西方宏观经济学部分：6产品市场和货币市场的一般均衡.ppt

* As we learned in chapter 4, the nominal interest rate is the opportunity cost of holding money (instead of bonds). Here, we are assuming the price level is fixed, so ? = 0 and r = i. * * * This and the next slide summarize the case study on pp.273-274. The data source is given on the next slide. At this point, students have now learned different theories about the effects of monetary policy on interest rates. This case study shows them that both theories are relevant, using a real-world example to remind students that the classical theory of chapter 4 applies in the long-run while the liquidity preference theory applies in the short run. * Since prices are sticky in the short run, the Liquidity Preference Theory predicts that both the nominal and real interest rates will rise in the short run. And in fact, both did. (However, the inflation rate was not zero, and in fact it increased, so the real interest rate didn’t rise as much as the nominal interest rate did during the period shown.) In the long run, the Quantity Theory of Money says that the monetary tightening should reduce inflation. The Fisher Effect says that the fall in ? should cause an equal fall in i. By January of 1983 (which is “the long run” from the viewpoint of 1979), inflation and nominal interest rates had fallen. (However, they did not fall by equal amounts. This doesn’t contradict the Fisher Effect, though, as other economic changes caused movements in the real interest rate.) About the data: i = 3-month rate on Commercial Paper (which seemed to be the closest match to the interest rate described in the case study: “on short-term commercial loans”, top of p.274). % change in M/P from previous slide: I computed M1/CPI (the measure used in the case study), then computed the percentage change in M1/CPI over the 8-month period beginning with the month in which Volcker became the Fed chairman, August 1979. Source: FRED database, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis. * * * * * * I