[answered] Macroeconomic Models: With the description of various inter

4.Historically( that is, prior to 2008) the Fed directly influenced only short-term interest rates( for example, the federal funds rate and short term Treasury security rate) through its purchase and sale of short-term Treasury securities. Discuss how the direct actions on short-term rates translate into effects on other interest rates( when interest rates are not at the zero lower bund); in particular

(Notes 3)

1 Use the term structure of interest rates to discuss how the direct action of the Fed can affect market( or nominal) rates on long-term Treasury securities.

2. Use the risk structure of interest rates to discuss how the direct action can affect market rates on corporate bonds and on home mortgages.

5.Suppose the Fed recently released the following hypothetical announcement; although we expect the economy to be doing a lot better in about a year from now. As a result, we plan on keeping the federal fund rate and short-term Treasury interest rates at term interest rates. We plan on keeping short rates high for some time thereafter to over the last several years. Also we understand that our current policy of very low short-term interest rates has led to increased uncertainty about inflation prospects over the coming years. We are confident that our new policy strategy will reduce the nervousness in financial markets and reduce inflation uncertainty immediately.

• Based on theories of the term structure of interest rates, give a detailed answer explaining what you think would happen to the slope of the Treasury yield curve if everyone believes the Fed?s announcement.
• In general we have observed over at least the past 50 years that current short

Term interest rates display more variation (up and down) than current long-term interest rate. Explain why? Also discuss whether the Fed?s (hypothetical) policy announcement variation in short-term and long-term interest rates.

6.Suppose that the economy is shocked from an initial position of long-run equilibrium and that, as a result, we observe an immediate (i.e short,-run) increase in potential output but a decline in actual outputs and inflation. The Fed announces that it has not altered its target rate of inflation

• Use the model of aggregate demand and aggregate supply developed in class (assuming adaptive adjustment of inflation expectations) to explain what set of factors could have caused these observation and why.
• Given your answer to the previous part, explain what happens to the real interest rate and to exchange rate (in units: foreign currency per dollar) in the short run
• Suppose that the nominal or market interest rate moves in the same direction as the real interest rate in your answer to part2, Discuss what must have happened to the price of existing(coupon or zero-coupon) bonds using formulas presented in this course( carefully define each variable)

7. Suppose the Fed issues the following hypothetical announcement:

? We now plan on using a policy rule in which the real interest rate depends only on the expected rate of price inflation as opposed to depending on the actiial current rate of inflation( relative to target) and the level of output( relative to potential output) More precisely, our new rule r = r0+r?^e where r is a positive constant.?

What could justify the Fed?s change in focus from actual current inflation to expected future inflation?

Assume that our classroom macroeconomic model is exactly same as always expect for substitution of the new monetary policy rule, given this alternative macro model, what are the impacts in the short run f a positive shock in aggregate demand, such as an increase in government expenditures, G?? You answer should clearly indicate the impact in the short run of an exogenous increase in G on the (1) new MP curve, (2) IS curve (3) new AD curve, and (4) AS curve of an exogenous increase in G; in so doing, indicate the short-run impact on (5) inflation (6) output, and (7) the real interest rate ( Hint: the effect of the new policy rule on the MP and AD curves is tricky, so be careful)

What happens to expected inflation, output and the real interest rate in the long run? In qualitative terms, how does your answer differ, I at all from the answer in the case of our standard classroom model?

8.Suppose that the current yield to maturity of 3-year, 6 year and 9year Treasury securities is 3%, 6% and 9%respectively ( all yield are expressed at annual rates).Using the expectations theory of the term structure, calculate the following implicit expected annual interest rates.

I: the implicit expected annual rate on a 3 year bond purchased 3 years in the future (3 year from today)

II: the impact expected rate on a 6 year bond purchased 3years in the future.

III: Finally assume that the term premium on a 9 year bond is 2%( perineum) use the liquidity premium theory of the term structure of interest rate to calculate:

The implicit expected rate on a 6-year bond purchased 3 years in the future.

