scholarly journals Purchasing Power Parity: A Time Series Analysis of the U.S. and Mexico, 1995–2007

2016 ◽  
Vol 22 (4) ◽  
pp. 409-419
Author(s):  
Steven Yee ◽  
Miguel D. Ramirez
Keyword(s):  
Time Series ◽  
Time Series Analysis ◽  
Purchasing Power Parity ◽  
Purchasing Power ◽  
Power Parity ◽  
Series Analysis ◽  
The U.S

A time-series analysis of the U.S. kidney transplantation and the waiting list: donor substitution effects

2010 ◽  
Vol 42 (1) ◽  
pp. 261-277 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. Randolph Beard ◽  
John D. Jackson ◽  
David Kaserman ◽  
Hyeongwoo Kim
Keyword(s):  
Time Series ◽  
Kidney Transplantation ◽  
Time Series Analysis ◽  
Waiting List ◽  
Substitution Effects ◽  
Series Analysis ◽  
The U.S

CONVERGENCE AND THE U.S. STATES: A TIME-SERIES ANALYSIS*

1996 ◽  
Vol 36 (4) ◽  
pp. 597-616 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gerald Carlino ◽  
Leonard Mills
Keyword(s):  
Time Series ◽  
Time Series Analysis ◽  
Series Analysis ◽  
The U.S

scholarly journals Testing for the Economic Impact of the U.S. Constitution: Purchasing Power Parity Across the Colonies versus Across the States, 1748–1811

2010 ◽  
Vol 70 (1) ◽  
pp. 118-145 ◽  
Author(s):  
Farley Grubb
Keyword(s):  
Economic Integration ◽  
Purchasing Power Parity ◽  
Free Market ◽  
Purchasing Power ◽  
Power Parity ◽  
Institutional Barriers ◽  
Legal Scholar ◽  
Short Run ◽  
British Colonies ◽  
The U.S

The U.S. Constitution removed real and monetary trade barriers between the states. By contrast, these states when they were British colonies exercised considerable real and monetary sovereignty over their borders. Purchasing power parity is used to measure how much economic integration between the states was gained in the decades after the Constitution's adoption compared with what existed among the same locations during the late colonial period. Using this measure, the short-run effect of the Constitution on economic integration was minimal. This may have been because the Constitution did not eliminate all the institutional barriers to interstate trade before 1812.“No idea is more firmly planted in American history than the idea that one of the most difficult problems during the Confederation was that of barriers to trade between state and state. There had been such barriers in colonial times …”Merrill Jensen1“The ‘secret’ of American economic growth, English legal scholar Sir Henry Maine wrote in 1886, lay in ‘the [constitutional] prohibition against levying duties on commodities passing from State to State … . It secures to the producer the command of a free market over an enormous territory of vast natural wealth …’”Charles W. McCurdy2

Does Spending on Defence Cut Spending on Health?: A Time-Series Analysis of the U.S. Economy 1929–74

1979 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 21-39 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kathleen Peroff ◽  
Margaret Podolak-Warren
Keyword(s):  
Time Series ◽  
Time Series Analysis ◽  
Public Policies ◽  
Zero Sum Games ◽  
Series Analysis ◽  
Budgetary Decisions ◽  
Zero Sum ◽  
The U.S

When public programme demands exceed resources, tradeoffs between different public policies occur; that is, one policy gains while another loses in the allocation of these resources. Tradeoffs are most easily measured in terms of budgetary expenditures. If the budget is expanding, the consequences of tradeoffs are less severe than when the budget contracts or remains stable, and budgetary decisions involve zero-sum games. However, the concept of tradeoff is still relevant in an expanding budget since decisions are made about how the additional resources are to be allocated, and while all policy areas may gain, some obviously will receive more resources than others.

scholarly journals Purchasing Power Parity in Commonwealth of Independent States

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gülçin Güreşçi Pehlivan ◽  
Esra Ballı ◽  
Muammer Tekeoğlu
Keyword(s):  
Time Series ◽  
Panel Data ◽  
Cross Section ◽  
Purchasing Power Parity ◽  
Unit Root ◽  
Unit Root Test ◽  
Purchasing Power ◽  
Power Parity ◽  
Panel Unit Root ◽  
Independent States

The Purchasing Power Parity suggests that differences in relative prices in two countries move together with nominal exchange rates in the long run. This study examines the validity of PPP as transition economies for Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS). Purchasing Power Parity holds only when the real exchange rate is stationary in the equation. To test the stationary, we used both time series and panel data analysis. Testing unit root both with time series and panel data in this study, provides us double check of the results. We also test the cross sectional dependence to choose the appropriate panel unit root test. Our test statistics indicate that there is cross section dependence between countries. Hence, one needs to take into consideration the cross section dependence while undertaking unit root tests. Otherwise, the results would be biased. ADF and KPPS indicate that PPP cannot be accepted for the countries except for Russia. According to the panel unit root test results indicate that PPP does not hold for Armenia, Belarus, Georgia, Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan except for Russia.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document