« On the role of house prices in the last expansion | Main | The September LFS report: Employment and hours worked »

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451688169e20120a6281013970c

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Flashbacks to the 1970's: the Bank of Canada and the deficit:

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

I find it interesting that we're returning to targeting unemployment at all when it's been demonstrated that these 'natural' rates of unemployment (as Friedman put it) are quite entrenched. You can only temporarily remove them with a spout of inflation and it will eventually go back to its natural rate. You'll only eventually have higher and higher inflation with the natural rate anyways (or even more unemployment if businesses can't properly plan with uneven amounts of monetary growth-see the 1970s).

What the philips curve misses, is that while lower unemployment leads to some price inflation it also slows the economy if there is no monetary growth. This is because the velocity of money will slow, thereby increasing unemployment back to the 'natural' rate. Now of course the US is increasing the money supply by a large amount, so that makes the philips curve less relevant, no? Am I missing something?

The comments to this entry are closed.

Search this site

  • Google

    WWW
    worthwhile.typepad.com
Blog powered by Typepad