Macroeconomic Models:

 

With the description of various interest rates and financial institutions as background, we

 

now turn to development of macroeconomic models that will provide us with the

 

theoretical basis to understand developments in the economy, including the macro effects

 

of monetary policy and of the collapse of housing prices in late 2006.

 

IS-MP-AS macroeconomic framework (based on work of Professor David Romer at UC

 

Berkeley; also partly covered in Cecchetti/Schoenholtz textbook.)

 

Market in New Goods and Services

 

1. Current real consumption of domestically-produced or foreign-produced goods and

 

services depends on current real after-tax income and on expected future real after-tax

 

income. (It also depends on other factors discussed in points 2, 3, and 4 below.) There

 

are two main pieces to understanding the basics of modern models of consumption.

 

First, consumption ?smoothing? over one?s lifetime is approximately optimal. That is if a

 

person expects to live T periods, then C1 = C2 = ?= CT is approximately optimal. This

 

follows from the key assumption of diminishing marginal utility of consumption. For

 

example, over two periods with a total of 20 units of consumption, reallocating one?s

 

consumption from a smooth (10, 10) to a choppy (5, 15) lowers utility on balance

 

because reducing consumption by 5 units (in period one) lowers utility more than raising

 

consumption 5 units (in period two) boosts utility; thus smooth or equal consumption is

 

optimal (there are some exceptions, discussed in class and briefly below).

 

Second, under modern models, consumption in every period of life depends on an

 

individual?s expected lifetime resources, not just today?s resources. Think of this as the

 

total of your current and expected future after-tax wage income (we will discuss the

 

impact of non-human wealth below). This has implications for temporary vs. permanent

 

changes in income.

 

For example, if a person unexpectedly receives $1 on a temporary or transitory

 

basis?either because of a one-time wealth transfer or a temporary tax cut?and if the

 

person allocates the income evenly to consumption in each period of their lifetime (as

 

should be the case given the point made above), then consumption rises by (1/T) dollars

 

each period starting immediately. That is, the marginal propensity to consume out of

 

temporary income?defined as the increase in current consumption for a small change in

 

temporary income?is (1/T). If T is 33 years, then the one-time $1 boost to income raises

 

consumption 3 cents per year (relative to baseline) starting immediately. As a topical

 

application, an exogenous decline in house prices resulting in a $1 fall in household

 

wealth would reduce total consumer spending by 3 cents (and, in fact, empirical evidence

 

supports a decline of 3 cents on the dollar in the aggregate).

 

By contrast, if the person unexpectedly receives an additional dollar every period,

 

so that the income rise is permanent, lifetime resources rise by $33 and consumption rises

 

by $1 per year (relative to baseline) starting immediately. Thus the marginal propensity

 

to consume out of permanent income is 1. [Notice I have described the increase in either

 

temporary or permanent income as "unexpected." What would happen to the path of

 

consumption if income increases and if the increase were fully expected, such as an 2

 

increase in income when you move from college to a job or from your working years to

 

retirement?]

 

Implicitly, the prior analysis assumes perfect capital (borrowing and lending) markets so

 

that an individual can borrow against their expected future income. If the government

 

announces a permanent tax cut of $1000 per person to take effect in two years then

 

individuals must be able to borrow against that expected future boost to after-tax income

 

(or draw down existing savings). Otherwise, consumption smoothing starting today--at

 

the new higher level of consumption--would not be possible.

 

To summarize at this point, households will choose the optimal level of current

 

consumption given today?s expectations of current and future after-tax income, etc. (i.e.,

 

given today?s view about lifetime resources). They will (approximately) maintain this

 

level of consumption for the rest of their lifetime unless something unexpected happens

 

that alters today?s expectations of current and future income, etc. For example, an

 

unexpected boost to lifetime resources would lead to an immediate increase in

 

consumption to a new level that would remain constant ("smoothed") until the next

 

unexpected change in lifetime resources occurs.

