6 Comments

Simplifying assumptions- as there is “one” interest rate that mattets- must live or die or their ability to predict. And obviously the new k paradigm has suffered its second obvious failure- after 2008.

Expand full comment

Really good. I am old enough to have missed in my formative years the new keynesian group think. We were thought to think of policy as affecting various “channels of transmission”, and besides knowing based on theory what the first derivatives should be, the rest was more descriptive.

Expand full comment
Feb 8, 2023Liked by Chris Marsh

Thank you for a great article !

Expand full comment

Reminded me of this ineresing article by DeLong from a while back: https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/jep.14.1.83

Expand full comment
author

Thanks, interesting. Don't think I've read that.

Expand full comment
Feb 6, 2023Liked by Chris Marsh

Might be wrong as I read it a while ago, but I think it might be in contrast with your view - as main point is that there are still elements of monetarism around, even in the NK framework. I mean, should not come as a surprise: most of econ schools generally build on previous one (to make up for theri blunders), imho. Good ones are those which can keep the good side and insights of previous ones. Quite far from your take, if I read it right.

Expand full comment