jueves, 29 de diciembre de 2011
martes, 27 de diciembre de 2011
lunes, 26 de diciembre de 2011
sábado, 24 de diciembre de 2011
viernes, 23 de diciembre de 2011
jueves, 22 de diciembre de 2011
martes, 20 de diciembre de 2011
lunes, 19 de diciembre de 2011
domingo, 18 de diciembre de 2011
sábado, 17 de diciembre de 2011
jueves, 15 de diciembre de 2011
martes, 13 de diciembre de 2011
The gizmo theory of the recession (críticas a Stiglitz)
Nick Rowe critica la tesis de Stiglitz sobre la Gran Depresión
Scott Sumner también la critica
Daniel Kuehn
Nick Rowe vs Bryan Caplan. Arnold Kling interviene
Scott Sumner: Why is aggregate demand so confusing?
Brad DeLong
Más de DeLong y Scott Sumner
Bill Woolsey
Más
The Economist resume
Otra crítica a Stiglitz
Scott Sumner también la critica
Daniel Kuehn
Nick Rowe vs Bryan Caplan. Arnold Kling interviene
Scott Sumner: Why is aggregate demand so confusing?
Brad DeLong
Más de DeLong y Scott Sumner
Bill Woolsey
Más
The Economist resume
Otra crítica a Stiglitz
lunes, 12 de diciembre de 2011
domingo, 11 de diciembre de 2011
sábado, 10 de diciembre de 2011
viernes, 9 de diciembre de 2011
martes, 6 de diciembre de 2011
lunes, 5 de diciembre de 2011
domingo, 4 de diciembre de 2011
sábado, 3 de diciembre de 2011
jueves, 1 de diciembre de 2011
martes, 29 de noviembre de 2011
lunes, 28 de noviembre de 2011
domingo, 27 de noviembre de 2011
miércoles, 23 de noviembre de 2011
martes, 22 de noviembre de 2011
Debunking the 'savings glut' thesis
Aca
Global savings glut or global banking glut? Yves Smith
Look after the unemployment, and the budget will look after itself: "Modern macroeconomics textbooks perpetuate the idea of a loanable funds market. In Greg Mankiw’s Principles, which is representative, we are taken back in time, to the theories that were prevalent before being destroyed by the intellectual advances provided in Keynes’ General Theory.
Mankiw assumes that it is reasonable to represent the financial system as the “market for loanable funds” where “all savers go to this market to deposit their savings, and all borrowers go to this market to get their loans. In this market, there is one interest rate, which is both the return to saving and the cost of borrowing.”"
Global savings glut or global banking glut? Yves Smith
Look after the unemployment, and the budget will look after itself: "Modern macroeconomics textbooks perpetuate the idea of a loanable funds market. In Greg Mankiw’s Principles, which is representative, we are taken back in time, to the theories that were prevalent before being destroyed by the intellectual advances provided in Keynes’ General Theory.
Mankiw assumes that it is reasonable to represent the financial system as the “market for loanable funds” where “all savers go to this market to deposit their savings, and all borrowers go to this market to get their loans. In this market, there is one interest rate, which is both the return to saving and the cost of borrowing.”"
domingo, 20 de noviembre de 2011
sábado, 19 de noviembre de 2011
jueves, 17 de noviembre de 2011
miércoles, 16 de noviembre de 2011
lunes, 14 de noviembre de 2011
domingo, 13 de noviembre de 2011
miércoles, 9 de noviembre de 2011
El fin del euro
Algunos que acertaron. Wynne Godley
The Economist
Felix Salmon
Going right to the top in Europe
Is this the end?
Death of a currency as eurogeddon approaches
What are they thinking?
The euro area is coming to an end
Who killed the eurozone?
Europe's disastrous summit
A disastrous failure at the summit
The Economist
Felix Salmon
Going right to the top in Europe
Is this the end?
Death of a currency as eurogeddon approaches
What are they thinking?
The euro area is coming to an end
Who killed the eurozone?
Europe's disastrous summit
A disastrous failure at the summit
lunes, 7 de noviembre de 2011
sábado, 5 de noviembre de 2011
jueves, 3 de noviembre de 2011
martes, 1 de noviembre de 2011
lunes, 31 de octubre de 2011
domingo, 30 de octubre de 2011
sábado, 29 de octubre de 2011
miércoles, 26 de octubre de 2011
How to understand the limits of financial models
Aca
"After 20 years on Wall Street, I’m a disbeliever in grand financial theories. We do have a variety of financial models, but financial modeling is not the physics of markets. The similarity of physics and finance lies more in their syntax than in their semantics. In physics you’re playing against God, and He doesn’t change His laws very often. In finance you’re playing against God’s creatures, agents who value assets based on their ephemeral opinions."
