Chapter 5 the challenge of new classical macroeconomics (Scarth)

The Challenge of New
Classical Macroeconomics
Abdul Hadi Ilman
Universitas Teknologi Sumbawa
November 2014
Chapter 5
Introduction to Advanced Macroeconomic (Scarth, 2009)

Introduction
• in Chapter 5, we examine the New Classical approach to business cycle analysis — the
modern, more micro-based version of the market-clearing approach to macroeconomics,
in which no appeal to sticky prices is involved
• Our analysis thus far may have left the impression that all macroeconomists feel
comfortable with models which "explain" short-run business cycles by appealing to some
form of nominal rigidity.
• The Pioneer of “new synthesis” would regard some of underlying assumption concerning
of the sticky price as “heroic”
• New Keynesian’s reaction is to explain to foundation of menu cost (the cost of changing
nominal prices), and to elaborate how other features, such as real rigidities and strategic
complementarities, make the basing of business cycle theory on seemingly small menu
costs appealing after all
• New Classical’s reaction to the proposition that menu costs "seem" too small to explain
business cycles is to investigate whether cycles can be explained without any reference to
nominal rigidities at all.

Introduction
• The chapter is organized as follow:
1. The original real business cycle model
2. Extension of the basic model
3. Optimal inflation policy
4. Harberger tiangles vs Okun’s Gap

The Original Real Business Cycle Model
• Keynesian analysis explains the business cycle by assuming rigid money wages. Demand
shocks push the price level up in booms and down in recessions. This set of outcomes
makes the real wage rise in recessions and fall in booms, and the resulting variations in
employment follow from the fact that firms slide back and forth along a given labour
demand curve. Thus, the model predicts that the real wage moves contracyclically (and this
is not observed), and because the labour market is not clearing, it makes the labour supply
curve irrelevant for determining the level of employment.
• New Classicals prefer to assume that wages are flexible and that the labour market always
clears. To their critics, a model which assumes no involuntary unemployment is an
"obviously" bad idea. But if this is so, say the New Classicals, it should be easy to reject
their theory. While the approach has encountered some difficulties when comparing its
predictions to the data, it has turned out to be much more difficult to reject this modelling
strategy than had been first anticipated by Keynesians.
Part 1

• New Classicals explain business cycles by referring to real shocks (shifts in technology) so the
approach is called real business cycle analysis. The basic idea is that workers make a choice
concerning the best time to work.
• If something happens to make working today more valuable (such as an increase in
today's wage compared to tomorrow's) workers make an inter-temporal substitution;
they work more today and take a longer than usual vacation tomorrow. Similarly, an
increase in interest rates lowers the present value of future wages, and so leads
individuals to work more today.
• If there is a positive technology shock today, the higher marginal product of labour implies
a shift to the right of the labour demand curve. Similarly, a negative development in the
technology field next period shifts the labour demand curve back to the left. Thus,
according to this view, business cycles are interpreted as shifts in the position of the labour
demand curve, not movements along a fixed labour demand curve.
Part 1

• Hansen and Wright's (1992) version real business cycle model
Part 1
Household utility function
Time constraint
Production function
Technology shock
Accumulation of capital stock

• Equation (5.1) is the household utility function; E, ρ, C and L denote expectations, the
rate of time preference, consumption, and leisure.
• Equation (5.2) is the time constraint (N is employment). Formal utility maximization is
used to derive consumption and labour supply functions.
• Equations (5.3), (5.4) and (5.5) define the production function and the one stochastic
variable in the system — the technology shock, z. An ongoing trend is involved, and the
stochastic part is a normally distributed error term with zero mean and constant variance,
and φ is the coefficient of serial correlation in this exogenous process. Formal profit
maximization is used to derive the demands for capital and labour.
• Finally, equations (5.6) and (5.7) define the accumulation of the capital stock δ is its
depreciation rate and I is gross investment)
Part 1

• If the model's data "looked like" the real world data, researchers concluded that this simple
approach has been vindicated.
• The result showed stylized facts of the business cycle are well illustrated by the "data" that
is generated from this very simple structure
• Diminishing marginal utility of consumption
• consumption is less variable than income,
• investment is more volatile than income
• If a positive technology shock occurs today, people can achieve higher utility by spreading
out this benefit over time. So they increase consumption by less than their income has
increased initially, and as a result, some of the new output goes into capital accumulatio
• It is impressive that these very simple calibrated models can mimic the actual magnitude
of investment's higher volatility relative to consumption
Part 1