 

2. consumer durables (e.g., autos, computers) provide services over time and thus have an

 

investment (as well as a consumption) component; thus as the real interest rate?viewed

 

as the real cost of borrowing?rises, demand for durables falls.

 

a. real interest rate = r = i - ?e where i is the nominal or market rate of interest

 

e

 

and ? is the expected rate of price inflation. Notice that we are not using the actual (or

 

realized) rate of inflation but rather the rate that borrowers and lenders expect will occur

 

as of today when decisions are made. This is called the ex ante real interest rate.

 

3. Households are believed to display a ?positive rate of time preference,? meaning that

 

they would prefer to consume now rather than in the future, all else equal. The household

 

choice between present and future consumption (and hence the decision about saving or

 

foregone current consumption) depends on the strength of time preference versus the

 

relative price of future consumption [1/(1+r)]. If the real interest rate changes, there is a

 

substitution (or incentive) and an income (also called a target-wealth effect) effect that

 

work in opposite directions. Under the former, a higher rate of return on saving, r,

 

provides an incentive to save more today or, put another way, to substitute future for

 

current consumption (for a given rate of time preference). By contrast, saving will fall

 

(current consumption rise) to the extent that the higher rate of return does not require as

 

much saving to achieve a target level of wealth in the future (say at retirement). Based on

 

empirical evidence on aggregate consumption behavior, we assume that the substitution

 

effect dominates so that higher r means lower current consumption and hence higher

 

household saving. This effect can alter the above result on consumption smoothing.

 

4. There are a few other important determinants of consumption. As suggested above,

 

consumption depends on a household?s net non-human wealth?the value of its stocks

 

and bonds and houses, etc. minus the value of its debts. The idea is that (net) assets

 

generate a stream of current and future non-wage income which provides resources (in 3

 

addition to wages) that support consumption over one?s lifetime. Also, the state of

 

consumer confidence matters for consumption.

 

Taken together, the previous points imply that current consumption depends on

 

current (after-tax) wage income, expected future (after-tax) wage income, non-human

 

wealth, real interest rates, and consumer confidence. As discussed at length later in the

 

course, wealth is inversely related to interest rates as well as having an exogenous

 

component such as the price of housing (assumed exogenous in this course). These

 

separate factors can replace non-human wealth in the expression for current consumption.

 

5. Real investment in plant and equipment and software by businesses and in new homes

 

(i.e., residential construction) by households varies inversely with real borrowing costs,

 

i.e., with the real interest rate. Also, real business investment depends on business

 

optimism/pessimism as well as on expectations of future demand for their products (i.e.,

 

expected future sales).

 

6. Real U.S. imports depend on our current and expected future income and, hence, real

 

U.S. net exports (i.e., exports minus imports) vary inversely with domestic income. Also,

 

real U.S. net exports tend to fall as the dollar rises relative to other currencies (i.e., as the

 

dollar appreciates). The exchange rate, ex, is denominated in the units: foreign currency

 

per dollar, so that an increase (decrease) in "ex" denotes an appreciation (depreciation) of

 

the dollar. In addition, the value of the dollar tends to rise as domestic (i.e. U.S.) interest

 

rates rise relative to those abroad. This is because higher U.S. rates provide an incentive

 

for worldwide investors to increase the demand for dollars to buy dollar-denominated

 

interest bearing securities, which in turn pushes up the value of the dollar. Thus higher

 

domestic interest rates reduce U.S. net exports (and equivalently boost foreign saving in

 

the U.S.)

 

7. Y = C + I + G + X ? IM or, equivalently, I = Shh + Sbus + Sgov + Sfor .

 

These two equations define equilibrium in the market for new goods and services. The

 

second equation explains why goods market equilibrium is sometimes called the IS (or

 

more accurately, I = S) relation.

