ISMP_2012_L2_post

advertisement

The full dynamic short-run model

Chairman Bernanke J. M. Keynes

1

The full Keynesian model of the business cycle i r

IS-MP

Y

π e u

Potential output =

AF(K,L)

Y pot

π

2

2

The Dynamic Model

This is state-of-the-art modern Keynesian model

Short-run model of business cycles

Combines

- IS (consumption, investment, fiscal, later trade)

- MP (Taylor rule)

- Phillips curve

Closed economy

3

The Taylor rule

1. John Taylor suggested the following rule to implement the dual mandate:

(TR) i t

= π t

+ r* + θ

π

(π t

- π*) +θ

Y y t

Here r* is the equilibrium real interest rate, π inflation rate, π* is inflation target, y is output gap (Y - Y*), θ

π and θ

Y are parameters.

2. Has both normative* and predictive** power.

____________________

*Theoretical point: Can be derived from minimizing loss function such as

L = λ

π

(π t

- π*) 2 + λ

Y

(lnY t

- lnY* ) 2

** We showed this last time with empirical Taylor rule, predictions and actual (see next slide).

4

Actual and Taylor rule federal funds rate

10

8

6

4

2

0

-2

-4

Actual

Taylor rule

-6

88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 08 10

5

Full Dynamic IS-MP analysis

Key equations:

1. Demand for goods and services: y t

2. Business real interest rate: r t b

3. Phillips curve:

4. Inflation expectations:

5. Monetary policy:

= -

= i

α t r t b

– π

+ μ*G t t e + σ t

+ ε

= r t

π

π e t i t

= π t e + φ y t t

= π

= π t t-1

+ r* + θ

+ η t

π

(π t t

+ σ t

- π*) +θ

Y y t

, i > 0

Notes:

• Equation (1) is our IS curve from last time with risk.

• Phillips curve in (3) substitutes y for u by Okun’s Law

• Business interest rate is real short rate plus risk and term premium (σ t

• Jones uses simplified version of these: no risk and other.

• Jones solves for AS-AD as function of inflation; we stick with interest rates.

)

6

Algebra of Dynamic IS-MP analysis

Solution of equations:

(IS) y t

= μ*G t

α ( i t

– π t e + σ t

) + ε t

(MP) i t

= [φ (1+ θ

π

) + θ

Y

] y t

+ r* - θ

π

π* + (1+ θ

π

) ( π t e + η t

)

This is derived by substitution. Check my algebra.

7

Interpretation of Dynamic IS-MP

(IS) y t

= μ*G t

α ( i t

– π t e + σ t

) + ε t

(MP) i t

A

= [φ (1+ θ

π

) + θ

Y

] y t

B

+ r* - θ

π

π* + (1+ θ

π

) ( π t e + η t

)

C D E

A = standard multiplier on spending

B = risk enters in as negative element on investment

C = slope of MP due to inflation and output term in Taylor rule

D = lower inflation target raises Fed interest rates

E = expected inflation or inflation shock raises Fed interest rate.

8

Federal funds rate

The graphics of dynamic IS-MP

MP(π e , π*, r*, η t

) i t

*

Y t

IS(π e , G , ε t

, σ t

)

Y t

= real output (GDP)

9

1. What are the effects of fiscal policy?

• A fiscal policy is change in purchases (G) or in taxes (T

0,

τ), holding monetary policy constant.

• In normal times, because MP curve slopes upward, expenditure multiplier is reduced due to crowding out.

10

i

IS shock (as in fiscal expansion)

MP

IS(G)

IS(G’)

Multiplier Estimates by the CBO

3.0

2.5

2.0

1.5

1.0

0.5

0.0

G: Fed G: S&L Trans: indiv Tax:

Mid/Low

Income

Tax: High

Income

Bus Tax

Congressional Budget Office, Estimated Impact of the ARRA, April 2010 12

Inflationary shock i

MP(η t

> 0)

MP(η t

= 0) i t

**

IS

Y t

**

Dual mandate v single mandate

Taylor rule for ECB versus the Fed:

(Fed) i t

= π t

+ r* + θ

π

(π t

- π*) +θ

Y y t

(EBC) i t

= π t

+ r* + θ

π

(π t

- π*)

Therefore MP curve steeper for ECB:

(MP) i t

= [φ (1+ θ

π

) + θ

Y

] y t

+ r* - θ

π

π* + (1+ θ

π

) ( π t e + η t

)

14

ECB v Fed

Note added after class:

I had the slopes backwards. The Fed is steeper (higher coefficient). Eating arithmetic humble pie. Note the interest rate diagram is explained by this.

15

i

IS shock (Fed v. ECB)

MP (Fed)

MP (ECB)

IS(G’)

IS(G)

Prediction: Fed should respond more to IS shocks such as those of 2001 - 2012

7

6

5

Fed interest rate

ECB interest rate

4

3

2

1

0

01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12

17

What about in the “liquidity trap” or “zero interest rate bound”

18

US short-term interest rates, 1929-45 (% per year)

6

5

4

3

2

1

0

1930 1932 1934 1936 1938 1940 1942 1944

Liquidity trap in US in

Great

Depression

19

20

16

12

US in current recession

Federal funds rate (% per year)

Policy has hit the

“zero lower bound” four years ago.

8

4

0

1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010

20

Japan short-term interest rates, 1994-2012

Liquidity trap from 1996 to today:

16 years and counting.

21

r = real interest rate

Fiscal policy in liquidity trap

IS

IS’

MP r e

Y = real output (GDP)

22

Monetary expansion in liquidity trap r = real interest rate

IS

MP

MP’ r e

Y = real output (GDP)

23

Can you see why macroeconomists emphasize the importance of fiscal policy in the current environment?

“Our policy approach started with a major commitment to fiscal stimulus. Economists in recent years have become skeptical about discretionary fiscal policy and have regarded monetary policy as a better tool for short-term stabilization. Our judgment, however, was that in a liquidity trap-type scenario of zero interest rates, a dysfunctional financial system, and expectations of protracted contraction, the results of monetary policy were highly uncertain whereas fiscal policy was likely to be potent.”

Lawrence Summers, July 19, 2009

24

Summary on IS-MP Model

This is the workhorse model for analyzing short-run impacts of monetary and fiscal policy

Key assumptions:

- Inflexible prices

- Unemployed resources

Now on to analysis of Great Depression in IS-MP framework.

25

Download