• Despite these encouraging results, however, this model does not generate the wide
variations in employment and the very low variability in real wages (that we
observe in real data) without an implausibly high value for the wage elasticity of
labour supply (an unacceptable value for parameter β).
Part 1

Extensions to the Basic Model
• We are considering a number of extensions to the basic New Classical model that
have been offered as mechanisms that can make the "data" that is generated from
the calibrated models more representative of the actual co-movements in real
wages and employment
• The first extension we consider is an alteration in the utility function. The one given
in equation (5.1) embodies the assumption that the marginal utility of leisure in one
period is not affected by the amount of leisure enjoyed in other periods
• The modern approach to adapting the utility function (central to much recent New
Classical work) is to specify that today's utility depends on both today's level of
consumption and today's level of habits. Habits evolve over time according to the
following relationship:
Part 2

Another extensions:
• Indivisible labour. At the macro level, then, variation in employment comes from changes in
the number of people working, not from variations in average hours per worker. This
means that the macro correlations are not pinned down by needing to be consistent with
evidence from micro studies of the hours supplied by each individual (that show a very
small elasticity).
• Non-market activity. "home" production is a very significant amount of real economic
activity. Benhabib, Rogerson, and Wright (1991) have shown that when the real business
cycle model involves this additional margin of adjustment, its real wage-employment
correlations are much more realistic. The basic idea is that the amount of leisure consumed
can remain quite stable over the cycle — even while measured employment in the market
sector of the economy is changing quite dramatically — when households have the
additional option of working at home (doing chores for which they would otherwise have
paid others to do).
Part 2

• Variations in government spending. This work involves adding an additional
(demand) shock (in addition to technology shocks) to the model; for example,
is added to the system, and the market clearing condition is changed to
• Increases in government spending raise interest rates, and higher interest rates
decrease the present value of working in the future. With the relative return of
working in the current period thereby increased, the current-period labour supply
curve shifts to the right. With these supply-side shifts in the model, some of the
variations in employment are explained by shifts along a given labour demand
curve. With this additional source- of employment fluctuation, the magnitude of
the technology shocks does not need to be as great for the calibrated model to
generate realistic changes in employment.
Part 2

• The variability of price mark-ups over the cycle is an example of a demand-shift
mechanism, we know that the mark-up of price over marginal cost falls during
booms because of the entry of new firms. This fact causes the labour demand curve
to shift to the right during booms.
• Households shifting between market-oriented employment and home production is
an example of a supply-shift mechanism.
• Payment lag. If firms have to pay their wage bill one period before receiving their
sales revenue, the labour demand function becomes FN = (W/P)(1+r) so variations
in the interest rate shift the position of the labour demand curve.
Part 2

• It is interesting to note the convergence involved with parts of New Keynesian and New
Classical work.
• Keynesians have been taking expectations and micro foundations more seriously to
improve the logical consistency of their systems,
• while Classicals are embracing such things as autonomous expenditure variation, imperfect
competition and payment lags to improve the empirical success of their models.
• Despite this convergence, however, there is still a noticeable difference in emphasis.
Classical models have the property that the observed fluctuations in employment have
been chosen by agents, so there is no obvious role for government to reduce output
variation below what agents have already determined to be optimal. This presumption of
social optimality is inappropriate, however, if markets fail for any reason (such as
externalities, moral hazard, or imperfect competition).
Part 2

• Hansen and Wright (1992) have shown that when all of these extensions are
combined, a simple aggregative model can generate data that reflects fairly well the
main features of the real-world real wageemployment correlations after all.
• But still the model does not fit the facts well enough, so even pioneers of this
approach (for example, Goodfriend and King (1997) have called for the New
Neoclassical Synthesis in which temporarily sticky prices are added to the real
business cycle model. We consider this synthesis in some detail in Chapter 6
Part 2

• It may seem surprising that New Classicals have embraced the hallmark of
Keynesian analysis — sticky prices. Why has this happened?
• Perhaps because there is one fact that appears to support the relevance of nominal
rigidities — the well-documented correlation between changes in the nominal
money supply and variations in real output. Either this is evidence in favour of
nominal rigidities, or it is evidence that the central bank always accommodates —
increasing the money supply whenever more is wanted (during an upswing)
• One final consideration is that real and nominal exchange rates are very highly
correlated. Many economists argue that there appears to be no way to account for
this fact other than by embracing short-run nominal rigidities.
Part 2

