'...4WD drivers were almost four times more likely than car drivers to be using a mobile phone, ....[and] using a mobile phone while driving is associated with a fourfold increase in the risk of having an accident..... "Although 4WD vehicles are safer in a crash, their owners may be placing themselves and other road users at increased risk of injury," she said. "They take the risk because they are higher up, they feel they can see better... but the person in a car or the pedestrian on the road has a much worse outcome." ...' |
P.-V. ajoute que:
D'autant plus que les personnes qui roulent en 4x4 sont des personnes qui ont un caractere labil, (extrapolation: le centre de gravite des bagnoles 4x4 est situe plus en hauteur que dans bagnoles normales?) toujours a la recherche de reconnaissance (la recherche se traduit par les 4x4, et la possibilite de pouvoir acceder a des sites qui sont en l'occurence difficilement accessibles aux conducteurs de bagnoles normales) ...chasseurs etc. etc. etc. et le telephone mobile := communication i.e. loop recherche etc. etc. etc.(Players...?)...
Bref, si en plus on la couleur du 4x4 alors 'On aura tout vu' ;)
par Pancho Villa
publié dans :
Gregory Mankiw
Pancho : il est "nouveau keynésien" pour être encore plus précis. Encore un qui n'a pas lu ma formidable (We 're flying high...We 're flying right up to the sky?) présentation des keynésiens, en deux tomes...
NON, NEO-KEYNESIEN...
Neo-Keynesian Economics
Through the 1980s Keynesianism and "classical macro-economics" fell out of fashion as a policy tool, and as a field of study. Instead it was felt that combining economics with behavioral science, game theory and monetary theory were more important areas of study. On the policy level it was the era of Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan, who advocated slashing the size of the non-military government sector. However, beginning in the late 1980s economics began shifting back to a study of macro-economics, and policy makers began to look for means of managing the global financial network, which was increasingly interlinked.
In the 1990s the "uncoupling" of money supply and inflation caused an increasing questioning of the original form of monetarism. The repeated failures of projections for economic recovery in Japan and the United States based on neo-classical synthesis models, as well as the failure of "big bang" marketization in the former Soviet Bloc, have encouraged the recent revival in Keynesian ideas, with particular emphasis on giving the Keynesian macroeconomic analysis theoretically sound foundations in microeconomics. These theories have been called new Keynesian economics. The heart of the new Keynesian view rests on microeconomic models that indicate that nominal wages and prices are "sticky," i.e., do not change easily or quickly with changes in supply and demand, so that quantity adjustment prevails. This is a practice which, according to economist Paul Krugman "never works in theory, but works beautifully in practice." This integration is further spurred by work of other economists which questions rational decision-making in a perfect information environment as a necessity for micro-economic theory. Imperfect decision making such as that investigated by Joseph Stiglitz underlines the importance of management of risk in the economy.
New classical economics relied on the theory of rational expectations to reject Keynesian economics. Most well-known is the critique by Robert Lucas, who argues that rational expectations will defeat any monetary or fiscal policy. But new Keynesians argue that this critique only works if the economy has a unique equilibrium at full employment. Price stickiness means that there are a variety of possible equilibria in the short run, so that rational expectations models do not produce any simple result.
In the end, many macroeconomists have returned to the IS-LM model and the Phillips Curve as a first approximation of how an economy works. New versions of the Phillips Curve, such as the "Triangle Model", allow for stagflation, since the curve can shift due to supply shocks or changes in built-in inflation. In the 1990s, the original ideas of "full employment" had been replaced by the NAIRU theory, sometimes called the "natural rate of unemployment." This theory pointed to the dangers of getting unemployment too low, because accelerating inflation can result. However, it is unclear exactly what the value of the NAIRU is -- or whether it really exists or not. While the Keynesian triumphalism of the 1960s is certainly not due for a revival, Keynesian ideas persist, often used to attain very conservative goals. Many observers find it hard to distinguish the new Keynesianism from old monetarism, except that the latter's emphasis on the money supply has been dropped or downgraded.
