tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8897997766931633186.post3501521362664104013..comments2024-02-14T03:21:37.506-05:00Comments on Monetary Freedom: Nominal GDP Targeting and StagflationBill Woolseyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06330232724290161369noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8897997766931633186.post-56123874513024640142016-10-18T02:06:42.444-04:002016-10-18T02:06:42.444-04:00It will be really hard if the inflation raises, bu...It will be really hard if the inflation raises, but I think it’s highly unlikely to be happening, so got to be very wise and sure with how we go about doing everything. This is ever easy with broker like OctaFX because of their world class features and facilities with low spreads from 0.2 pips to high leverage up to 1.500 while there is also smooth trading platform in cTrader, it’s all picture perfect and helps out with working for us in big way.Anwernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8897997766931633186.post-68818816545205111932011-10-27T20:57:21.410-04:002011-10-27T20:57:21.410-04:00Thanks Bill. You answered those so well that I don...Thanks Bill. You answered those so well that I don't have any more questions.JP Koninghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02559687323828006535noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8897997766931633186.post-67936421879718727072011-10-27T11:49:25.673-04:002011-10-27T11:49:25.673-04:00I see nominal GDP targeting as a regime and not a ...I see nominal GDP targeting as a regime and not a one time fix for the current situation. I think it is a better regime than inflation, price level, or quantity of money targeting.<br /><br />If this particular episode was solely one of reduction in productive capacity, and nominal GDP just happened to drop in parallel, so that rising nominal GDP had no positive impact on output, then this would be a particular episode where nominal GDP targeting provides no benefit. But as a regime, it would provide benefits in other possible scenarios and should be maintained. <br /><br />I don't expect that the announcement effect will solely impact prices. <br /><br />Sticky prices, including resource prices like wages, are the key reason why nominal GDP targeting is a better regime that targeting the price level or the quantity of money. If all prices (and wages) were instantly and perfectly flexible, then price level targeting would probably be better than targeting the growth path for nominal GDP.Bill Woolseyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06330232724290161369noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8897997766931633186.post-42209887009267101172011-10-27T11:09:05.513-04:002011-10-27T11:09:05.513-04:00"If, on the other hand, prices rise in strict..."If, on the other hand, prices rise in strict proportion to the rise in nominal expenditure, then production and employment would not be influenced at all."<br /><br />Would this constitute a failure of NGDP targeting vis a vis its ability to resuscitate the economy? Would you be disappointed if this was the result?<br /><br />What are the odds that the reaction to the announcement of a target plays out purely through prices and not quantities?<br /><br />In order for there to be an affect on quantities, you're assuming some degree of money illusion and sticky prices, right?JP Koninghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02559687323828006535noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8897997766931633186.post-58515762041443278872011-10-27T01:12:58.381-04:002011-10-27T01:12:58.381-04:00All terribly sensible. Of course, there is the eve...All terribly sensible. Of course, there is the even more elementary point that stagflation was characterised by double digit nominal spending growth. Who is proposing that? Not the Market Monetarists.Lorenzohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00305933404442191098noreply@blogger.com