 

The full set of equations defining the goods market is presented next:

 

1. Y = C + I + G + X ? M

 

2. C = C0 + cy(Y ? T) + cye(Y ? T)e -cr r

 

3. I = I0 + iy Y + iye Ye - ir r

 

4. NX = N0 - ny Y - nyeYe - ne ex

 

5. ex = e0 + er (r ? rf) 4

 

Notice that the equations are linear in the variables. A list of variables contained in the

 

model follows:

 

Y denotes real output or income (basically, real GDP)

 

C denotes real private consumption expenditures

 

I denotes real private investment expenditures (business plus residential)

 

G denotes real government expenditures (not including transfer payments)

 

NX = X-IM denotes real exports less imports

 

T denotes taxes minus transfer payments, real

 

Y ? T, Ye ? Te denote real current and expected future disposable income, respectively

 

r denotes the real interest rate

 

rf denotes the real foreign interest rate

 

ex denotes the exchange value of the dollar (expressed in units of foreign currency per

 

dollar)

 

Shh, Sbus, Sgov, Sfor denote household, business, gov?t, and foreign saving, respectively

 

All intercepts terms and slope coefficients are taken as constant unless otherwise noted.

 

Examples of slope coefficients are:

 

cy = dC/d(Y-T) = marginal propensity to consume out of current real disposable income.

 

iy = dI/dY = marginal propensity to invest out of real income

 

By substituting equations 2 ? 5 into equation 1 and solving the result for r as a function of

 

Y, we get the following linear equation that mathematically defines the IS curve:

 

r = (messy negative slope coefficient) Y + (messy intercept term)

 

Conclusion: higher domestic real interest rates are negatively related to aggregate

 

demand in goods market equilibrium; this is because C, I, and NX are each inversely

 

related to real interest rates (be certain that you understand the economics behind this

 

fundamental point). The downward sloping curve in (y, r) space that captures all

 

combinations of real interest rates and GDP consistent with equilibrium in the market for

 

goods and services is called the IS curve. A simple way of thinking about why the IS

 

curve is downward sloping follows: because Y = C+I+G+NX, an increase in Y must be

 

matched by an increase in C+I+G+NX, which requires a reduction in r. Also, the curve

 

shifts to the right (or upward) with increases in current G, improved consumer or business

 

confidence, increased foreign demand for U.S. goods?in short, it shifts with changes in

 

any exogenous variable appearing in the ?messy intercept term.? The effect of tax cuts

 

on current consumption and, hence, aggregate demand is ambiguous; they boost current

 

disposable income but reduce future disposable income if the current cuts are expected to

 

be financed by future tax hikes.

 

An aside on curve shifting: Recall the equation for a straight line, Y = mX + b. Here, Y

 

is the variable on the vertical axis, X is the variable on the horizontal axis, ?m? is the

 

slope of the line, and ?b? is the Y-intercept. Generally in this course, important curves

 

(such as the IS curve) will be straight lines, so the above formula applies. The curve

 

shifts if and only if ?b? changes (of course, ?b? may be a complicated linear combination 5

 

of several exogenous variables, so ?b? will change if any of its components change).

 

Finally, if Y changes but ?b? does not then we are talking about movement along the

 

curve rather than a shift of the curve. What happens to the curve when ?m? changes?

 

Monetary Policy

 

1. r = M (? ? ?*, Y ? Yp) = r* + r?(? ? ?*) + ry(Y ? Yp)

 

The Fed is assumed to raise real interest rates when price inflation on goods and services,

 

?, rises relative to its target, ? *, and when the output gap (difference between actual and

 

potential GDP) rises. I have linearized the M function after the second equals sign; in

 

this expression, r* is a constant, although it depends on a host of factors in more

 

complicated formulations. Also, r? and ry are constants. For example, ry = dr/d(Y ? Yp)

 

and is interpreted as the impact of a change in the output gap on the real interest rate. In

 

class, I will set ry = 0, to simplify the analysis.

