What Is This “Tranquility”? A Reply to Nelson
回复纳尔逊对克里斯蒂亚诺2023年文章的批评，澄清该文并非声称英国政策制定者未使用菲利普斯曲线作为政策菜单，而是默认这一共识，并指出纳尔逊的研究在其他方面有重要意义。
Abstract In a note appearing in the August 2024 issue of History of Political Economy (HOPE), Edward Nelson argues that a passage commenting on James Forder's Macroeconomics and the Phillips Curve Myth (2014) in a 2023 HOPE article by Carlo Cristiano titled “The Early Reception of the Phillips Curve in the United Kingdom” would provide a false characterization of the economic literature and claims priority in affirming that UK policymakers did not use the Phillips curve as a menu for policy. It is shown in this reply that Nelson's reading of Cristiano's 2023 article, and more specifically of the passage commenting on Forder's 2014 book, is based on a misunderstanding. The purpose of the 2023 article was not to show that UK policymakers did not use the Phillips trade-off as a menu for policy. In that article, consensus on this point is taken for granted. It is also argued in this reply that there is no need to mention Nelson's works to affirm that UK policymakers did not use the Phillips trade-off as a policy menu and that Nelson's works are indeed very relevant, but for other reasons.