Mime-Version: |
1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.4 \(3445.8.2\)) |
Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset=utf-8 |
Date: |
Sat, 1 Sep 2018 15:18:17 +0200 |
Reply-To: |
|
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
In-Reply-To: |
|
Content-Transfer-Encoding: |
quoted-printable |
Sender: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
This proof is no a rebuttal but a tautology.
Equation I = (1-b)(Y-T) is actually derived from the two identities:
(1) Y = C + I + G
(2) Y - T = C + S
and from the behavioral equation:
(3) C = b Y
Once you found the expression for I, you can of course plug it into (1)-(3) but this does not make any sense.
To understand what's going on, you have to look the other way.
(1) Start from your previous result (expression for Y): Y = 1/(1-b) + (G - bT)/(1-b)
(2) Set G = T (government spending is entirely financed by taxes)
You get:
Y = 1/(1-b) + G
The multiplier does not disappear but is no longer depending on the marginal propensity to consume: it is equal to 1.
Steve Kates rediscovered the Haavelmo theorem. Well done!
The equality T = G simply means that in a closed economy, if you exclude the possibility of financing the deficit by creating money (the LM part has been excluded from the outset) and issuing bonds (otherwise, equation (2) becomes Y - T + transfers = C + S), it must necessarily be financed by taxes. How surprising it is!
Best,
Aurélien Saïdi
> Le 31 août 2018 à 19:04, Fred Foldvary <[log in to unmask]> a écrit :
>
> Steve Kates <[log in to unmask]> seeks a rebuttal to the Keynesian multiplier.
>
>
>
> The Keynesian multiplier is 1/(1-b).
>
> As I see it, the derivation is:
>
> T is taxes that pay for G, government spending.
> b is the portion of income Y that is spent for consumption C.
> I is economic investment.
>
> Y = C + I + G[
> C = b(Y-T)
> Y = bY -bT + I + G
> Y-bY = I + G - bT
> Y(1-b) = I + G -bT
> Y=(I+G-bT)/(1-b)
>
> That assumes constant I.
> If investment I is a function of savings, then
> I = (1-b)(Y-T)
> Substitute into the third equation:
> Y = bY -bT + (1-b)(Y-T) + G
> Which concludes with
> G=T
>
> The multiplier disappears, and there is no determination of Y from 1/(1-b)
>
> Fred Foldvary
>
Notre nouveau nom "UNIVERSITE PARIS NANTERRE" s'applique
maintenant sur nos messageries professionnelles :
"@u-paris10.fr" devient "@parisnanterre.fr".
Nous vous remercions d'utiliser cette nouvelle adresse.
|
|
|