Fwd: Macroperu Re: (ECONOMIA) Un mundo feliz keynesiano

bruno seminario y dani schydlowsky

2008/12/7 Bruno Seminario <lbseminario@yahoo.com>

Hola Dany,

La reforma arancelaria que realizaron los liberales apristas, el tratado comercial que se
caba de firmar con china , y, el descenso del tipo de camio, deb en haber aumentando
sustancialmente el valor de la propensión marginal a importar. Para el Perú, su varo
podría ser cercano a 1/2.

Si usaramos el mismo valor para la prpension marginal a consumir, podríamos llegar a la
conclusión que para el Perú, el valor del multiplicado fiscal sería

(1/(1-c(1-t)+m)). Con c=0.8 , t=0.15, m=0.5. 1-0.80*0.85+0.5 que es igual 1/0.85,
es decir un valor batsante reducido. Como las exportaciones van a descender 6000
millones de dolares y su el valor de retorno dee etas lo podemos estimar en 1/3, su
probable impacto sobre la demanda gargada lo podemos estimar en 2000 millones de
dolares; para cancelar el fecto es probable que se requiera una uamento en el gatso
publico de 3000 millones de dolares.: un estimulo fiscal equivalente a 2 o 3 puntos
porcentuales del pbi . Obviamente, los numeros serían mas favorables si se reduce la
propension marginal a importar- Pero esete tipo de medidas no quieren por los
neoliberalies apristas.

