There is a growing literature on what exactly the Quantitative Easing has achieved. As we are going see, there is an agreement that QE has led to both higher output and higher inflation, however, there is less agreement on the magnitude and persistence of these effects.
The Fed has recently announced that it will renounce to Quantitative Easing policy. Alan Blinder has a very interesting material that explains pretty well the rationales for why has the FED chosen this approach, how was implemented and what are the exit strategies.
Quite surprisingly, although there is so much talk about the liquidity trap and its close concept, the zero lower bound (see the definition of liquidity trap), the criticism of these concepts is rather thin. This is even more puzzling since the liquidity trap concept is known for a long time, ever since Keynes proposed it (Rhodes did not find any mention of it in the work By Keynes).
After the rather successful concept of BRIC economies, Goldman Sachs came in 2005 with another group of potential fast growing economies, the so called Next Eleven or N11. The group of the BRIC economies is quite known (Brazil, Russia, India and China) and the concept has been successfully adopted by politicians, researchers and media. However, this N11 idea has had until now a harder way to be generally adopted.
If you read opinions like the one by James Bullard (current president of the Federal Reserve of St. Louis), you might think that Quantitative Easing has been a succes and it has shown how monetary policy can be effective even when the interest rate is near zero.
The literature on exchange rate forecasting and the out of sample evaluation has basically started with the work by Meese and Rogoff (1983). They were the first to show that the basic random walk model outperforms other economic models of exchange rate in terms of forecasting.
This post is dedicated to a rather different topic than what has been discussed until now. It deals with scholarly publishing in the field of academic macroeconomics.
I discussed in a previous post about the failure of austerity measures in Portugal. Here, I would like to take a few steps back and look better at the theoretical foundations of austerity. Without being a theoretical presentation of austerity, this post rather discusses the empirical evidences regarding the effects of austerity measures.
To many, this is not news. However, given the persistence of IMF and other international institutions to insist with new austerity measures, it is still surprising.