"If you are someone who cannot distinguish between God’s creations and man’s idols, you may mistake models for deep laws. Many economists are such people."
"Economists for the most part have never seen a genuinely successful theory. The simple models they work with fail to reflect the complex reality of the world around them. That lack of success is not the fault of economists, for people, unlike matter, are difficult to theorize about. But it is the economists’ fault that they take their simple models so seriously."
"At the end of the cold war, we imagined a future with no more history, a smooth stroll into the sunrise accompanied by democracy, privatization and free markets. It hasn’t worked out that way. Authoritarian versions of capitalism have spread. Privatization has become oligarchy. The gaps between rich and poor, managers and workers, and owners and employees have widened. Economic models have misfired, and financial models have proved to be enormously inaccurate. More recently, the prescribed cure of a Keynesian stimulus to jump-start spending and employment has had only a muted effect. Low interest rates, the Federal Reserve’s cure for past crises and the progenitor of future ones, are being prescribed again. Lessons have not been learned."
"Any assurance economists pretend to with regard to cause and effect is merely a pose"
"Everyone should understand the difference between a model and reality, and no one should be astonished by the inability of one- or two-inch equations to represent the convolutions of people and markets."
"• Think of models as gedanken experiments. No model is correct, but models can provide immensely helpful ways to estimate value. I like to think of financial models as gedanken, or thought, experiments, like those Einstein carried out when he pictured himself surfing a light wave, or Schrödinger when he pictured a macroscopic cat subject to quantum interference. I believe that’s the right way to use mathematical models in finance, and the way experienced practitioners do use them. Models are only models, not the thing in itself. Models are better regarded as a collection of parallel thought universes to explore. Each universe should be consistent, but, unlike the world of matter, the world of financial concepts and the minds of the humans that interact with them are going to be infinitely more complex than any model you make.
• Beware of idolatry. The greatest conceptual danger is idolatry: believing that someone can write down a theory that encapsulates human behavior and thereby free you of the obligation to think for yourself. A model may be entrancing, but no matter how hard you try, you will not be able to breathe life into it. To confuse a model with a theory is to believe that humans obey mathematical rules, and to invite future disaster."
"After 20 years on Wall Street, I’m a disbeliever in grand financial theories. We do have a variety of financial models, but financial modeling is not the physics of markets. The similarity of physics and finance lies more in their syntax than in their semantics. In physics you’re playing against God, and He doesn’t change His laws very often. In finance you’re playing against God’s creatures, agents who value assets based on their ephemeral opinions."
"If you are someone who cannot distinguish between God’s creations and man’s idols, you may mistake models for deep laws. Many economists are such people."
"Economists for the most part have never seen a genuinely successful theory. The simple models they work with fail to reflect the complex reality of the world around them. That lack of success is not the fault of economists, for people, unlike matter, are difficult to theorize about. But it is the economists’ fault that they take their simple models so seriously."
"At the end of the cold war, we imagined a future with no more history, a smooth stroll into the sunrise accompanied by democracy, privatization and free markets. It hasn’t worked out that way. Authoritarian versions of capitalism have spread. Privatization has become oligarchy. The gaps between rich and poor, managers and workers, and owners and employees have widened. Economic models have misfired, and financial models have proved to be enormously inaccurate. More recently, the prescribed cure of a Keynesian stimulus to jump-start spending and employment has had only a muted effect. Low interest rates, the Federal Reserve’s cure for past crises and the progenitor of future ones, are being prescribed again. Lessons have not been learned."
"Any assurance economists pretend to with regard to cause and effect is merely a pose"
"Everyone should understand the difference between a model and reality, and no one should be astonished by the inability of one- or two-inch equations to represent the convolutions of people and markets."
"• Think of models as gedanken experiments. No model is correct, but models can provide immensely helpful ways to estimate value. I like to think of financial models as gedanken, or thought, experiments, like those Einstein carried out when he pictured himself surfing a light wave, or Schrödinger when he pictured a macroscopic cat subject to quantum interference. I believe that’s the right way to use mathematical models in finance, and the way experienced practitioners do use them. Models are only models, not the thing in itself. Models are better regarded as a collection of parallel thought universes to explore. Each universe should be consistent, but, unlike the world of matter, the world of financial concepts and the minds of the humans that interact with them are going to be infinitely more complex than any model you make.
