注册 登录  
 加关注
   显示下一条  |  关闭
温馨提示!由于新浪微博认证机制调整,您的新浪微博帐号绑定已过期,请重新绑定!立即重新绑定新浪微博》  |  关闭

N·格里高利·曼昆的博客

恒甫学社的学术性分支博客

 
 
 

日志

 
 
关于我
曼昆  

曼昆

网易考拉推荐

流动性偏好,可贷资金理论与尼尔·弗格森(书呆子)  

2009-05-05 11:35:45|  分类: 默认分类 |  标签: |举报 |字号 订阅

  下载LOFTER 我的照片书  |
May 2, 2009, 8:35 am
Liquidity preference, loanable funds, and Niall Ferguson(wonkish)
    流动性偏好,可贷资金理论与尼尔·弗格森这个书呆子

克鲁格曼[著]
 
雨儿[译]
 
Joe Nocera writes about Thursday’s New York Revie/PEN event on the economy, but fails to mention what I found the most depressing aspect of the whole thing: further confirmation that we’re living in a Dark Age of macroeconomics, in which hard-won knowledge has simply been forgotten.

乔诺西拉在“星期四的纽约维/国际笔会活动”中,把讨论经济状况定为主题,但没有提到,我发现的整个事情最令人担忧的方面:即在更大程度上证实了,我们生活在一个宏观经济政策的黑暗时代,只不过遗忘了那些难能可贵的见解。

What’s the evidence? Niall Ferguson “explaining” that fiscal expansion will actually be contractionary, because it will drive up interest rates. At least that’s what I think he said; there were so many flourishes that it’s hard to tell. But in any case, this is really sad: John Hicks knew far more about this in 1937 than people who think they’re sophisticates know now.

有什么证据?尼尔·弗格森“解释”,扩大财政实际上将导致紧缩,因为这会推高利率。至少我认为他说的事:很难说有他说的那么夸张。但无论何,这实在是令人痛心:约翰·希克斯很清楚,在1937年人们就认为政府是老油条,对此,远比人们现在所了解到的多得多。

In any case, I thought it might be useful to re-explain why our current predicament can be thought of as a global excess of desired savings — which means that fiscal deficits won’t drive up interest rates unless they also expand the economy.

不管怎样,我认为再解释也许是有用的,为什么我们目前的困境,可以理解为是一个全球性储蓄过剩-这意味着财政赤字将不会推高利率,除非他们还扩大经济规模。

Here’s what I imagine Niall Ferguson was thinking: he was thinking of the interest rate as determined by the supply and demand for savings. This is the “loanable funds” model of the interest rate, which is in every textbook, mine included. It looks like this:

我猜测尼尔·弗格森的想法是:他认为,利率要视对储蓄的供给和需求而定。这是利率的“可贷资金”模式,每本教科书都包括这个内容。它看起来像这样的(图标): (我这里上克鲁格曼的博客很慢。图暂时看不到!

where S is savings, I investment spending, and r the interest rate.

其中S是储蓄,I是投资开支和r利率。

What Keynes pointed out was that this picture is incomplete if you allow for the possibility that the economy is not at full employment. Why? Because saving and investment depend on the level of GDP. Suppose GDP rises; some of this increase in income will be saved, pushing the savings schedule to the right. There may also be a rise in investment demand, but ordinarily we’d expect the savings rise to be larger, so that the interest rate falls:

凯恩斯指出的,如果您考虑到经济不充分就业的可能性,那么这张图片就是不完整的。为什么?因为储蓄和投资取决于国内生产总值的水平。假设国内生产总值上升:增加的这方面收入将被储蓄,推动储蓄的明细表要靠右。此外,还有可能投资需求上升,但我们通常期待储蓄上升较大,因此利率下降:

So supply and demand for funds doesn’t tell you what the interest rate is — not by itself. It tells you what the interest rate would be conditional on the level of GDP; or to put it another way, it defines a relationship between the interest rate and GDP, like this:

因此,供求资金不会告诉你利率是什么-它本身并不可能。它会告诉您利率将取决于国内生产总值的水平, 或者换言之,它定义了利率和国民生产总值之间的一个关系,象这样:

This is the IS curve, taught in Econ 101. Now, we usually explain how this curve is derived in a different way: we say that given the interest rate, you can determine investment demand, and then through the multiplier process this determines GDP. What you’re supposed to understand, however, is that the derivation I’ve just given is just a different way of arriving at the same result. It’s just different presentations of the same model.

这是曲线,讲授经济学101 。现在,我们通常解释是,如何以不同的方式导出这个曲线:我们说,鉴于利率,您可以判断投资需求,然后通过乘数处理,确定国内生产总值。然而,你应该了解的是什么,仅仅就是我刚给定的推导的派生,以不同的方式推出同样的结果。这只是同一模型的不同显示。

  评论这张
 
阅读(304)| 评论(0)
推荐 转载

历史上的今天

评论

<#--最新日志,群博日志--> <#--推荐日志--> <#--引用记录--> <#--博主推荐--> <#--随机阅读--> <#--首页推荐--> <#--历史上的今天--> <#--被推荐日志--> <#--上一篇,下一篇--> <#-- 热度 --> <#-- 网易新闻广告 --> <#--右边模块结构--> <#--评论模块结构--> <#--引用模块结构--> <#--博主发起的投票-->
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

页脚

网易公司版权所有 ©1997-2017