As part of dotting all the

*i's*and crossing the*t's*in finishing up the draft of the paper, there is a piece I added to the discussion of the macroeconomic models that I've never made explicit. If you look at the information transfer models used in the IS-LM model and the Solow model, they are superficially similar:ISLM:N → M and N → SSolow (1):N → K and N → LSolow (2):K → I and K → D

i.e. "

*source → destination1*" and "*same source → destination2*" (note, I've changed the Y to N because that's what I've done in the paper). However, you end up with completely different models. How can that happen? Obviously there are some unstated assumptions.
The ISLM model is a model of partial equilibrium (N varies slowly when M or S change, and the solution to the differential equation is

*N ~ log M*) where both destinations (M and S) are receiving the same signal from the source (N). In a diagram it looks like this:Solow (2) is similar, except it is

*general equilibrium*. Changes in K immediately register in both I and D and vice versa (and the solution is

*log K ~*

*α*

*log X*). The diagram looks the same as the partial equilibrium one, though:

The third one is a bit different from the previous two. Solow (1) is a general equilibrium model where the information source is treated as a sum of two orthogonal signals (think two FM radio stations). It looks like this:

We have two separate "communication channels". This is important because it means that even if N is in information equilibrium with K and L, K and L are not necessarily in information equilibrium with each other (however, they will be "coupled" to each other by N).

## No comments:

## Post a Comment

Comments are welcome. Please see the Moderation and comment policy.

Also, try to avoid the use of dollar signs as they interfere with my setup of mathjax. I left it set up that way because I think this is funny for an economics blog. You can use € or £ instead.