• Beware of idolatry. The greatest conceptual danger is idolatry: believing that someone can write down a theory that encapsulates human behavior and thereby free you of the obligation to think for yourself. A model may be entrancing, but no matter how hard you try, you will not be able to breathe life into it. To confuse a model with a theory is to believe that humans obey mathematical rules, and to invite future disaster."
sábado, 22 de octubre de 2011
jueves, 20 de octubre de 2011
miércoles, 19 de octubre de 2011
martes, 18 de octubre de 2011
lunes, 17 de octubre de 2011
The case for a nominal GDP [NGDP] target
Goldman Sachs. Reacciones
Bill Woolsey
David Beckworth vs Greg Mankiw
Más reacciones
NGDP targeting is not about 'stimulus'
Brad DeLong. Reacción a Krugman. Comentario a DeLong. Otro
What is nominal GDP targeting
NGDP targeting links
Stephen Williamson. Respuesta a Williamson
What is NGDP targeting? Respuesta de DeLong
Diálogo socrático de DeLong
Nick Rowe
Three objections in NGDP level targeting
Implementing nominal GDP targeting via monetary authorities alone
Can Knut Wicksell beat up Chuck Norris? All Chuck Norris really needs is stamina
McCallum and targeting the growth rate of nominal GDP
Understanding NGDP targeting
Supply shocks and NGDP targeting
Kelly Evans on NGDP
Christina Romer también pide NGDP targeting
Nick Rowe: Negative natural rates of interest and NGDP targets
What is NGDP?
Nominal GDP targeting and stagflation
Diferencias entre varios esquemas de política monetaria
“Ben Volcker” and the monetary transmission mechanism
Daylight saving time and NGDP targeting
Tres respuestas a Greg Ip: Aca, aca y aca
The case for an NGDP target
The world is nominal
Friedman provided a theory for NGDP targeting
Reply to Noahpinion and Andy Harless on NGDP/inflation
NGDP targeting is not a Keynesian business cycle policy
Scott Sumner vs John Taylor. Varios le responden a Taylor
Does nominal GDP exist?
La Fed discutió la posibilidad de adoptar un objetivo de NGDP. Comentan Scott Sumner, David Beckworth, Bill Woolsey
Otro comentario sobre NGDP
George Selgin vs John Taylor. Scott Sumner interviene. Y David Glasner
Paper de Scott Sumner
Monetary policy can't fix all problems
Growth or level targeting?
Una explicación de NGDP targeting
Scott Sumner sobre NGDP y la crisis
Tyler Cowen y Scott Sumer sobre level targeting NGDP targeting: Some questions. Responde Scott Sumner. Y Nick Rowe. David Glasner. Bill Woolsey. David Andolfatto responde Algunas crìticas al NGDP targeting Argumentos a favor
Bill Woolsey
David Beckworth vs Greg Mankiw
Más reacciones
NGDP targeting is not about 'stimulus'
Brad DeLong. Reacción a Krugman. Comentario a DeLong. Otro
What is nominal GDP targeting
NGDP targeting links
Stephen Williamson. Respuesta a Williamson
What is NGDP targeting? Respuesta de DeLong
Diálogo socrático de DeLong
Nick Rowe
Three objections in NGDP level targeting
Implementing nominal GDP targeting via monetary authorities alone
Can Knut Wicksell beat up Chuck Norris? All Chuck Norris really needs is stamina
McCallum and targeting the growth rate of nominal GDP
Understanding NGDP targeting
Supply shocks and NGDP targeting
Kelly Evans on NGDP
Christina Romer también pide NGDP targeting
Nick Rowe: Negative natural rates of interest and NGDP targets
What is NGDP?
Nominal GDP targeting and stagflation
Diferencias entre varios esquemas de política monetaria
“Ben Volcker” and the monetary transmission mechanism
Daylight saving time and NGDP targeting
Tres respuestas a Greg Ip: Aca, aca y aca
The case for an NGDP target
The world is nominal
Friedman provided a theory for NGDP targeting
Reply to Noahpinion and Andy Harless on NGDP/inflation
NGDP targeting is not a Keynesian business cycle policy
Scott Sumner vs John Taylor. Varios le responden a Taylor
Does nominal GDP exist?
La Fed discutió la posibilidad de adoptar un objetivo de NGDP. Comentan Scott Sumner, David Beckworth, Bill Woolsey
Otro comentario sobre NGDP
George Selgin vs John Taylor. Scott Sumner interviene. Y David Glasner
Paper de Scott Sumner
Monetary policy can't fix all problems
Growth or level targeting?
