Search

This paper builds a two-country model with differential productivity and financial frictions to quantitatively account for the recent increase in the U.S. current account deficit. An influential literature says that as U.S. productivity surged, capital was attracted to the United States to take advantage of the high returns to investment. We show, however, that when we include emerging Asia, the gap in productivity growth between the United States and the rest of the world cannot explain the U.S. current account deficits, especially since 2000. This is because on a gross domestic product-weighted basis, the rest of the world actually had higher productivity growth during this period; and standard macroeconomic models would predict an outflow of funds from the United States to the rest of the world, and a consequent narrowing of the U.S. current account deficit. This paper shows that greater financial integration abroad can explain this anomaly. However, we still cannot explain why U.S. per capita output growth has been so low, despite the large inflow of capital.IMF Staff Papers (2009) 56, 655–682. doi:10.1057/imfsp.2009.4; published online 31 March 2009 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The purpose of this paper is to analyze the financial turmoil of the US subprime loan crisis of mid-Noughties and to compare it with the Japanese asset bubble of late 1980s. While examining the two crises, it compares the monetary policies of both countries, focusing on the excess liquidity and expansion of bank loans that were seen. This paper develops several bubble indicators, including the ratio of real estate loans to total loans, the loan-to-GDP ratio, and housing affordability. In order to develop these indicators, it is necessary to compare banking behavior in both Japan and the United States, as banks in both countries were making loans beyond the point of profit maximization. Property prices and monetary policy in both countries influenced banking behavior significantly. The bubble indicators developed in this paper can be used as early warning indicators for future bubbles. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Genuine Progress Indicator (GPI) was designed to reveal the economic, social, and environmental trade-offs associated with conventional economic growth as traditionally measured by Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Although originally designed for use at the national scale, an interest has developed in the United States in a state-level uptake of the GPI to inform and guide policy. This study presents the first fifty-state estimate for U.S. GPI in order to address questions over its design, implementation, and ultimate potential as a tool to guide state-level economic policy. Following a review of the current state of analysis and critique of GPI, we provide an overview of methodology and database development. Results are then presented, including discussion of lessons learned through a fifty-state application. The paper concludes with suggestions for further research and next steps to consolidating a consistent methodology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper presents evidence of a non-linear relationship between real GDP growth and oil price changes for the US economy. We also argue that this non-linearity is not merely due to the use of data from the mid-1980s onwards, as most authors, so far, seem to believe. In fact, we find the existence of non-linearity with the use of data earlier than 1984, and even before 1977. Furthermore, we question that the non-linear transformations of oil prices proposed in the literature are the most appropriate ones for reflecting such non-linearity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article develops a growth-based regionalisation of the United States using both principal components and cluster analyses to endogenously sort states into regional transition clubs with somewhat uniform annual rates of per capita real GSP growth in the period 1977–2004. I correlate the principal components with annual growth in per capita real GDP and assess spatial dependencies in the identified transition clubs. Growth variability in the transition clubs is compared with growth variability in BEA and Census regions. Results show a large Coastal transition club that contains most of the New England, Middle Atlantic, and South Atlantic census regions. California, Minnesota, and Arizona belong to this grouping. A second growth transition club titled Eastern Interior groups most of the states in the East North Central and the East South Central census regions. A Western Interior region groups states in the southern Great Plains. Coefficients of variation show that these three large interstate groupings grow more uniformly compared with associated census and BEA regions. Growth in western states is idiosyncratic. Most western states group with one or two related states, California and Arizona associate with the Coastal club, Nevada does not pigeonhole well with other states, and Alaska's annual growth trajectory is unique. Este artículo desarrolla una regionalización de los Estados Unidos basada en crecimiento usando componentes principales y análisis de cluster para agrupar los estados en grupos de transición regional según tasas anuales de crecimiento más o menos uniformes en el producto estatal bruto (GSP) real per capita en el periodo 1977–2004. Correlaciono los componentes principales con el crecimiento anual en el producto interior bruto (GDP) real per capita y evalúo dependencias espaciales en los grupos de transición identificados. La variabilidad de crecimiento en los grupos de transición se compara con la variabilidad de crecimiento en regiones BEA (Bureau of Economic Analysis) y Censuales. Los resultados muestran un grupo de transición grande en la Costa que contiene la mayoría de regiones censuales de New England, Atlántico Medio, y Atlántico Sur. California, Minnesota, y Arizona pertenecen a este grupo. Un Segundo grupo de transición de crecimiento llamado Interior Este aglutina la mayoría de estados de las regiones censuales Central Norte Oriental y Central Sur Oriental. Una región Interior Occidental agrupa los estados de las Grandes Llanuras del Sur. Los coeficientes de variación muestran que estos tres grandes grupos interestatales crecen más uniformemente en comparación con las regiones censuales y BEA asociadas. El crecimiento en los estados occidentales es idiosincrásico. La mayoría de los estados occidentales se agrupan con uno o dos estados relacionados, California y Arizona se asocian con el grupo de la Costa, Nevada no se clasifica bien con ningún otro estado, y la trayectoria de crecimiento anual de Alaska es única. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article analysis research paper about the effects of estimated macroeconomics to the federal reserve's large-scale treasury program. It states that the authors apply a set of model to attempt setting apart the effects that the program may have on interest rates, employment rates, and real spending gross domestic product (GDP). Moreover, it notes that the Boston model suggests that it will require two years for the lagged impact to be fully actualized in the U.S. economy.