Site Meter

Thursday, August 20, 2015

Begging for even more attention from Paul Romer

I have recently been delighted to find comments on this blog from someone named Paul who seems to be Paul Romer himself. He seems to have taken the time to answer my "Question for Paul Romer" even after writing "Solow's Choice" which makes the answer very clear. In that post, he suggests that, in 1978 Solow should have written a simple, applied general equilibrium (SAGE) model with downwarnd nominal rigidity instead of mocking Lucas and Sargent. I just remembered that I have written (but not type set sorry) a SAGE model with downward nominal rigidity -- it's behavior is strange with secular stagnation and sunspots and stuff. I wonder if it is worth a look Also, given the success of my question for Paul Romer, I have two similar ones What about Thomas Sargent ? Does he display Feynman integrity ? I sometimes think he does and sometimes think he's just discovered a spectacularly successful rhetoric of false modesty. Brad DeLong named Alan Blinder as a model of intellectual integrity (sorry can't find the link). Does Alan Blinder display Feynman integrity ?


M. said...

How is your SAGE model differentfrom Schmitt_Grohe Uribe (2013)?

It seems to me that you sumultaneously wrote down the same model (in discrete time in their case).

Anonymous said...

An extract from a letter written by Lucas after the FRB of Boston conference to Herschel Grossman appearing in a paper by Da Silva puts a different complexion on the situation. Lucas writes:

"Tom and I were trying to jog people into an awareness that the cozy intellectual world of the neoclassical synthesis has gone the way of Queen Victoria's."

(The Establishment of Robert E. Lucas Jr.'s Macroeconomics of Equilibrium in the 1970s - D. F. R. Da Silva - March 2014 - p.18)

Lucas clearly admits he was out to provoke a reassessment by the adherents of the Neoclassical Synthesis.

The agent provocateur here is Lucas, not Romer's Solow.


Peter said...

The Internet is awesome!

I don't like what Blinder has been saying lately about monetary policy.

Agruably he's trying to shield Yellen from the heat, saying things like the timing of the first rate hike doesn't matter and the Fed shouldn't lose any independence.