{"title":"Inflation, Financial Markets, and Capital Formation","authors":"Sangmok Choi, B. Smith, J. Boyd","doi":"10.20955/R.78.9-35","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This explanation has been articulated in a number of recent papers. See, for example, Azariadis and Smith (forthcoming), Boyd and Smith (forthcoming), and Schreft and Smith (forthcoming and 1994). A consensus among economists seems to be that high rates of inflation cause \" problems, \" not just for some individuals, but for aggregate economic performance. There is much less agreement about what these problems are and how they arise. We propose to explain how inflation adversely affects an economy by arguing that high inflation rates tend to exacerbate a number of financial market frictions. In doing so, inflation interferes with the provision of investment capital, as well as its allocation. 1 Such interference is then detrimental to long-run capital formation and to real activity. Moreover, high enough rates of inflation are typically accompanied by highly variable inflation and by variability in rates of return to saving on all kinds of financial instruments. We argue that, by exacerbating various financial market frictions, high enough rates of inflation force investors' returns to display this kind of variability. It seems difficult then to prevent the resulting variability in returns from being transmitted into real activity. Unfortunately, for our understanding of these phenomena, the effects of permanent increases in the inflation rate for long-run activity seem to be quite complicated and to depend strongly on the initial level of the inflation rate. For example, Bullard and Keating (forthcoming) find that a permanent, policy-induced increase in the rate of inflation raises the long-run level of real activity for economies whose initial rate of inflation is relatively low. For economies experiencing moderate initial rates of inflation, the same kind of change in inflation seems to have no significant effect on long-run real activity. However, for economies whose initial inflation rates are fairly high, further increases in inflation significantly reduce the long-run level of output. Any successful theory of how inflation affects real activity must account for these nonmonotonicities. Along the same lines, Bruno and Easterly (1995) demonstrate that a number of economies have experienced sustained inflations of 20 percent to 30 percent without suffering any apparently major adverse consequences. However, once the rate of inflation exceeds some critical level (which Bruno and Easterly estimate to be about 40 percent), significant declines occur in the level of real activity. This seems consistent with the results of Bullard and Keating. Evidence is also accumulating that inflation adversely affects …","PeriodicalId":307845,"journal":{"name":"Handbook of Monetary Policy","volume":"128 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1996-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"63","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Handbook of Monetary Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.20955/R.78.9-35","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 63
Abstract
This explanation has been articulated in a number of recent papers. See, for example, Azariadis and Smith (forthcoming), Boyd and Smith (forthcoming), and Schreft and Smith (forthcoming and 1994). A consensus among economists seems to be that high rates of inflation cause " problems, " not just for some individuals, but for aggregate economic performance. There is much less agreement about what these problems are and how they arise. We propose to explain how inflation adversely affects an economy by arguing that high inflation rates tend to exacerbate a number of financial market frictions. In doing so, inflation interferes with the provision of investment capital, as well as its allocation. 1 Such interference is then detrimental to long-run capital formation and to real activity. Moreover, high enough rates of inflation are typically accompanied by highly variable inflation and by variability in rates of return to saving on all kinds of financial instruments. We argue that, by exacerbating various financial market frictions, high enough rates of inflation force investors' returns to display this kind of variability. It seems difficult then to prevent the resulting variability in returns from being transmitted into real activity. Unfortunately, for our understanding of these phenomena, the effects of permanent increases in the inflation rate for long-run activity seem to be quite complicated and to depend strongly on the initial level of the inflation rate. For example, Bullard and Keating (forthcoming) find that a permanent, policy-induced increase in the rate of inflation raises the long-run level of real activity for economies whose initial rate of inflation is relatively low. For economies experiencing moderate initial rates of inflation, the same kind of change in inflation seems to have no significant effect on long-run real activity. However, for economies whose initial inflation rates are fairly high, further increases in inflation significantly reduce the long-run level of output. Any successful theory of how inflation affects real activity must account for these nonmonotonicities. Along the same lines, Bruno and Easterly (1995) demonstrate that a number of economies have experienced sustained inflations of 20 percent to 30 percent without suffering any apparently major adverse consequences. However, once the rate of inflation exceeds some critical level (which Bruno and Easterly estimate to be about 40 percent), significant declines occur in the level of real activity. This seems consistent with the results of Bullard and Keating. Evidence is also accumulating that inflation adversely affects …
这一解释在最近的一些论文中得到了阐明。例如,参见Azariadis and Smith(即将出版),Boyd and Smith(即将出版),以及Schreft and Smith(即将出版和1994年出版)。经济学家的共识似乎是,高通胀率不仅会给某些人带来“问题”,还会给整体经济表现带来“问题”。对于这些问题是什么以及它们是如何产生的,人们的看法要少得多。我们建议解释通货膨胀对经济的负面影响,认为高通货膨胀率往往会加剧一些金融市场摩擦。在这样做的过程中,通货膨胀干扰了投资资本的提供及其配置。这种干预对长期资本形成和实际活动是有害的。此外,足够高的通货膨胀率通常伴随着高度可变的通货膨胀率和各种金融工具的储蓄回报率的可变性。我们认为,通过加剧各种金融市场摩擦,足够高的通胀率迫使投资者的回报表现出这种可变性。因此,似乎很难防止由此产生的回报可变性转化为实际活动。不幸的是,从我们对这些现象的理解来看,通货膨胀率的持续上升对长期经济活动的影响似乎相当复杂,而且在很大程度上取决于通货膨胀率的初始水平。例如,布拉德和基廷(即将出版)发现,对于初始通胀率相对较低的经济体来说,由政策导致的通货膨胀率的永久性上升,会提高其长期实际活动水平。对于初始通胀率适中的经济体,同样的通胀变化似乎对长期实际经济活动没有显著影响。然而,对于初始通货膨胀率相当高的经济体,通货膨胀的进一步增加会显著降低长期产出水平。任何成功的关于通货膨胀如何影响实际经济活动的理论,都必须考虑到这些非单调性。沿着同样的思路,布鲁诺和伊斯特利(1995)证明,许多经济体经历了20%至30%的持续通货膨胀,而没有遭受任何明显的重大不利后果。然而,一旦通货膨胀率超过某个临界水平(布鲁诺和伊斯特利估计约为40%),实际活动水平就会出现显著下降。这似乎与布拉德和基廷的结果一致。越来越多的证据表明,通货膨胀对……