Showing posts with label Macro Demystified. Show all posts
Sunday, November 25, 2018
From a new post by Dave Giles:
“Anyone who’s undertaken empirical macroeconomic research relating to Canada will know that there are some serious data challenges that have to be surmounted.
In particular, getting access to long-term, continuous, time series isn’t as easy as you might expect.
Statistics Canada has been criticized frequently over the years by researchers who find that crucial economic series are suddenly “discontinued”, or are re-defined in ways that make it extremely difficult to splice the pieces together into one meaningful time-series.
In recognition of these issues, a number of efforts have been made to provide Canadian economic data in forms that researchers need. These include, for instance, Boivin et al. (2010), Bedock and Stevanovic (2107), and Stephen Gordon’s on-going “Project Link“.
Thanks to Olivier Fortin-Gagnon, Maxime Leroux, Dalibor Stevanovic, &and Stéphane Suprenant we now have an impressive addition to the available long-term Canadian time-series data. Their 2018 working paper, “A Large Canadian Database for Macroeconomic Analysis“, discusses their new database and illustrates its usefulness in a variety of ways.”
From a new post by Dave Giles:
“Anyone who’s undertaken empirical macroeconomic research relating to Canada will know that there are some serious data challenges that have to be surmounted.
In particular, getting access to long-term, continuous, time series isn’t as easy as you might expect.
Statistics Canada has been criticized frequently over the years by researchers who find that crucial economic series are suddenly “discontinued”,
Posted by 1:08 PM
atLabels: Macro Demystified
Saturday, November 24, 2018
From a new post by Timothy Taylor:
“Robert Solow is a notable player in these disputes: in particular, in his 1960 paper with Paul Samuelson, “Analytical Aspects of Anti-Inflation Policy” (American Economic Review, 50:2, pp. 177-194). In an essay in the Winter 2000 issue of the Journal of Economic Perspectives, “Toward a Macroeconomics of the Medium Run,” Solow addressed this question of thinking about macroeconomic policy in the short- and the long-run. He wrote:
I can easily imagine that there is a “true” macrodynamics, valid at every time scale. But it is fearfully complicated, and nobody has a very good grip on it. At short time scales, I think, something sort of “Keynesian” is a good approximation, and surely better than anything straight “neoclassical.” At very long time scales, the interesting questions are best studied in a neoclassical framework, and attention to the Keynesian side of things would be a minor distraction. At the five-to-ten-year time scale, we have to piece things together as best we can, and look for a hybrid model that will do the job.
In this most recent essay, “A Theory is a Sometime Thing,” Solow pushes this idea of medium-run thinking harder. He acknowledges that if a central bank can only cause the interest rate and unemployment rate to shift for a year or two, in the short-run before a rebound to what is determined in the long run, then when problems of lags in timing are included, macroeconomic policy might be dysfunctional. But if a central bank can affect the interest rate and the unemployment rate for a medium-run period of, say 5-7 years, then even with some uncertainty and lags, macroeocnomic policy may be quite relevant and possible. At one point, Solow writes: “The medium run is where we live.””
From a new post by Timothy Taylor:
“Robert Solow is a notable player in these disputes: in particular, in his 1960 paper with Paul Samuelson, “Analytical Aspects of Anti-Inflation Policy” (American Economic Review, 50:2, pp. 177-194). In an essay in the Winter 2000 issue of the Journal of Economic Perspectives, “Toward a Macroeconomics of the Medium Run,” Solow addressed this question of thinking about macroeconomic policy in the short- and the long-run.
Posted by 7:30 PM
atLabels: Macro Demystified
Monday, November 5, 2018
From a new AEI post:
“Watch the top ten largest economies in the world based on GDP, year-by-year from 1961 to 2017. A few interesting observations:
1. The global slowdown in the early 1980s.
2. China’s ranking in the world’s ten largest economies has sure bounced around a lot. It was the world’s fifth largest economy in 1962 and remained in the top ten economies until it dropped out in 1978 and 1979, before returning in 1980, dropping out again for a few years and returning to the top ten in 1982. In 1987, China fell out for a year, came back in 1988, dropped out again in 1989 before returning to the top ten for good in 1992. By 2000, China rose to the No. 6 position by passing Italy, then to No. 5 in 2005 when it surpassed France, to No. 4 in 2006 when it surpassed the UK, No. 3 in 2007 surpassing Germany, and finally rising to No. 2 in 2010 by surpassing Japan.
3. As of 2017, the US economy at $19.4 trillion was 58.4% larger than China’s GDP of $12.2 trillion.”
Watch the dynamic chart here.
From a new AEI post:
“Watch the top ten largest economies in the world based on GDP, year-by-year from 1961 to 2017. A few interesting observations:
1. The global slowdown in the early 1980s.
2. China’s ranking in the world’s ten largest economies has sure bounced around a lot. It was the world’s fifth largest economy in 1962 and remained in the top ten economies until it dropped out in 1978 and 1979,
Posted by 9:42 PM
atLabels: Macro Demystified
Sunday, November 4, 2018
From a new post by Timothy Taylor:
“I was hired back in 1986 to be the Managing Editor for a new academic economics journal, at the time unnamed, but which soon launched as the Journal of Economic Perspectives. The JEP is published by the American Economic Association, which back in 2011 decided–to my delight–that it would be freely available on-line, from the current issue back to the first issue. Here, I’ll start with Table of Contents for the just-released Fall 2018 issue, which in the Taylor household is known as issue #126. Below that are abstracts and direct links for all of the papers. I may blog more specifically about some of the papers in the next week or two, as well.”
From a new post by Timothy Taylor:
“I was hired back in 1986 to be the Managing Editor for a new academic economics journal, at the time unnamed, but which soon launched as the Journal of Economic Perspectives. The JEP is published by the American Economic Association, which back in 2011 decided–to my delight–that it would be freely available on-line, from the current issue back to the first issue.
Posted by 9:18 PM
atLabels: Macro Demystified
Monday, October 29, 2018
From a new post by Francis Diebold:
“As the expansion ages, there’s progressively more discussion of whether its advanced age makes it more likely to end. The answer is no. More formally, postwar U.S. expansion hazards are basically flat, in contrast to contraction hazards, which are sharply increasing. Of course the present expansion will eventually end, and it may even end soon, but its age it unrelated to its probability of ending.
All of this is very clear in Diebold, Rudebusch and Sichel (1992). See Figure 6.2 on p. 271. (Sorry for the poor photocopy quality.) ”
“The flat expansion hazard result has held up well (e.g., Rudebusch (2016)), and moreover it would only be strengthened by the current long expansion.”
From a new post by Francis Diebold:
“As the expansion ages, there’s progressively more discussion of whether its advanced age makes it more likely to end. The answer is no. More formally, postwar U.S. expansion hazards are basically flat, in contrast to contraction hazards, which are sharply increasing. Of course the present expansion will eventually end, and it may even end soon, but its age it unrelated to its probability of ending.
Posted by 9:49 AM
atLabels: Macro Demystified
Subscribe to: Posts