 

This monetary policy ?rule? can be described as ?leaning against the wind.? The idea

 

intuitively is that if ? rises or if Y rises, an increase in the real interest rate by the Fed

 

reduces aggregate demand (through the channels discussed above) and puts downward

 

pressure on inflation and output; conversely, if ? falls or if Y falls, a reduction in the real

 

interest rate by the Fed boosts aggregate demand and puts upward pressure on inflation

 

and output. Notice that when Y = Yp and ? ? ?*, the Fed sets the real rate equal to r*.

 

The rate, r*, is called various names, including the "natural," the "neutral," and the

 

"equilibrium" level of the real interest rate. Suppose we start with: Y = Yp and ? ? ?*; in

 

this case, r = r* and policy is said to be neutral. From this situation if output and inflation

 

were to decline (possibly as a result of a negative aggregate demand shock) then r < r*

 

and policy is said to be stimulative. Similarly, if r > r* policy is said to be contractionary.

 

The rule is deceptively simple, masking a host of important issues, including:

 

a. for stability, Fed must target the real interest rate-- if ? rises and i goes up (recall that

 

"i" is the nominal or market rate of interest), but less than point-for-point, the real interest

 

rate falls and aggregate demand rises and hence ? rises even more, leading to unstable

 

dynamics.

 

b. Can the Fed affect real interest rates? Yes, if ? is sticky in the short run, as evidence

 

strongly suggests (especially the experience during the late 1970s and early 1980s).

 

c. Which goal is more important to the Fed? Are the goals of low inflation and high

 

output complementary?this is an extremely important issue that is discussed later.

 

d. Should arguments of the M function be the expected future values of ? and y, rather

 

than current values? Arguably, by cutting interest rates through the early stages of the

 

financial crisis the Fed appeared to respond to their forecast or expectation that the

 

housing/financial market mess would hurt the future level of overall economic activity. 6

 

e. Should the Fed respond to movements in ?headline? price inflation (e.g., the total CPI)

 

or in ?core? inflation (total CPI excluding food and energy prices)? Although households

 

obviously pay for food and energy?and so the total CPI matters to consumers?

 

movements of prices of these goods often are transitory (e.g., changing with the seasons).

 

Core prices are less volatile and generally provide a better short-run signal of underlying

 

trend movements in the cost of living. This view was called into question by events that

 

resulted in persistent increases in food and energy prices over the couple of years prior to

 

the fall of 2008.

 

It also is important to note that the Fed?s task is complicated by the fact that there

 

are several empirical measures of inflation, including the CPI; the Fed actually focuses on

 

the personal consumption expenditures price index, not the CPI.

 

f. Should asset prices?such as the prices of houses and stocks?be an argument of the

 

M function? The idea is that central banks perhaps should be concerned with the

 

development of asset price ?bubbles? in which asset prices rise in anticipation of further

 

asset price increases rather than on changes in underlying fundamentals. The Fed does

 

not react directly to movements in asset prices, only indirectly to the extent that asset

 

prices affect Y and ?. Former Chairmen Greenspan and Bernanke both have argued

 

against responding directly to asset price bubbles. They argue that in practice it is hard, if

 

not impossible, to identify bubbles as they are occurring. Further, even if they could be

 

identified, it is not obvious how to deflate bubbles. And, when bubbles burst, they have

 

argued that the Fed can deal with the fallout when it happens with the intention of

 

limiting collateral damage to the rest of the financial system and to the overall economy.

 

This perspective has been sorely tested by the housing/financial/macroeconomic crisis of

 

the past few years.

