"Adaptive expectations" of Milton Friedman and monetarists and Phillips curve; and the comparison of them with other macroeconomic schools

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Özlen Hic Birol
2016 ◽  
Vol 38 (1) ◽  
pp. 105-112 ◽  
Author(s):  
James Forder

Milton Friedman (1968)—his famous Presidential Address to the American Economic Association—contains an elementary error right at the heart of what is usually supposed to be the paper’s crucial argument. That is the argument to the effect that during an inflation, changing expectations shift the Phillips curve. It is suggested that the fact of this mistake and of its having gone all but unnoticed are points of historical interest. Further reflections, drawing on the arguments of Forder (2014), Macroeconomics and the Phillips Curve Myth, are suggested.


2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 310-330
Author(s):  
Karl Whelan

The inability of central banks to attain their target inflation rates in recent years has raised questions about the extent to which central banks can control the inflation process. This paper discusses the evolution of thought and evidence since the 1960s on the determinants of inflation and the role that should be played by central banks. The paper highlights the roles played by two streams of thought associated with Milton Friedman: monetarist theories predicting a key role for monetary aggregates in determining inflation and the rise in popularity of the expectations-augmented Phillips curve. The author discusses the influence of the latter in determining the modern consensus on central-bank institutions and the relative roles for fiscal and monetary policies. The paper concludes with a discussion of macroeconomic developments since 2010 and current policy options to stimulate the economy and restore inflation to its target levels, including the merits of ‘helicopter money’.


2018 ◽  
Vol 32 (1) ◽  
pp. 195-210 ◽  
Author(s):  
Johannes A. Schwarzer

This paper addresses two conflicting views in the 1950s and 1960s about the inflation-unemployment tradeoff as given by the Phillips curve. Many economists at this time emphasized the issue of a seemingly unavoidable inflationary pressure at or even below full employment. In contrast, Milton Friedman was convinced that full employment and price stability are not conflicting policy objectives. This dividing line between the two camps ultimately rested on fundamentally different views about the inflationary process: For economists of the 1950s and 1960s cost-push forces are responsible for the apparent conflict between price stability and full employment. On the other hand, Friedman, who regarded inflation to be an exclusively monetary phenomenon, rejected the notion of ongoing inflationary cost-push pressures at full employment. Besides his emphasis on the full adjustment of inflation expectations, this rejection of cost-push theories of inflation, which implied a decoupling of the two previously perceived incompatible policy objectives, was the other important element in Friedman's attack on the Phillips curve tradeoff in his 1967 presidential address to the American Economic Association.


1964 ◽  
Vol 15 (5) ◽  
pp. 677-712 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pierre Maurice
Keyword(s):  

Author(s):  
Julio H. Cole

Milton Friedman, who died in the early morning of November 16, 2006, was a world-famous economist, and an ardent and effective advocate of the free market economy. Much of his celebrity derived from his role as public intellectual, an aspect of his work that was reflected largely in popular books, such as Capitalism and Freedom (1962) and the hugely successful Free to Choose (1980) -both co-authored with his wife, Rose (and the latter based on the television documentary of the same title)- and in the Newsweek opinion columns he wrote for many years. Though he was already well-known by the time he received the Nobel Prize in Economics, in 1976, both his stature as public figure and his effectiveness as policy advocate were greatly enhanced by that award, and this is what has been mostly stressed in the vast outpouring of obituaries and public testimonials prompted by his recent passing. It is important to recall, however, that there was another aspect of his career, one which most professional economists (and probably Friedman himself) would regard as far more important than his incursions in the policy arena. Indeed, even if "Friedman the public intellectual" had never existed, "Friedman the economic scientist" would still be renowned and respected (though perhaps not as a bona fide world-class celebrity), and his memory will live long in the lore of economics It is primarily this other aspect of his life and work that I wish to focus on in this essay.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document