May 072011

As my regular blog readers know, Paul Krugman and I often do not see eye to eye.  So, once in a while, it might be useful to point out those times when we actually agree.

In a recent post on commodity prices, Paul says, “Volatile prices are volatile, which is why they shouldn’t be used to determine monetary policy.”  I agree, and I suspect many other macroeconomists would as well.

I once wrote a paper on this topic with Ricardo Reis, called ”What Measure of Inflation Should a Central Bank Target?“ (published link)  Here is the abstract:

This paper assumes that a central bank commits itself to maintaining an inflation target and then asks what measure of the inflation rate the central bank should use if it wants to maximize economic stability. The paper first formalizes this problem and examines its microeconomic foundations. It then shows how the weight of a sector in the stability price index depends on the sector’s characteristics, including size, cyclical sensitivity, sluggishness of price adjustment, and magnitude of sectoral shocks. When a numerical illustration of the problem is calibrated to U.S. data, one tentative conclusion is that a central bank that wants to achieve maximum stability of economic activity should use a price index that gives substantial weight to the level of nominal wages.

As the graph below illustrates, the price of labor does not show any significant inflationary pressures right now:

Click on graphic to enlarge.
For more on this topic, see a recent post by MIT grad student Matt Rognlie.
Apr 212011

I am regularly struck by how bloggers so often want to pick fights with other bloggers.  Rather than giving others the benefit of the doubt, they often seem to interpret the writing of others in the worst possible light so they can then point out how foolish it is.  As an example, see

  1. This Steve Landsburg post
  2. Followed by this Brad DeLong critique
  3. And this Paul Krugman critique
  4. And Steve’s two replies.

As far as I can tell, all Steve is saying is that the true incidence of a tax is not necessarily on the person who writes the check to pay the tax bill.  He just made the point in a particularly dramatic way.  At its heart, however, his point is pretty standard and hard to argue with.

FYI, more interesting to me is this Landsburg post, where Steve argues that a rich person who wants to raise taxes on the rich should be voluntarily paying more right now.  One example is the rich person who lives in very nice publicly-provided housing on Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington DC.

Some Commentary

Economics Comments Off
Mar 192011

A couple bloggers I follow have posted comments on my new paper with Matthew Weinzierl on optimal stabilization policy.   Scott Sumner likes itPaul Krugman is predictably snarky.

Update: Greg Ip of The Economist weighs in.

This scatterplot is from Paul Krugman.  x is the core inflation rate minus the unemployment rate.  y is the federal funds rate.  It uses data from 1988 to 2008.

This graph is motivated by a version of the Taylor rule I once proposed.  Paul uses a different sample than I did, so he gets slightly different parameter values.  Nonetheless, I think Paul and I agree that this equation provides a reasonable first approximation to what the Fed will and should do in response to macroeconomic conditions.

Mar 232010

An interesting debate between Michael Kinsley and Paul Krugman.  Read in this order:

  1. Kinsley’s orginal article
  2. Krugman’s critique
  3. Kinsley’s response
  4. Krugman again
  5. Kinsley again
© 2011 Random Observations for Students of Economics Random Observations for Students of Economics