In several past posts, I’ve been taken to task for using the CBO measure of the output gap (and the associated measure of potential GDP) [0] [1]. Some criticize the false sense of certainty that is provided by the official measures, since they are known to be revised as data comes in. Some criticize the measures on the basis the fact that the statistical methodologies (Hodrick-Prescott, Band-Pass) are divorced from a formal economic model. Some criticize the concept of potential GDP derived from a production function approach (i.e., thinking about the economy as one big production function associated with one big firm…). Arnold Kling‘s recent critique centers upon the idea that output is not homogenous, and we need different types of capital (and by extension labor) when the desired composition of output changes. Yet another — not entirely unrelated — perspective argues that when relative prices change a lot, potential GDP can drop due to technological frictions; Jim provides a cogent discussion of this approach.
More papers on the credit crunch
Links to some interesting papers that I recently read.
House Prices Continue to Slide
House prices continued to tumble in March, according to the Case-Shiller index. Time to see what the futures say (keeping in mind the forecasting capacity of the Case Shiller futures are not well known).
Link to JEC video
The Joint Economic Committee has now posted a video of yesterday’s hearing on oil and the economy. My statement starts at about 11 minutes.
Rising world oil demand and the U.S. economy
This morning, the Joint Economic Committee of the U.S. Congress took up the implications of rising world oil demand for the U.S. economy. I was invited to participate along with Daniel Yergin, Co-Founder and Chairman of Cambridge Energy Research Associates.
I have some more discussion at the Washington Post as well as the following links: