LIMITS OF SHORT-RUN STABILIZATION POLICY PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS TO THE WESTERN ECONOMIC ASSOCIATION, JULY 3, 1986

1987 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-14 ◽  
Author(s):  
ALLAN H. MELTZER
2012 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 185-203
Author(s):  
Marek Loužek

Abstract The paper deals with the economic theory of Milton Friedman. Its first part outlines the life of Milton Friedman. The second part examines his economic theories - “Essays in Positive Economics” (1953), “Studies in the Quantity Theory of Money“ (1956), “A Theory of the Consumption Function” (1957), “A Program for Monetary Stability” (1959), “A Monetary History of the United States 1897 to 1960” (1963), and “Price Theory” (1976). His Nobel Prize lecture and American Economic Association lecture in 1967 are discussed, too. The third part analyzes Friedman’s methodology. Milton Friedman was the most influential economist of the second half of the 20th century. He is best known for his theoretical and empirical research, especially consumption analysis, monetary history and theory, and for his demonstration of the complexity of stabilization policy.


2018 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 517-532 ◽  
Author(s):  
Servaas Storm

Milton Friedman's presidential address to the American Economic Association holds a mythical status as the harbinger of the supply-side counter-revolution in macroeconomics – centred on the rejection of the long-run Phillips-curve inflation–unemployment trade-off. Friedman (seconded by Edmund Phelps) argued that the long run is determined by ‘structural’ forces, not demand, and his view swept the profession and dominated academic economics and macro policymaking for four decades. Friedman, tragically, put macroeconomics on the wrong track which led to disaster: secular stagnation, rising inequality, mounting indebtedness, financial fragility, a banking catastrophe and recession – and no free lunches. This is Friedman's legacy. We have to unlearn the wrong lessons and return macroeconomics to the right track. To do so, this paper shows that Friedman's (and Phelps's) conclusions break down in a general model of the long run in which productivity growth is endogenous – aggregate demand is driving everything again, short and long.


2021 ◽  
Vol 67 (2) ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  
Vladimir Mihajlović ◽  
Gordana Marjanović

Abstract The trade-off between output and unemployment has become an essential part of modern macroeconomics and is known as Okun’s law. However, in transition and emerging markets economies’ context, the output-employment nexus has a much more important role as these countries strive to significantly improve the growth dynamics of both variables. This paper aims to analyze the particularities of this relationship in selected Central- and South-Eastern European transition (and former transition) countries to find out a discrepancy between the output and employment growth. Therefore, the employment elasticity coefficients are calculated. The estimated results suggest that, in the observed period, economic growth has not contributed to satisfactory employment growth, which is commonly referred to as a “jobless growth” hypothesis. Accordingly, this paper attempts to single out the main challenges of the output-employment growth misbalance in these countries and propose adequate policy measures that could reduce it. The industrial policy that differentiates from the “one-size-fits-all” paradigm is emphasized as the most important part of macroeconomic policy in transition economies to make their development more balanced. Additionally, short-run stabilization policy, especially the one focused on the labour market, has a significant role in these economies.


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.


2018 ◽  
Vol 32 (1) ◽  
pp. 121-134 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert E. Hall ◽  
Thomas J. Sargent

The centerpiece of Milton Friedman's (1968) presidential address to the American Economic Association, delivered in Washington, DC, on December 29, 1967, was the striking proposition that monetary policy has no longer-run effects on the real economy. Friedman focused on two real measures, the unemployment rate and the real interest rate, but the message was broader—in the longer run, monetary policy controls only the price level. We call this the monetary-policy invariance hypothesis. By 1968, macroeconomics had adopted the basic Phillips curve as the favored model of correlations between inflation and unemployment, and Friedman used the Phillips curve in the exposition of the invariance hypothesis. Friedman's presidential address was commonly interpreted as a recommendation to add a previously omitted variable, the rate of inflation anticipated by the public, to the right-hand side of what then became an augmented Phillips curve. We believe that Friedman's main message, the invariance hypothesis about long-term outcomes, has prevailed over the last half-century based on the broad sweep of evidence from many economies over many years. Subsequent research has not been kind to the Phillips curve, but we will argue that Friedman's exposition of the invariance hypothesis in terms of a 1960s-style Phillips curve is incidental to his main message.


2018 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 446-460 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roger E.A. Farmer

I review the contribution and influence of Milton Friedman's 1968 presidential address to the American Economic Association. I argue that Friedman's influence on the practice of central banking was profound and that his arguments in favour of monetary rules were responsible for 30 years of low and stable inflation in the period from 1979 through 2009. I present a critique of Friedman's position that market economies are self-stabilizing and I describe an alternative reconciliation of Keynesian economics with Walrasian general equilibrium theory from that which is widely accepted today by most neoclassical economists. My interpretation implies that government should intervene actively in financial markets to stabilize economic activity.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document