See Smets and Wouters (2007) for a complete review of their model. It determines 14 endogenous variables:
output, consumption, investment, the price of capital, the capital stock, capital services, the capital utilization
rate, labor supply, the interest rate, the inflation rate, the rental rate on capital, the wage rate, the marginal
product of labor, and the marginal rate of substitution between work and consumption. The 14 equations include
forward looking consumption, investment, price and wage setting as well as several identities.
Unadjusted CPI has increased four straight months in a row. From Dec 2008 to Apr 2009, unadjusted CPI rose from 210.228 to 213.240. That's a 1.4% increase over four months, which works out to an annualized price inflation rate of 4.3%.
Actual and "seasonal" is now over a four-month period
How to generate severe stagflation in the years 2010 through 2019 right on que thanks Washington provided below.
The Macroeconomic Effects of Tax Changes: Estimates Based on a new Measure of Fiscal Shocks, by Christina D. and David H. Romer (March 2007). (Christina Romer now chairs the president's Council of Economic Advisors). This study found that the tax multiplier is 3, meaning that each dollar rise in taxes will reduce private spending by $3."
http://www.heritage.org/research/featur ... ChartBook/
So who believes the tax mutiliplier and how the Waxman–Markey Climate Change Bill Would Affect the States,
Sun Dec 07, 2008 3:10 pm
By Congressional District is not a disconnect to a run on capital on your future. Trust is a key word and see
where this is going. Patients? I remember clearly Mr. Johnsons war on poverty and Mr. Nixon's energy plan he called for
and sure we know what happened with Gov planning. Plan 2 is exploded as Plan 1 since numerous reason have unfolded as
we know.
http://www.criticalreview.com/crf/pdfs/ ... o21_23.pdf Again top to bottum acountability issues.
66 books covers the reason.
Keynes: Trade surplus countries should stimulate their economies; Deficit countries should balance trade.
John Maynard Keynes was the greatest economist of the 20th century and the founder of modern macroeconomics (the economic study of the economy as a whole). American economists consider themselves to be following Keynes' recommendations when they try to stimulate an economy with stimulus packages, but they studiously ignore the fact that Keynes' had different advice for trade-surplus countries and trade-deficit countries.
After graduation from college, Keynes held the same opinion about free trade that is still held in America's ivory towers and still believed in Washington. He thought that free trade is always the best policy.
Free trade only exists to stabilize vunerable democracy's going left and is the same as welfare on your dime as we are bleed dry since Ms. Schwab trade secratary stated there concern is about loopholes and not balance. Susan Schwab, US trade representative, said such exemptions would defeat the object of the talks, to create trade flows. “As we went through the layers of loopholes . . . we discovered that a couple of our trading partners were more interested in loopholes than market access,” she said.
However, as he began to study the economics of the real world, he realized that countries can improve their own lot by practicing strategies that produce trade surpluses. When they do so, they destabilize the trade deficit countries. As a result, during World War II he worked hard to set up a post-war economic institution that would keep trade in balance so that the post-war expansion in trade could be sustainable.
Volume 25 of his collected writings is full of his plans for the institution that would regulate the world economy after World War II. His institution was to have very different requirements for trade surplus countries and trade deficit countries (pages 79-81), with the goal of keeping trade in balance. Here is what his institution would require of trade surplus countries:
A Surplus Country shall discuss with the Governing Board (but shall retain the ultimate decision in its own hands) what measures would be appropriate to restore the equilibrium of its international balances, including
(a) measures for the expansion of domestic credit and domestic demand:
(b) the appreciation of its local currency ... or, if preferred, an increase in money-wages;
(c) the reduction of excessive tariffs and other discouragements against imports;
(d) international loans for the development of backward countries.
On the other hand, countries with a trade deficit would be allowed to take the following actions:
(i) restrictions on the disposal of receipts arising out of current trade and ‘invisible’ income.
(ii) import restrictions, whether quantitative or in the form of ‘duty-quotas’ (excluding however prohibitions genuinely designed to safeguard e.g. public health or morals or revenue collection);
(iii) barter arrangements
(iv) export quotas and discriminatory export taxes;
(v) export subsidies either furnished direction to the state or indirectly under schemes supported or encouraged by the state; and
(vi) excessive tariff.
Warren Buffet reinvented Keynes' prescription for a trade deficit economy when he put together his Import Certificates plan. This is not really all that surprising. Like Keynes, he has a sound understanding of the way economics works in the real world.
Anyway:
Lawrence Summers, who served as President Clinton's treasury secretary during the headiest days of free-trade enthusiasm, is now having some very public second thoughts. Writing in the Financial Times, he noted that "[e]ven as globalisation increases inequality and insecurity, it is constantly and often legitimately invoked as an argument against the viability of progressive taxation, support for labour unions, strong regulation and substantial production of public goods that mitigate its adverse impacts." But Summers argued that such an attitude was a political non-starter, particularly as globalization "encourages the development of stateless elites whose allegiance is to global economic success and their own prosperity rather than the interests of the nation where they are headquartered." In a subsequent column, he concluded that the "domestic component of a strategy to promote healthy globalisation must rely on strengthening efforts to reduce inequality and insecurity. The international component must focus on the interests of working people in all countries, in addition to the current emphasis on the priorities of global corporations." Mark Thoma, an economist at the University of Oregon who runs the popular blog Economist's View. "There's a growing perception that the political will to keep markets open or open them further depends on solving some of these distributional issues, health care, all of these things. I don't think there's complete buy-in on the welfare state, but what's new is the idea that opening trade further is going to require us to deal with the problem of winners and losers, rather than just acknowledge it. It won't just solve itself, and it won't happen quickly and easily."
Free trade only exists to stabilize vunerable democracy's going left and is the same as welfare on your dime as we are bleed dry since Ms. Schwab trade secratary stated there concern is about loopholes and not balance. Susan Schwab, US trade representative, said such exemptions would defeat the object of the talks, to create trade flows. “As we went through the layers of loopholes . . . we discovered that a couple of our trading partners were more interested in loopholes than market access,” she said.
History conveys: Syndicalism stays veiled from public discernment and will be rendered later for the purpose of Capital and Labor Responsibilities of systemic misnomers. The Austrian’s call it the master builder dilemma and I agree to what I found to be
painfully true in any context to date. To many items we do not need from market “global” saturation points and the loss of core sanity hinging on
energy petro dollars losses which will sponge out base monetary supports as we have seen given the markets true exchanges noted to date. Basically the vanilla investors have wised up and moved elsewhere from equity it appears as such. Auto can breathe enough for a few years but the tide is going out given forward demand will dissipate since the cart is ahead of the Horse on market demand. For many decades they deny balance and they wonder why we discern that there cheerful to useful idiots may be there maximum liability when they awake. As mentioned in GD forums the water needs established to solve some blatant issues to temper growing summer of discontent fomenting.
These major chock points need to be tempered. USDA numbers where posited for ag produce i.e
cpi core issues to consumer cost indices.
http://generationaldynamics.com/forum/v ... ater#p3688 Stock up and plan for Stagflation. Yes we must stabilize given what priority?
http://www.dni.gov/nic/special_globaltr ... plications We are at now at the solar minumum so natural effects suggest and do regard to proper planing in detail not pandering to rhetorical up to the neck Global Left nonsense on climate.