For a relatively open economy this simple Keynesianism must be complemented by considerations of foreign exchange markets, exchange rates, and the balance of payments. Also needed is an understanding of issues of long-term growth of potential. The open economy considerations which were the basis of the conservative or neo-liberal revival of policy, were then codified by Keynesian economists.
New Keynesian economics developed partly in response to new classical economics. It strives to provide microeconomic foundations to Keynesian economics by showing how demand management by the government or its central bank can improve efficiency under imperfect markets. The main assumption of New Keynesian economics that distinguishes it from the new classical economics is that wages and prices do not adjust instantly to allow the economy to attain full employment. (This price and wage stickiness is explained using microeconomic theory.) Thus, unemployed resources and non-clearing markets can exist and persist, even when rational expectations apply.
A commonly used explanation that New Keynesians use to explain why prices adjust slowly is “menu costs”. This is saying that the reason firms do not change their prices immediately is due to the costs that they must incur in order to do so. For instance, the cost of making a new catalog, price list, or menu is considered menu costs. Even though such a cost seems minor, New Keynesians explain how it can cause short-run fluctuations. Not only do the firms have to pay to change the price, but there are also externalities that go along with changing prices (Mankiw). As Mankiw describes, a firm that lowers its prices because of a decrease in the money supply will be raising the real income of the customers of that product. This will allow the buyers to purchase more, which will not necessarily be from the firm that lowered their prices. So firms will hesitate before doing so, because they do not want to assist other company’s sales.
NON, NEO-KEYNESIEN...
Neo-Keynesian Economics
Through the 1980s Keynesianism and "classical macro-economics" fell out of fashion as a policy tool, and as a field of study. Instead it was felt that combining economics with behavioral science, game theory and monetary theory were more important areas of study. On the policy level it was the era of Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan, who advocated slashing the size of the non-military government sector. However, beginning in the late 1980s economics began shifting back to a study of macro-economics, and policy makers began to look for means of managing the global financial network, which was increasingly interlinked.
In the 1990s the "uncoupling" of money supply and inflation caused an increasing questioning of the original form of monetarism. The repeated failures of projections for economic recovery in Japan and the United States based on neo-classical synthesis models, as well as the failure of "big bang" marketization in the former Soviet Bloc, have encouraged the recent revival in Keynesian ideas, with particular emphasis on giving the Keynesian macroeconomic analysis theoretically sound foundations in microeconomics. These theories have been called new Keynesian economics. The heart of the new Keynesian view rests on microeconomic models that indicate that nominal wages and prices are "sticky," i.e., do not change easily or quickly with changes in supply and demand, so that quantity adjustment prevails. This is a practice which, according to economist Paul Krugman "never works in theory, but works beautifully in practice." This integration is further spurred by work of other economists which questions rational decision-making in a perfect information environment as a necessity for micro-economic theory. Imperfect decision making such as that investigated by Joseph Stiglitz underlines the importance of management of risk in the economy.
New classical economics relied on the theory of rational expectations to reject Keynesian economics. Most well-known is the critique by Robert Lucas, who argues that rational expectations will defeat any monetary or fiscal policy. But new Keynesians argue that this critique only works if the economy has a unique equilibrium at full employment. Price stickiness means that there are a variety of possible equilibria in the short run, so that rational expectations models do not produce any simple result.
In the end, many macroeconomists have returned to the IS-LM model and the Phillips Curve as a first approximation of how an economy works. New versions of the Phillips Curve, such as the "Triangle Model", allow for stagflation, since the curve can shift due to supply shocks or changes in built-in inflation. In the 1990s, the original ideas of "full employment" had been replaced by the NAIRU theory, sometimes called the "natural rate of unemployment." This theory pointed to the dangers of getting unemployment too low, because accelerating inflation can result. However, it is unclear exactly what the value of the NAIRU is -- or whether it really exists or not. While the Keynesian triumphalism of the 1960s is certainly not due for a revival, Keynesian ideas persist, often used to attain very conservative goals. Many observers find it hard to distinguish the new Keynesianism from old monetarism, except that the latter's emphasis on the money supply has been dropped or downgraded.