 

Professor Alan Blinder (of Princeton and also former Vice Chair of the Federal

 

Reserve) has offered an interesting appraisal of the conventional Fed view of intervening

 

in bubbles. He notes that the Fed executed a successful mop-up-after strategy when the

 

tech bubble popped in 2000. Despite the loss of roughly $8 trillion in wealth, not one

 

financial institution of any size failed and the ensuing recession was so mild in terms of

 

output loss that it was call ?the recessionette.? By contrast, perhaps because of the sheer

 

size of the subprime bubble bursting and associated financial crisis, the Fed?s mop-up

 

strategy seems not to have worked so well or quickly, as the financial system and

 

economy as a whole have improved very slowly.

 

Blinder argues that there are two types of bubbles and the Fed potentially can

 

intervene in one type while it is occurring. He calls this type a ?bank-centered bubble?

 

and is characterized by speculative excesses fueled by irresponsible bank lending. In this

 

case, the Fed?s role as a bank supervisor and regulator gives it extraordinary insight into

 

bank lending practices and arms it with several tools to address harmful lending practices,

 

such as outright prohibition of certain types of lending or other forms of regulatory

 

discipline. In contrast, Blinder argues that in the second type of bubble, such as stock

 

market bubbles, bank lending plays at best a minor role; in this case, the Fed is not well

 

positioned to intervene as the bubble is developing (the Fed has no tools aimed directly at

 

tech stocks and only limited ability to affect stock prices more broadly). 7

 

g. Zero bound on nominal interest rates: As noted in the first module of the course, the

 

Fed?s target level of the federal funds rate reached close to zero in late December 2008

 

and remains only slightly higher as of September 2016. The funds rate cannot go any

 

lower, so it appears that the Fed is out of its traditional ammunition. However, ?the real

 

interest rate? in the monetary policy rule should be interpreted as the interest rate relevant

 

for affecting macroeconomic behavior; in normal times it is reasonable to think of this as

 

the real federal funds rate because it is the rate targeted by the Fed and because other

 

interest rates more closely tied to macro behavior are indirectly related to it (in ways we

 

will discuss in detail later in the course). Currently, it is better to think of ?the real

 

interest rate? as longer term interest rates such as the long-term rate on Treasury

 

securities which is greater than zero; in the current environment the Fed has been trying

 

?evidently with some success?to bring down such longer-term interest rates directly.

 

h. In (y,r) space, the curve relating all values of r and y consistent with the monetary

 

policy rule is called the MP line. It is horizontal if r depends only on ?; it is upward

 

sloping if r depends on y. The idea is that if y falls (rises) the Fed leans against the wind

 

by reducing (increasing) the real interest rate. Also, the MP curve shifts up with higher

 

inflation: the idea is that, for a given y, higher inflation causes the Fed to boost the real

 

interest rate to fight the higher inflation. The curve shifts up (down) if the target rate of

 

inflation falls (rises). **To simplify the analytics for the rest of this module, we will set ry

 

=0, ignoring the impact of the output gap on interest-rate setting by the Fed; thus we

 

will consider only the case where the MP line is flat, shifting up or down with inflation.**

 

Aggregate Demand: IS-MP in (Y, ?) space

 

--As ? rises, r rises because of the Fed response; this leads to a reduction in the interestsensitive components of aggregate demand (AD). The curve relating all values of Y and

 

? consistent with goods market equilibrium subject to the Fed?s policy response function

 

is called the AD curve; it is downward sloping. The curve shifts upward or to the right

 

with higher values of current G, improved consumer/business confidence, and lower

 

taxes (subject to the earlier caveats), and higher values of the Fed?s target rate of inflation

 

(?*). [For certain former Econ 110 students, notice that this approach differs from the

 

IS-LM-AD approach because it focuses on price inflation rather than on the price level.]

