5 ms·

I should mention that so far i've found The Wealth of Nations (Adam Smith) and this blog (http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com http://unqualified-reserv

I should mention that so far i've found The Wealth of Nations (Adam Smith) and this blog (http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com) have built up an idea of classic economics and hinted at Austrian economics. I'm still having trouble understanding some of the macro stuff like foreign currency reserves, printing money, inflation + employment etc.

hga 17y ago
Heh, "having trouble understanding some of the macro stuff like foreign currency reserves, printing money, inflation + employment etc." shows that you've learned enough to be as confused as any honest person is about these fields, e.g.: The Phillips Curve postulated there was an inverse relationship between inflation and employment (e.g. one aspect was that as labor got tight, it cost more to hire people and that lead to inflation). It was utterly destroyed by the stagflation of the '70s where we got both high inflation and unemployement, but it's still the law of the land in the US (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humphrey-Hawkins_Full_Employment_Act http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humphrey-Hawkins_Full_Employmen...). I prefer the explanation that you get inflation by "printing money", but as we and e.g. the Japanease in the last two "lost decades" show, it's not that simple: this is confounded by the velocity of money as the high level concept and at the low level is expressed as the futility of "pushing on a string" (e.g. "dropping money from helicopters" as the current Chairman of the Fed puts it does little good if people are afraid to borrow or lend). Macroeconomics is a wild blood sport where no one is really sure of their view of The Truth.
linhir 17y ago
You might want to try David Romer's Advanced Macroeconomics (a higher level undergrad text) or Acemoglu's Introduction to Modern Economic Growth (lower level grad text). From http://ocw.mit.edu/OcwWeb/Economics/14-452Spring-2007/Syllabus/index.htm http://ocw.mit.edu/OcwWeb/Economics/14-452Spring-2007/Syllab... : Macroeconomics is a rapidly changing field. To get a sense of the geography, you might find it useful to read two surveys (which are already on the verge of obsolescence...): Blanchard, O. "What Do We Know About Macroeconomics that Fisher and Wicksell Did Not?" Quarterly Journal of Economics 115, no. 4 (November 2000): 1375-1410. Woodford, M. "Revolution and Evolution in Twentieth-Century Macroeconomics." June 1999. Paper presented at Frontiers of the Mind in the Twenty-First Century, U.S. Library of Congress, Washington, DC, June 1999. For two more recent and more polemical, pieces, you may also want to read: Chari, V. V. "Modern Macroeconomics in Practice: How Theory is Shaping Policy." Journal of Economic Perspectives 20, no. 4 (2006): 3-28. Mankiw, N. G. "The Macroeconomist as Scientist and Engineer." Journal of Economic Perspectives 20, no. 4 (2006): 29-46.

hga 17y ago

Heh, "having trouble understanding some of the macro stuff like foreign currency reserves, printing money, inflation + employment etc." shows that you've learned enough to be as confused as any honest person is about these fields, e.g.: The Phillips Curve postulated there was an inverse relationship between inflation and employment (e.g. one aspect was that as labor got tight, it cost more to hire people and that lead to inflation). It was utterly destroyed by the stagflation of the '70s where we got both high inflation and unemployement, but it's still the law of the land in the US (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humphrey-Hawkins_Full_Employment_Act http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humphrey-Hawkins_Full_Employmen...). I prefer the explanation that you get inflation by "printing money", but as we and e.g. the Japanease in the last two "lost decades" show, it's not that simple: this is confounded by the velocity of money as the high level concept and at the low level is expressed as the futility of "pushing on a string" (e.g. "dropping money from helicopters" as the current Chairman of the Fed puts it does little good if people are afraid to borrow or lend). Macroeconomics is a wild blood sport where no one is really sure of their view of The Truth.

linhir 17y ago

You might want to try David Romer's Advanced Macroeconomics (a higher level undergrad text) or Acemoglu's Introduction to Modern Economic Growth (lower level grad text). From http://ocw.mit.edu/OcwWeb/Economics/14-452Spring-2007/Syllabus/index.htm http://ocw.mit.edu/OcwWeb/Economics/14-452Spring-2007/Syllab... : Macroeconomics is a rapidly changing field. To get a sense of the geography, you might find it useful to read two surveys (which are already on the verge of obsolescence...): Blanchard, O. "What Do We Know About Macroeconomics that Fisher and Wicksell Did Not?" Quarterly Journal of Economics 115, no. 4 (November 2000): 1375-1410. Woodford, M. "Revolution and Evolution in Twentieth-Century Macroeconomics." June 1999. Paper presented at Frontiers of the Mind in the Twenty-First Century, U.S. Library of Congress, Washington, DC, June 1999. For two more recent and more polemical, pieces, you may also want to read: Chari, V. V. "Modern Macroeconomics in Practice: How Theory is Shaping Policy." Journal of Economic Perspectives 20, no. 4 (2006): 3-28. Mankiw, N. G. "The Macroeconomist as Scientist and Engineer." Journal of Economic Perspectives 20, no. 4 (2006): 29-46.