes but didn’t make consumers better off Almost half of consumers increased consumption Because the data is subject to different interpretations, both views of govt debt survive OTHER PERSPECTIVES: Balanced budgets vs. optimal fiscal policy Some politicians have proposed amending the U.S. Constitution to require balanced federal govt budget every year. Many economists reject this proposal, arguing that deficit should be used to: stabilize output & employment smooth taxes in the face of fluctuating income redistribute income across generations when appropriate OTHER PERSPECTIVES: Debt and politics “Fiscal policy is made not by angels…” – Greg Mankiw, p.487 Some do not trust policymakers with deficit spending. They argue that: policymakers do not worry about true costs of their spending, since burden falls on future taxpayers OTHER PERSPECTIVES: Fiscal effects on monetary policy Govt deficits may be financed by printing money A high govt debt may be an incentive for policymakers to create inflation (to reduce real value of debt at expense of bond holders)