• Keynesians welcome this convergence of research approaches, yet (at the
conceptual level) they remain concerned about the lack of market failure involved
in the classical tradition. Also, they have some empirical concerns:
• The real business cycle approach is based on the notion of intertemporal substitution of
labour supply. However, micro studies of household behaviour suggest that leisure and
the consumption of goods are complements, not substitutes (as assumed in New
Classical theory).
• Another awkward fact is that, in the United States at least, only 15 percent of actual
labour market separations are quits. The rest of separations are layoffs. In addition, the
data on quits indicates that they are higher in booms. The real business cycle model
predicts that all separations are quits and that they are higher in recessions.
• Finally, it is a fact that a high proportion of unemployment involves individuals who
have been out of work for a long time — an outcome that does not seem consistent
with the assumption of random separations.
• It is impossible to observe the technology shocks directly.
Part 2

• Given these problems, why does real business-cycle theory appeal to many
of the best young minds of the profession?
• Blinder (1987) attributes the attraction to "Lucas's keen intellect and profound
influence," but it also comes from the theory's firm basis in microeconomic
principles and its ability to match significant features of real-.world business cycles
• Given these problems, why does real business-cycle theory appeal to many of the
best young minds of the profession? Blinder (1987) attributes the attraction to
"Lucas's keen intellect and profound influence," but it also comes from the theory's
firm basis in microeconomic principles and its ability to match significant features of
real-world business cycles
Part 2

• To justify a zero-inflation target, many analysts make the following argument.
• Since inflation is a tax on the holders of money, and since taxes create a loss of consumer
surplus known as an "excess burden" — that tax (inflation) should be eliminated.
• The problem with this argument is that if one tax is eliminated, the government must raise
another tax (and that other tax creates an excess burden of its own).
• Recognizing this, the standard approach in public finance is to recommend the "inverse
elasticity rule" for setting taxes.
• Since excess burdens are bigger when taxes cause large substitution effects, the efficiency
criterion for judging taxes stipulates that the largest tax rates should apply to the items that
have the smallest price elasticities of demand.
• Since the interest rate is the (opportunity) cost of holding money, and since the estimated
interest elasticity of money demand is very small, the inverse elasticity rule can be used to
defend a relatively large tax on money.
• In other words, it supports choosing an inflation rate that is (perhaps well) above zero.
Optimal Inflation Policy
Part 3

• The full-equilibrium benefits of low inflation are independent of the complexities of
the transition path that the economy takes to reach the long run (such as those
caused by nominal rigidities). As a result, all analysts agree that a basic version of
the New Classical model is the appropriate vehicle to use for estimating the
benefits of that policy.
• Since our focus is on the longterm benefits of low inflation, we use an example of
New Classical work that highlights money — Mansoorian and Mohsin (2004).
Part 3

• Households maximize a standard utility function. As usual, instantaneous utility is a
weighted average of leisure and consumption
U = (α In(1 - N) + (1 - α) ln C),
and there is a constant rate of time preference, ρ.
• The budget constraint is
• Consumption is the sum of wage and employment income, plus the transfer
payments received from the government, τ, minus the inflation tax incurred by
holding real money balances and minus asset accumulation.
Part 3

• The full-equilibrium version of the model is described by the following equations:
• The first equation is the Ramsey consumption function when consumption growth is zero
(that follows from the household differentiating with respect to variable C).
• The second equation is what emerges when the labour supply function (that follows from
the household differentiating with respect to variable N) is equated with the firms' labour
demand function.
• The third equation is the production function, and
• the fourth is the other relationship that follows from profit maximization — that capital is
hired to the point that its marginal product equals the interest rate.
• The final three equations can be used to determine how consumption, employment and
the capital stock respond to different inflation rates.
Part 3

• As noted, the government budget constraint is
• This equation states that lump-sum transfer payments, T, are paid to individuals,
and in aggregate, these transfers are financed by the inflation tax
• With τ endogenous, cutting inflation is unambiguously "good". Lower inflation
eliminates tax that distorts the household saving decision, and no other distortion
is introduced by the government having to levy some other tax to acquire the
missing revenue. Consumption, employment, output and the capital stock all
increase by the same percentage when the inflation rate is reduced. Specifically,
Part 3