 

Inflation adjustment/Aggregate Supply

 

We will introduce two characterizations of the supply side of the economy but then focus

 

on only one of them. Both approaches incorporate some ?stickiness? into the inflation

 

adjustment process, which is realistic for the U.S. economy. In the first approach,

 

inflation itself is assumed to have inertia or to be ?sticky? in the short run, in part because

 

of multi-year labor and supply contracts that fix the rate of increase of certain wages and

 

prices for a period of time. The CPI inflation rate, e.g., varies every month but usually

 

not by much, so this is not an unreasonable starting point. For the U.S. economy, this

 

case probably overstates the importance of inflation inertia and understates the extent to

 

which aggregate demand movements initially affect inflation. In the second approach,

 

inflation expectations are sticky; this probably understates the importance of inertia in

 

inflation itself but overstates the extent to which demand disturbances initially affect 8

 

inflation. The Fed staff tends to use variants of the second approach because of the

 

importance of inflation expectations to the price adjustment process in the United States;

 

we will focus on this approach below.

 

Define the actual rate of price inflation as the percentage change in the price level,

 

(Pt - Pt-1)/Pt-1 = ?Pt/Pt-1. For the sake of brevity let ?Pt/Pt-1 = ?t. In this definition, the

 

price level at time t (today) is Pt. The price level in period t-1 (last period) is Pt-1. Dating

 

of the other variables in the model is handled the same way.

 

The expected rate of price inflation also is an important concept. In particular, we can

 

ask: given all the information available to you last period, by how much did you expect

 

last period's price level, Pt-1, to increase this period (again, expressed as a percent of last

 

period's price level)? The answer is: ( Pet - Pt-1)/Pt-1. In this expression, Pet is the price

 

level that you expected last period to occur this period and ( Pet - Pt-1)/Pt-1 is known as the

 

expected rate of price inflation for period t, ?et. To drive home the point, the price level

 

that you expect this period to hold next period (in period, t+1) is given by, Pet+1.

 

The first key equation defining the inflation adjustment process is:

 

*** ?t = ?et + g (Yt - Yp) + ?s, where g is a positive constant. Equation S1 1. This equation is a standard expectations-augmented Philips curve (the simple

 

Philips curve relates inflation to the GDP gap only), also known as the aggregate supply

 

relation. Current inflation depends on expected inflation point-for-point; it varies

 

positively with the output gap (Y ? Yp); and it depends on ?inflation shocks,? denoted as

 

?s. For the moment, ignore these inflation shocks. The equation says that output is high

 

(exceeds the natural or potential rate, Yp) when inflation exceeds expected inflation, i.e.,

 

when the public has been surprised by the level of inflation. The idea is that if prices of

 

output are unexpectedly high, producers would desire to supply more output than

 

originally planned.

 

In this sense there is a tradeoff for the economy in the absence of inflation shocks

 

and for a given expectation of inflation: we can have more aggregate output (and lower

 

unemployment) if we are willing to accept higher price inflation or, conversely, we can

 

achieve lower price inflation only at the expense of less output. By contrast, if

 

expectations of inflation always equaled actual inflation, there would be no tradeoff. (As

 

we will see below, in our model there is a short-run tradeoff due to fixed inflation

 

expectations in the short...

 

---

Solution details:

About this Question

STATUS

Answered

QUALITY

Approved

DATE ANSWERED

Sep 18, 2020

EXPERT

Tutor

ANSWER RATING

GET INSTANT HELP/h4>

We have top-notch tutors who can do your essay/homework for you at a reasonable cost and then you can simply use that essay as a template to build your own arguments.

You can also use these solutions:

• As a reference for in-depth understanding of the subject.
• As a source of ideas / reasoning for your own research (if properly referenced)
• For editing and paraphrasing (check your institution's definition of plagiarism and recommended paraphrase).

This we believe is a better way of understanding a problem and makes use of the efficiency of time of the student.

NEW ASSIGNMENT HELP?

Order New Solution. Quick Turnaround

Click on the button below in order to Order for a New, Original and High-Quality Essay Solutions. New orders are original solutions and precise to your writing instruction requirements. Place a New Order using the button below.

WE GUARANTEE, THAT YOUR PAPER WILL BE WRITTEN FROM SCRATCH AND WITHIN YOUR SET DEADLINE.