Government and Inflation
比较了新凯恩斯模型、新古典模型和传统货币主义对政府与通胀关系的不同看法，重点分析了需求变化对产出和通胀的非对称效应，适合宏观经济学研究者快速了解三种理论的核心分歧。
Competing views on relationship between government and inflation arise from competing models of inflation. Neo-Keynesian models predict that governments can manipulate aggregate demand by suitable combinations of monetary and fiscal policies, but that effects are asymmetrical: starting from a state of employment, short-term effects of a rise in demand are mainly in a rise in inflation rate and only slightly in a rise in output, while shortterm effects of a fall in demand are mainly in a fall in output and only slightly in a fall in inflation. Throughout this paper I call this the It can also be expressed in terms of a short-term Phillips curve relating real national income to price inflation which is much steeper above than below full employment. This short-term Phillips curve shifts with changes in core inflation rate, defined inflation rate ruling when there are neither demand nor supply-side shock effects on price level. The core rate may depend on expected future inflation these expectations themselves depend on past inflation rates, in Eckstein, or it may depend on inertias, in Tobin, where a concern over relatives makes current wage bargains closely related to past wage bargains. The core rate shifts only slowly because it depends on backward looking behavior. Arthur Okun's posthumously published book contributed greatly to development of micro underpinnings of this model. I have also discussed them in some detail elsewhere (1981). In new classical model, markets clear as they were perfectly competitive. Actual income differs from potential income only if errors are made in predicting rate of inflation which causes firms and/or workers to misperceive changes in money prices and wages changes in relative prices and wages. Expectations of inflation are rational and hence forward looking. If government adopts appropriate policies to raise or lower inflation rate, this leads immediately to a revision of inflationary expectations to which actual inflation rate quickly responds. Thus asymmetry is absent: increases and decreases in aggregate demand have their main effects on increasing or decreasing inflation rate even in short term. The third theory, traditional monetarism, is least explicitly modelled of three. Friedman's statement of its theoretical underpinnings was an IS-LM model closed by a perfectly inelastic aggregate supply curve (AS). Although most economists would accept this long-run AS curve provided long run is enough, agreement on shape of monetarist shortterm AS curve is less obvious. Some would appear to accept virtually inelastic AS curve over this period, while others such Phillip Cagan (1979) and David Laidler (1981) would appear to favor asymmetry. Monetarism has meant different things at different times. Perhaps its most enduring central core is rejection of policy activism and associated k percent rule for monetary expansion. Furthermore many monetarists believe that restrictive monetary policy can be advocated major anti-inflationary tool for governments having threeto five-year political time horizons, that is, they believe in only a short-lived asymmetry at most.