Una explicación de NGDP targeting
Scott Sumner sobre NGDP y la crisis
Tyler Cowen y Scott Sumer sobre level targeting NGDP targeting: Some questions. Responde Scott Sumner. Y Nick Rowe. David Glasner. Bill Woolsey. David Andolfatto responde Algunas crìticas al NGDP targeting Argumentos a favor
viernes, 14 de octubre de 2011
miércoles, 12 de octubre de 2011
martes, 11 de octubre de 2011
lunes, 10 de octubre de 2011
Nobel de Sims y Sargent
Para Chris Sims y Thomas Sargent. Explicaciones del premio 1 y 2
Alex Tabarrok
El WSJ
Entrevista a Sargent
Sims sobre IS-LM. Comentario
Stephen Williamson critica a Krugman
What today’s Nobel prizewinners tell us about monetary policy
Más links
Market Monetarist Methodology – Markets rather than econometric testing
A note on Chris Sims' contributions
Opinion de Scott Sumner
Glaeser: Nobel winners saved macroeconomics
Otro análisis
A Nobel price for the Ancien Regime. Olaf Storbeck se retract un poco
David Henderson
John Taylor
Christopher Sims and tests for causality
What the Nobel prize tells us about oil
James Hamilton. Comentario de Nick Rowe
Pete Boettke
Arnold Kling
Ivan Werning
A prize for the scientific method in economic policy
Sims is not Sargent
David Warsh
Vector Autoregressions and Keynesian macro
High quality global journalism requires investment. Please share this article with others using the link below, do not cut & paste the article. See our Ts&Cs and Copyright Policy for more detail. Email ftsales.support@ft.com to buy additional rights. http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/5ec11d0a-f973-11e0-bf8f-00144feab49a.html#ixzz1bHziRbkV
The random shock that clinched a brave Nobel Prize. Comentario
Una crítica
Otra
Alex Tabarrok
El WSJ
Entrevista a Sargent
Sims sobre IS-LM. Comentario
Stephen Williamson critica a Krugman
What today’s Nobel prizewinners tell us about monetary policy
Más links
Market Monetarist Methodology – Markets rather than econometric testing
A note on Chris Sims' contributions
Opinion de Scott Sumner
Glaeser: Nobel winners saved macroeconomics
Otro análisis
A Nobel price for the Ancien Regime. Olaf Storbeck se retract un poco
David Henderson
John Taylor
Christopher Sims and tests for causality
What the Nobel prize tells us about oil
James Hamilton. Comentario de Nick Rowe
Pete Boettke
Arnold Kling
Ivan Werning
A prize for the scientific method in economic policy
Sims is not Sargent
David Warsh
Vector Autoregressions and Keynesian macro
High quality global journalism requires investment. Please share this article with others using the link below, do not cut & paste the article. See our Ts&Cs and Copyright Policy for more detail. Email ftsales.support@ft.com to buy additional rights. http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/5ec11d0a-f973-11e0-bf8f-00144feab49a.html#ixzz1bHziRbkV
The random shock that clinched a brave Nobel Prize. Comentario
Una crítica
Otra
domingo, 9 de octubre de 2011
sábado, 8 de octubre de 2011
jueves, 6 de octubre de 2011
martes, 4 de octubre de 2011
lunes, 3 de octubre de 2011
domingo, 2 de octubre de 2011
sábado, 1 de octubre de 2011
jueves, 29 de septiembre de 2011
miércoles, 28 de septiembre de 2011
martes, 27 de septiembre de 2011
lunes, 26 de septiembre de 2011
domingo, 25 de septiembre de 2011
viernes, 23 de septiembre de 2011
jueves, 22 de septiembre de 2011
miércoles, 21 de septiembre de 2011
'Operation Twist'
Bill Woolsey. Más de Woolsey
Mark Thoma
Varios análisis
Scott Sumner. Otro
Yves Smith
David Beckworth
Gavyn Davies
Tim Duy
Paul Krugman. Brad DeLong le comenta
Everyday Economist
Otra vez Scott Sumner
The Economist
Edward Harrison
Stephen Williamson
Steve Horwitz
The twisted logic behind the federal reserve dissenters' arguments
Operation Twist and the limits of monetary policy in a credit economy. Crítica de Scott Sumner. Bill Woolsey.Woolsey otra vez.
Los efectos de la Operación Twist según James Hamiltom
Justin Wolfers
Explaining dissent on the FOMC board for Operation Twist
Is the Fed contributing to the credit/mortgage crunch?
How does Operation Twist differ from QE?
Mark Thoma
Varios análisis
Scott Sumner. Otro
Yves Smith
David Beckworth
Gavyn Davies
Tim Duy
Paul Krugman. Brad DeLong le comenta
Everyday Economist
Otra vez Scott Sumner
The Economist
Edward Harrison
Stephen Williamson
Steve Horwitz
The twisted logic behind the federal reserve dissenters' arguments
Operation Twist and the limits of monetary policy in a credit economy. Crítica de Scott Sumner. Bill Woolsey.Woolsey otra vez.
