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

世界经济持续低迷  

2009-08-26 22:19:34|  分类: 默认分类 |  标签: |举报 |字号 订阅

  下载LOFTER 我的照片书  |

Blanchard on the Outlook

qianlaoda[译]

 

Regular readers of this blog may remember the following exchange from March:

常来本博客的读者们,也许会记得自三月以来,有以下的交锋:

1. I express some doubt about the administration's economic forecast because it assumes a trend-stationary processs for GDP rather than a process with a unit root.

1.本人对政府所做的经济预测持一定的怀疑态度,原因是:它假设GDP是“趋势平稳过程”,而没有假设为“单位根过程”。

2. Paul Krugman accuses me of "deliberate obtuseness."

2.克鲁格曼骂我,说我“故意地反应迟钝”。

3. I ask Paul to place a wager on the administration's forecast. (He never responds.)

3.我让克鲁格曼为政府预测押宝。(他没有理我的茬。)

Well, now, the IMF's Olivier Blanchard writes the following:

好了,现在,IMF的奥利弗·布兰查德写下了如下的观点:

 

The historical evidence is worrisome, however. The IMF’s forthcoming World Economic Outlook presents evidence from 88 banking crises over the past four decades in a wide range of countries. While there is large variation across countries, the conclusion is that, on average, output does not go back to its old trend path, but remains permanently below it. The possible good news is that the trend itself appears to be unaffected: on average, crises permanently decrease the level of output, but not its growth rate. So, if past is prologue, the world economy likely will return to its past growth rate. But, especially in advanced countries, the period of above-average growth, characteristic of normal recoveries, may be short-lived or nonexistent.

然而,历史的证据,令人揪心。IMF将要发布的《世界经济前瞻》,发布了包括相当多国家在内的过去四十年间的88次银行危机情况。虽然国家之间存在很大的差异,但是,结果却是:平均来说,经济产出不会回到原有的趋势路径上去,而是持久地处于原有趋势之下。一个可能的好消息就是:趋势本身看似不受影响:平均来说,危机持续降低了产出水平,但是没有降低经济增长率。因此,如果过去就是一个序幕,那么,世界经济可能将会回到它原有的增长率上去。但是,尤其在发达国家,平均水平以上的增长时期——它作为正常的经济复苏的标志——会是很短命的,或者根本就不存在。

 

What Olivier is saying is that the shocks to the level of GDP from banking crises are typically permanent. That is, in econometric terms, there is a unit root. Of course, Olivier could be wrong. But I am pretty sure that he is not guilty of "deliberate obtuseness."

布兰查德说的就是:银行危机对GDP水平所造成的冲击,一般来说是永久性的。换言之,用计量经济学的术语来说,它是一个单位根过程。当然,布兰查德可能不对。但是,我却极度相信,他可不是犯“故意反应迟钝”的错误。

By the way, the administration's midsession review, with its updated forecast, should be coming out soon. Will Team Obama continue to forecast a rebound to the previous trend path, as they did earlier in the year, or will they change their view and take to heart the kind of evidence Olivier describes above? Either way, it will be noteworthy.

顺便说一句,政府的中期评估,会包含最新预测,也快要出台了。奥巴马团队会像今年早些时候那样,依然认为经济会反弹至原有趋势路径吗?或者,他们改变了看法,将布兰查德前面所说的那类证据记在心头?无论如何,这个预测一定是值得关注的。


编辑手记:


* 这个问题,在本博客中多有涉及,也是一个相当有趣的话题.曼昆有相应的回归分析.也是本博客与克鲁格曼网易博客最有趣的地方.

 

  评论这张
 
阅读(13714)| 评论(13)
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