In models of money with an infinitely-lived representative agent (ILRA models), the optimal monetary policy is almost always the Friedman rule. Overlapping generations (OG) models are different: in this paper, we study how they are different, and why. We investigate the welfare properties of monetary policy in a simple OG model under two different types of money demand specifications and under two alternative assumptions about the generational timing of taxes for money retirement. We find that the Friedman rule is generally not the policy that maximizes steady-state utility. We conclude that the key difference between ILRA and OG monetary models is that in the latter, the standard method for constructing a monetary regime causes transactions involving money to become intergenerational transfers. Overlapping generations are different in this regard; we study how they are different and why.JEL Classifications: E31, E42, E63
There is an emerging consensus that money can be largely ignored in making monetary policy decisions. Svensson (1999, 2002) provide some empirical support for this view. In this paper, we reconsider the role of money. We find that money is not redundant. More specifically, there is a significant statistical relationship between lagged values of money and the output gap, even when lagged values of real interest rates and lagged values of the output gap are accounted for. We further test for and find significant information useful in predicting movements in the output gap arise from movements in both inside and outside money.
We study several popular monetary models which generate a non-degenerate stationary distribution of money holdings. Across these environments, our principal finding is as follows: a monetary policy that sets long run nominal interest rates to zero (the Friedman rule) does not typically maximize ex-post social welfare if it can generate redistributive effects. An increase in the rate of growth of the money supply has the standard partialequilibrium effect of making money a less desirable asset thereby decreasing the utility of all moneyholders. A second, general-equilibrium effect, is a transfer from one type of agent to the other. For each environment, when the rate of growth of the money supply is not too high, an increase in the latter away from the Friedman rule may produce a transfer effect that dominates the partial equilibrium effect thereby rendering the Friedman rule ex-post suboptimal. Keywords
We study several popular monetary models which generate a non-degenerate stationary distribution of money holdings. Across these environments, our principal finding is as follows: a monetary policy that sets long run nominal interest rates to zero (the Friedman rule) does not typically maximize ex-post social welfare if it can generate redistributive effects. An increase in the rate of growth of the money supply has the standard partialequilibrium effect of making money a less desirable asset thereby decreasing the utility of all moneyholders. A second, general-equilibrium effect, is a transfer from one type of agent to the other. For each environment, when the rate of growth of the money supply is not too high, an increase in the latter away from the Friedman rule may produce a transfer effect that dominates the partial equilibrium effect thereby rendering the Friedman rule ex-post suboptimal. Keywords
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.