Los efectos de la Operación Twist según James Hamiltom
Justin Wolfers
Explaining dissent on the FOMC board for Operation Twist
Is the Fed contributing to the credit/mortgage crunch?
How does Operation Twist differ from QE?
lunes, 19 de septiembre de 2011
domingo, 18 de septiembre de 2011
viernes, 16 de septiembre de 2011
jueves, 15 de septiembre de 2011
miércoles, 14 de septiembre de 2011
martes, 13 de septiembre de 2011
lunes, 12 de septiembre de 2011
domingo, 11 de septiembre de 2011
sábado, 10 de septiembre de 2011
jueves, 8 de septiembre de 2011
miércoles, 7 de septiembre de 2011
martes, 6 de septiembre de 2011
miércoles, 31 de agosto de 2011
domingo, 28 de agosto de 2011
jueves, 25 de agosto de 2011
lunes, 22 de agosto de 2011
domingo, 21 de agosto de 2011
miércoles, 17 de agosto de 2011
lunes, 15 de agosto de 2011
domingo, 14 de agosto de 2011
sábado, 13 de agosto de 2011
jueves, 11 de agosto de 2011
lunes, 8 de agosto de 2011
miércoles, 3 de agosto de 2011
lunes, 25 de julio de 2011
domingo, 24 de julio de 2011
jueves, 21 de julio de 2011
miércoles, 20 de julio de 2011
American lessons on how to run a single currency
lunes, 18 de julio de 2011
domingo, 17 de julio de 2011
miércoles, 13 de julio de 2011
martes, 12 de julio de 2011
miércoles, 6 de julio de 2011
martes, 28 de junio de 2011
domingo, 19 de junio de 2011
sábado, 18 de junio de 2011
miércoles, 15 de junio de 2011
martes, 14 de junio de 2011
domingo, 12 de junio de 2011
viernes, 10 de junio de 2011
martes, 7 de junio de 2011
miércoles, 1 de junio de 2011
domingo, 22 de mayo de 2011
lunes, 16 de mayo de 2011
domingo, 15 de mayo de 2011
miércoles, 11 de mayo de 2011
martes, 10 de mayo de 2011
domingo, 8 de mayo de 2011
sábado, 7 de mayo de 2011
viernes, 6 de mayo de 2011
domingo, 1 de mayo de 2011
Apoyaba Keynes la planificación central?
jueves, 28 de abril de 2011
How Goldman Sachs created the food crisis
martes, 19 de abril de 2011
domingo, 17 de abril de 2011
lunes, 11 de abril de 2011
Krugman vs Modern Monetary Theory
domingo, 10 de abril de 2011
martes, 5 de abril de 2011
lunes, 4 de abril de 2011
domingo, 27 de marzo de 2011
sábado, 26 de marzo de 2011
jueves, 24 de marzo de 2011
martes, 22 de marzo de 2011
lunes, 21 de marzo de 2011
jueves, 17 de marzo de 2011
martes, 15 de marzo de 2011
domingo, 13 de marzo de 2011
domingo, 6 de marzo de 2011
Are government bonds net wealth?
Tyler Cowen repite la idea de Barro. Y recibe críticas. Otra y otra. Y otra de Brad DeLong. Paul Krugman. Más de Krugman sobre la Equivalencia Ricardiana
Resumen de la discusión. Otro
Más sobre Equivalencia Ricardiana
Tyler Cowen vs Brad DeLong
Tyler Cowen responde. Y The Economist también. Más DeLong vs Cowen. Arnold Kling vs Paul Krugman
Nick Rowe
Resumen de la discusión. Otro
Más sobre Equivalencia Ricardiana
Tyler Cowen vs Brad DeLong
Tyler Cowen responde. Y The Economist también. Más DeLong vs Cowen. Arnold Kling vs Paul Krugman
Nick Rowe
sábado, 5 de marzo de 2011
jueves, 3 de marzo de 2011
sábado, 26 de febrero de 2011
lunes, 21 de febrero de 2011
domingo, 20 de febrero de 2011
miércoles, 16 de febrero de 2011
lunes, 14 de febrero de 2011
domingo, 13 de febrero de 2011
sábado, 12 de febrero de 2011
jueves, 10 de febrero de 2011
miércoles, 9 de febrero de 2011
martes, 8 de febrero de 2011
lunes, 7 de febrero de 2011
Suscribirse a:
Entradas (Atom)