For a relatively open economy this simple Keynesianism must be complemented by considerations of foreign exchange markets, exchange rates, and the balance of payments. Also needed is an understanding of issues of long-term growth of potential. The open economy considerations which were the basis of the conservative or neo-liberal revival of policy, were then codified by Keynesian economists.
New Keynesian economics developed partly in response to new classical economics. It strives to provide microeconomic foundations to Keynesian economics by showing how demand management by the government or its central bank can improve efficiency under imperfect markets. The main assumption of New Keynesian economics that distinguishes it from the new classical economics is that wages and prices do not adjust instantly to allow the economy to attain full employment. (This price and wage stickiness is explained using microeconomic theory.) Thus, unemployed resources and non-clearing markets can exist and persist, even when rational expectations apply.
A commonly used explanation that New Keynesians use to explain why prices adjust slowly is “menu costs”. This is saying that the reason firms do not change their prices immediately is due to the costs that they must incur in order to do so. For instance, the cost of making a new catalog, price list, or menu is considered menu costs. Even though such a cost seems minor, New Keynesians explain how it can cause short-run fluctuations. Not only do the firms have to pay to change the price, but there are also externalities that go along with changing prices (Mankiw). As Mankiw describes, a firm that lowers its prices because of a decrease in the money supply will be raising the real income of the customers of that product. This will allow the buyers to purchase more, which will not necessarily be from the firm that lowered their prices. So firms will hesitate before doing so, because they do not want to assist other company’s sales.
par Pancho Villa
publié dans :
Gregory Mankiw
Et comme l'a dit très bien Monsieur Thoma sur son Blog:
'...It would have been nice to hear some of these things voiced when he was Chair of the Council of Economic Advisers...'
En tous les cas, chapeau (In any case, I tip my hat to), Greg:
• #1: This year I will be straight about the budget mess. I know that the federal budget is on an unsustainable path. I know that when the baby-boom generation retires and becomes eligible for Social Security and Medicare, all hell is going to break loose. I know that the choices aren't pretty -- either large cuts in promised benefits or taxes vastly higher than anything ever experienced in U.S. history. I am going to admit these facts to the American people, and I am going to say which choice I favor.
• #2: This year I will be unequivocal in my support of free trade. I am going to stop bashing the Chinese for offering bargains to American consumers. I am going to ask the Bush administration to revoke the textile quotas ... I am going to vote to repeal the antidumping laws... I am going to admit that unilateral disarmament in the trade wars would make the U.S. a richer nation.
• #3: This year I will ask farmers to accept the free market. While I believe the government should provide a safety net for the truly needy, taxpayers shouldn't have to finance handouts to farmers... Farmers should meet the market test as much as anyone else. I will vote to repeal all federal subsidies ...
• #4: This year I will admit that there are some good taxes. Everyone hates taxes, but the government needs to fund its operations, and some taxes can actually do some good in the process. I will tell the American people that a higher tax on gasoline is better at encouraging conservation than are heavy-handed CAFE regulations. ... I will tell people that tolls are a good way to reduce traffic congestion ... I will advocate a carbon tax as the best way to control global warming. Because we may well need to raise more revenue (see resolution no. 1), I'll always be on the lookout for these good taxes.
• #5: This year I will not be tempted to bash the Fed. Ben Bernanke, soon to be the new chairman of the Federal Reserve, will not inherit Alan Greenspan's halo, and so may be a tempting target. But I will resist temptation. ... Difficult as it is, I will hold my tongue.
par Pancho Villa
publié dans :
Gregory Mankiw