--- In MacroPeru@yahoogroups.com, "Daniel Schydlowsky" <schydlowsky@...> wrote:
>
> Estimados,
>
>
>
> Existe en la literatura el “multiplicador keynesiano con repercusiones externas†. Toma
en cuenta que mi importanciones son tus exportaciones, lo cual a su vez afecta tu ingreso,
y por lo tanto tus importaciones, que son mis importaciones.
>
>
>
> Facil hacer el algebra para dos paises, pero con un poco de algebra matricial, se
generaliza a n paises.
>
>
>
> Con ello podriamos ponerle numeros a lo que dice Rodrik.
>
>
>
> Saludos,
>
>
>
> Dani
>
>
>
> From: MacroPeru@yahoogroups.com [mailto:MacroPeru@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of Oscar Blanco
> Sent: Sunday, December 07, 2008 9:00 AM
> To: Lista Tumi; MACROPERU
> Subject: Macroperu (ECONOMIA) Un mundo feliz keynesiano
>
>
>
>
> Dos apuntes blogueros de Dani Rodrik provenientes de sus "unconventional thoughts on
economic development and globalization", en los que aborda temas como el
funcionamiento del mercantilismo en el paraiso keynesiano en ciernes, la reduccion de la
demanda agregada en dicho mundo feliz, la propuesta de un estimulo fiscal coordinado a
nivel global, el incremento de los aranceles a las importaciones, etc. etc. De todo como en
la Farmacia "Marte". Existe todavia o ahora son las FASA?
>
> A proposito de mundos felices, como marcha la estrategia de Lalo Moron, desde el MEF,
para contrarrestar el impacto de la recesion gringa y de la crisis economica mundial en el
Peru?
>
> Saludos,
> Oscar
>
>
> December 05, 2008
>
>
> Does <http://rodrik.typepad.com/dani_rodriks_weblog/2008/12/does-mercantilism-
work-in-a-keynesian-world..html> mercantilism work in a Keynesian world?
>
>
> Yes it does. And not just in theory, but also in practice.
>
> The evidence comes from the 1930s, and from the work of Ben Bernanke himself (along
with other scholars like Barry Eichengreen). The important finding is that countries that
devalued their currencies by getting off the gold standard were able to recover more
quickly, thanks in part to an increase in their net exports relative to countries that stayed
on gold. Note that a currency depreciation amounts to a policy of combining import
tariffs with export subsidies--hence the mercantilist intent and effect.
>
> Interestingly, Bernanke finds that the increase in net exports came from the increase in
exports, while imports did not decline more than it did in countries remaining on the gold
standard. He speculates that the reason has to do with the increase in income (thanks to
the depreciation) which pushed demand for imports higher and offset the substitution
effects.
>
> I am writing all this partly in response to Tyler Cowen's comment
<http://www.marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2008/12/their-weird-o-
1.html> that any theory that suggests import protection can be a good thing must be a
deeply flawed theory. The experience with currency devaluations during the 1930s shows
that the theory is in fact quite OK.
>
> What the theory does not consider fully, which was rather my point
<http://rodrik.typepad.com/dani_rodriks_weblog/2008/12/some-unpleasant-
keynesian-arithmetic.html> , is that mercantilist policies--Keynesianism in one country--
has adverse effects on others. My net exports can increase only at the expense of yours.
Similarly, the worse thing about Smoot-Hawley was that it led to a vicious cycle of
protectionism everywhere.
>
> So the implication is not that we throw the theory overboard, but that we foresee its
global implications and apply the requisite remedy: a globally coordinated fiscal stimulus,
which requires in turn that we provide the developing countries with the liquidity and
fiscal resources needed to get on board.
>
>
>
> Posted at 12:13 PM | Permalink
<http://rodrik.typepad.com/dani_rodriks_weblog/2008/12/does-mercantilism-work-in-
a-keynesian-world.html> | Comments
<http://rodrik.typepad.com/dani_rodriks_weblog/2008/12/does-mercantilism-work-in-
a-keynesian-world.html#comments> (18) | TrackBack
<http://rodrik.typepad.com/dani_rodriks_weblog/2008/12/does-mercantilism-work-in-
a-keynesian-world.html#trackback> (0)
>
> <http://rodrik.typepad.com/dani_rodriks_weblog/2008/12/does-mercantilism-work-
in-a-keynesian-world..html#trackback>
>
>
>
> December 04, 2008
>
>
> Some <http://rodrik.typepad.com/dani_rodriks_weblog/2008/12/some-unpleasant-
keynesian-arithmetic.html> unpleasant Keynesian arithmetic
>
>
> How much of a boost to economic activity will a fiscal stimulus provide? For those who
believe that we have entered a Keynesian world of shortage of aggregate demand--me
included--the answer depends on the Keynesian multiplier. The size of this multiplier
depends in turn on three things in particular, the marginal propensity to consume (c), the
marginal tax rate (t), and the marginal propensity to import (m). If c=0.8, t=0.2, and
m=0.2, the Keynesian multiplier is 1.8 (=1/(1-c(1-t)+m)). A $1 trillion fiscal stimulus
would increase GDP by $1.8 trillion.
>
> Now suppose that we had a way to raise the multiplier by more than half, from 1.8 to
2.8. The same fiscal stimulus would now produce an increase in GDP of $2.8 trillion--
quite a difference. Nice deal if you can get it.
>
> In fact you can. It is pretty easy to increase the multiplier; just raise import tariffs by
enough so that the marginal propensity to import out of income is reduced substantially
(to zero if you want the multiplier to go all the way to 2.8). Yes, yes, import protection is
inefficient and not a very neighborly thing to do--but should we really care if the
alternative is significantly lower growth and higher unemployment? More to the point, will
Obama and his advisers care?
>
> Being the open economy that it is, I fear that the U.S. will have to confront this dilemma
sooner or later. In an environment where the dollar has already appreciated against the
Euro and even more significantly against emerging market currencies, fiscal stimulus here
will produce an even larger current account deficit. If American consumers decide to
spend 40 cents of a dollar of additional income on cheap imports from China and other
foreign countries, the multiplier will be a mere 1.3. How long will it take before
politicians of all stripes cry foul over the leakage through the trade account and the "gift to
foreigners" that this represents? And they will have Keynesian logic on their side.
>
> The way out of this dilemma is to get the rest of the world to engage in fiscal expansion
at the same time--so that the gift is returned. The good news here is that China is
playing along and hopefully the Europeans will too (if they can convince Germans to get
over their weird obsession with fiscal conservatism).
>
> But most developing nations are constrained by weak fiscal fundamentals. They cannot
play the fiscal stimulus game because their borrowing capacity is limited: external finance
is drying up and domestic financial markets cannot absorb the increase in public debt
without a sharp rise in interest rates.
>
> So unless we come up with a solution to the credit constraints in the developing world,
we are going to either endanger the effectiveness of Keynesian policies in the U.S. and
other advanced nations, or risk a sharp increase in protectionism. Not a pleasant choice.
>
> Two solutions suggest themselves. One is to enlarge global liquidity by creating new
SDR allocations and handing them over to developing nations to increase their spending.
The other is to institute a Tobin tax on foreign currency transactions and pass the
proceeds on to the developing nations.
>
> Exceptional times, exceptional measures.
>
>
>
> <http://www.bustedtees.com/shirt/vivalaevolucion/male>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
<http://7.media.bustedtees.com/bustedtees/mf/9/7/bustedtees.d17acda91cc7d8f810fd
e057d909e98b.jpg>
>

__._,_.___

Messages in this topic (3) Reply (via web post) | Start a new topic

Messages | Links | Polls | Members | Calendar

MARKETPLACE

---

From kitchen basics to easy recipes - join the Group from Kraft Foods

Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch format to Traditional
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

Recent Activity

•  1
  New Members

Visit Your Group

Best of Y! Groups

Discover groups

that are the best

of their class.

Y! Groups blog

the best source

for the latest

scoop on Groups.

Yahoo! Groups

w/ John McEnroe

Join the All-Bran

Day 10 Club.

.

__,_._,___