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

谁是发动“大萧条”的罪魁祸首?(推荐)  

2009-04-06 12:10:01|  分类: 默认分类 |  标签: |举报 |字号 订阅

  下载LOFTER 我的照片书  |

Hoover did it!

UCLA economist Lee Ohanian sends me a paper called "What - or Who - Started the Great Depression?" with the following conclusion:

UCLA的经济学家,Lee Ohanian,给我寄了一篇文章来,题目是:“谁,或什么玩艺,发动了大萧条?”,结论如下:

The defining characteristic of the Great Depression is a substantial and chronic excess supply of labor, with employment well below normal, and real wages in key industrial sectors well above normal. A successful theory of the Depression must explain not only why the labor market failed to clear, but why monetary forces apparently had such large and protracted effects. This paper proposes such a theory, based on President Hoover’s program that offered industrial firms protection from unions in return for paying high wages. Firms deeply feared unions at this time, reflecting a growing union wage premium and a sea change in economic policy, including policies advanced and supported by Hoover, that significantly fostered unionization and enhanced their bargaining power. Consequently, there was an incentive for firms to follow Hoover’s program of paying moderately higher real wages to avoid even higher wages and lower profits that would come from unionization.

大萧条有明确的特征,即:劳动力供给,出现了巨量的、长期的过剩;就业水平远低于正常水平;关键的产业部门的真实工资,远高于正常水平。如果要找到一个理论,要让它成功地解释大萧条,那么,它不仅必须解释“劳动力市场何以不能出清”,还必须解释“货币力量何以如此地具有延迟性的巨大影响”。这篇文章给出了一个理论,依据的基础就是“胡佛总统”的方案,这个方案就是:企业支付高工资,并由此获得了回报,方案帮助企业防范来自工会的干扰。在这个时候,企业是极其害怕工会的,这说明了存在一个日益增长的“工会工资溢价”,存在大量的经济政策的变化,当然,这包括胡佛总统推动和支持的政策。这些东西,极大地推进了“工会化”,并提高了工会的讨价还价实力。因此,对于企业来说,就存在一个激励,它们遵从胡佛的方案,支付适度提高了的真实工资,从而避开了因“工会化”而带来的更高的工资,避免了更低的利润。

I conclude that the Depression is the consequence of government programs and policies, including those of Hoover, that increased labor’s ability to raise wages above their competitive levels. The Depression would have been much less severe in the absence of Hoover’s program. Similarly, given Hoover’s program, the Depression would have been much less severe if monetary policy had responded to keep the price level from falling, which raised real wages. This analysis also provides a theory for why low nominal spending - what some economists refer to as deficient aggregate demand - generated such a large depression in the 1930s, but not in the early 1920s, which was a period of comparable deflation and monetary contraction, but when firms cut nominal wages considerably.

我的结论是:大萧条是政府方案和政策的结果,这些方案当然包括胡佛的方案,即:让劳动者可以将其工资提升至“竞争工资水平”的能力。如果没有胡佛方案,那么,大萧条远不会像那样严重。相似地,在存在胡佛方案的情况下,如果货币政策能够发挥作用,在提高实际工资的时候,使价格水平不至下滑,那么,大萧条也不会那么严重。这个分析,还提出了一个理论,说明了:为什么较低的名义支出——有些经济学家称之为“总需求不足”——会造成1930年代那么大的萧条,而不会在1920年代初期引发大萧条。在1920年代,出现了差相仿佛的通缩和货币紧缩,但是,在那个时候,企业大量地削减了名义工资。

Presidents Hoover and Roosevelt shared similar goals of fostering industrial collusion and increasing real wages and raising labor’s bargaining power. Hoover accomplished these goals during a period of deflation by inducing industry to maintain nominal wages, and by promoting and signing legislation that facilitated union organization and that increased wages above competitive levels, including the Davis-Bacon Act and the Norris-Lagaurdia Act. Roosevelt accomplished these goals with the NIRA and the Wagner Act, both of which raised wages well above competitive levels while increasing industrial collusion.

胡佛总统和罗斯福总统,这二位都有着相似的目标,都想推动行业串谋,增加真实工资,提高劳动力的讨价还价实力。在通缩的时期,胡佛总统的做法是:诱使企业保持名义工资,提出并签署了法令,它有利于工会组织,并将工资升至竞争工资水平之上,这些法令包括the Davis-Bacon Act(戴维斯-佩根法案)the Norris-Lagaurdia Act(反禁令法)。罗斯福总统的作法是:提出了NIRANational Industrial Recovery Act (美国)全国工业复兴法)和瓦格纳法案,这两个东西,都使极大了提高了工资,远远地超过了竞争工资水平,同时,还增加了行业串谋。

The 1930s would have been a better economic decade had government policy promoted competition in product and labor markets, rather than adopting policies that extended monopoly in product markets, and that set wages above competitive levels which prevented labor markets from clearing.

 1930年代,如果政府推动产品市场和劳动市场的竞争,而不是采取那些政策,不在产品市场上推进垄断,不将工资设立在竞争水平之上(从而防止了劳动力市场的出清),那么,这十年里,它就会有一个更好的经济状态。

I do not have a link to the current draft of the paper, but here is Lee's webpage.

我没有这篇文章当前草稿的链接,我给出Lee

If this analysis makes you start thinking about the macroeconomic effects of card check, you are not alone.

如果有研究人员想研究“工会的公开投票”(card check)(曼昆快语链接:http://greg-mankiw.blog.sohu.com/111861543.html)的宏观效应,那么,你有了同道中人了。

谁是发动“大萧条”的罪魁祸首?(推荐) - 曼昆 - N·格里高利·曼昆的博客 

  评论这张
 
阅读(88)| 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