• Mansoorian and Mohsin calibrate the model with standard real-businesscycle
assumptions: α = 0.64, ρ = 0.042, θ = 0.30 and they assume an initial inflation rate
of zero: π = 0. These assumptions allow them to evaluate the inflation multiplier.
The result is that creating inflation of 2% lowers steady-state consumption by
1.37%. This outcome is an annual annuity.
• With no growth and a discount rate of 0.042, the present value of this annual loss in
consumption is 0.0137/0.042 = 32% of one year's level of consumption.
• Most analysts regard this magnitude as quite large. The policy implication is that
even a two-percent inflation rate should not be tolerated.
Part 3

• Experience has shown (see Ball (1994)) that we suffer an increase in the GDP gap
of about two percentage points for about 3.5 years to lower the inflation rate by
two percentage points. This means that we lose approximately 7 percentage points
of one year's GDP to lower steady-state inflation by this amount. The benefit-cost
analysis says that the present value of the benefits exceeds this present cost (32%
exceeds 7%), so disinflation is supported.
• This is the standard defense for targeting zero inflation. It is an application of the
neoclassical synthesis. The long-run benefits of lower inflation are estimated by
appealing to our theory of the natural rate (New Classical macroeconomics). The
short-run costs are estimated by appealing to a more Keynesian model of
temporary deviations from that natural rate that stem from temporary nominal
rigidities
Part 3

• In diagrammatic terms, the
reasoning is illustrated in Figure
5.1, where we continue to abstract
from any ongoing growth. New
Classical analysis is used to
estimate the shift up in the
potential GDP line that
accompanies disinflation, and the
short-run synthesis model (in
which potential GDP is
exogenous) is used to calculate the
temporary drop (and then later
recovery) in actual GDP.
Part 3

• One unappealing aspect of this estimate of the long-term benefits of low inflation is
that it involves the assumption that the monetary authority can dictate to the fiscal
policy maker (and insist that the latter must cut transfer payments in the face of
disinflation).
• How is the analysis affected if we assume that this is not possible?
• To explore this question, we add a tax on wage income. Assuming (as we have
already) that the wage equals the marginal product of labour, we re-express the
government budget constraint as
Part 3

• There is one change in household budget constraint, since it must now stipulate that
households receive only the after-tax wage. This results in only one change; the third
equation in our list of the model's relationships becomes:
• It is more difficult for disinflation to be supported in this case, since one distortion (the
wage-tax) is replacing another (the inflation tax). Indeed, in this case, for the calibration
assumed by Mansoorian and Mohsin, it turns out that the "benefit" of lower inflation has
to be negative!
• Disinflation forces the fiscal authority to rely more heavily on a more distortionary revenue
source than the inflation tax. Similar results in more elaborate calibrated models are
reported in Cooley and Hansen (1991). It would therefore appear that the public-finance
approach (that simplifies by using a New Classical model with no ongoing growth) does
not lead to a solid under-pinning for a zero inflation target.
Part 3

• A somewhat more reliable argument for choosing a very low inflation rate (perhaps
zero) as "best," concerns the effect of inflation on savings in a growth context. Most
tax systems are not fully indexed for inflation.
• To appreciate why this is important, suppose you have a $100 bond that gives you a
nominal return of 10%. Suppose that inflation is 5%, and that the interest rate on
your bond would be 5% if inflation were zero. At the end of the year, the financial
institution sends you a tax form indicating that you received $10 of interest
earnings, and the government taxes you on the entire $10. In fact, however, only $5
of the $10 is interest earnings. The other $5 is compensation for the fact that the
principal value of your investment has shrunk with inflation
Part 3

• An interest income tax system should tax only interest income, not the saver's
depreciation expenses. An indexed tax system would do just this.
• Thus, inflation reduces the incentive to save, so that individuals living in the future
inherit either a smaller capital stock (with which to work) or a larger foreign debt to
service, or both.
• According to this analysis, then, to avoid a lowering of future living standards, we
should pursue a "zero" inflation target.
• The case for zero inflation is far from complete
Part 3

• Much of this book has focused on
explanations of the business cycle and an
evaluation of stabilization policy. It has
been implicit that there would be
significant gains for society if the business
cycle could be eliminated
• Without business cycles, actual output, y,
would coincide with the natural rate, 𝑦; ,
and both series would follow a smooth
growth path such as the straight line
labelled 37 in Figure 5.2
Harberger Triangles vs. Okun's Gap
Part 4

Chapter 5 the challenge of new classical macroeconomics (Scarth)

More Related Content

What's hot (20)

Viewers also liked (18)

Similar to Chapter 5 the challenge of new classical macroeconomics (Scarth) (20)

More from Abdul Hadi Ilman (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

Chapter 5 the challenge of new classical macroeconomics (Scarth)