The paper argues that applicable macro is high frequency macro and the data generating process is therefore to be modeled in continuous time. It exemplifies this with a misuse of a 2D period model of monetarist type which becomes extremely overshooting, allowing for routes to “chaos,” when iterated at low frequencies. Instead of such low frequency procedures, we augment the model by a Keynesian feedback chain (the real rate of interest channel) to introduce local instability into the model. We also introduce heterogeneous opinion dynamics into it. The implied 4D dynamics are made bounded thereby, but seem to allow only complex limit cycles, with no transition towards strange attractors anymore. 1. Introduction The next several sections examine the behavior of a variety of models that differ mainly in how they model real and nominal stickiness. … They are formulated in continuous time to avoid the need to use the uninterpretable “one period” delays that plague the discrete time models in this literature [1, p.318]. This quotation can be considered as introducing the objective of this paper in a very pronounced way. We intend to demonstrate in addition to this interpretational riddle that macrodynamic period models are devoid of empirical content if their qualitative features differ from the ones of their continuous time analog. We will use Soliman’s [2] period model in order to demonstrate this from a different angle compared to how it was done in Flaschel and Proa?o [3], but could have used equally well more recent approaches by Brianzoni et al. [4] or Roa et al. [5], and indeed many other papers as well. We have chosen the Soliman paper here, since it makes use of a monetarist baseline model—with an estimated wage Phillips curve—a model type which is known to provide strong point attractors, and so we want to compare it with a Keynesian extension of it. A basic empirical fact in the macrodynamic literature is, see Flaschel and Proa?o [3], that the actual data generating process in macroeconomics (which is generally based on the use of annualized data) is by and large a daily one (and that the data collection frequency is now also much less than a year in the real markets of the economy). This suggests that empirically oriented or estimated macromodels should be iterated with a very short period length as far as actual processes are concerned and will then in general provide the same qualitative answer as their continuous-time analogues. Concerning expectation formation, the data collection process is however of importance and may give rise to certain
References
[1]
C. Sims, “Stickiness,” Carnegie-Rochester Conference Series on Public Policy, vol. 49, pp. 317–356, 1998.
[2]
A. S. Soliman, “Transitions from stable equilibrium points to periodic cycles to chaos in a phillips curve system,” Journal of Macroeconomics, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 139–153, 1996.
[3]
P. Flaschel and C. R. Proa?o, “The j2 status of “chaos” in period macroeconomic models,” Studies in Nonlinear Dynamics and Econometrics, vol. 13, no. 2, article 2, 2009.
[4]
S. Brianzoni, C. Mammana, and E. Michetti, “Complex dynamics in the neoclassical growth model with differential savings and non-constant labor force growth,” Studies in Nonlinear Dynamics and Econometrics, vol. 11, no. 3, article 3, 2007.
[5]
M. J. Roa, F. J. Vazquez, and D. Saura, “Unemployment and economic growth cycles,” Studies in Nonlinear Dynamics and Econometrics, vol. 12, no. 2, article 6, 2008.
[6]
S. Invernizzi and A. Medio, “On lags and chaos in economic dynamic models,” Journal of Mathematical Economics, vol. 20, no. 6, pp. 521–550, 1991.
[7]
R. G. Lipsey, “The relation between unemployment and the rate of change of money wage rates in the United Kingdom, 1862–1957: a further analysis,” Economiea, vol. 27, pp. 1–31, 1960.
[8]
J. M. Keynes, The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money, Macmillan, New York, NY, USA, 1936.
[9]
A. Medio, “Discrete and continuous-time models of chaotic dynamics in economics,” Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 99–118, 1991.
[10]
M. Charpe, P. Flaschel, F. Hartmann, and R. Veneziani, “Keynesian DSGD (isequilibrium) Modelling: A Basic Model of Real-Financial Market Interactions with Heterogeneous Opinion Dynamics,” IMK working paper 93, 2012.
[11]
C. Chiarella, P. Flaschel, and H. Hung, “Keynesian disequilibrium dynamics: estimated convergence, roads to instability and the emergence of complex business fluctuations,” AUCO Czech Economic Review, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 236–262, 2010.
[12]
P. Flaschel, The Macrodynamics of Capitalism. Elements for a Synthesis of Marx, Keynes and Schumpeter, Springer, Heidelberg, Germany, 2009.
[13]
A. Okun, The Political Economy of Prosperity, The Brookings Institution, 1970.
[14]
M. W. Hirsch and S. Smale, Differential Equations, Dynamical Systems, and Linear Algebra, Academic Press, New York, NY, USA, 1974.
[15]
D. Foley, “On two specifications of asset equilibrium in macro-economic model,” Journal of Political Economy, vol. 83, pp. 305–324, 1975.
[16]
M. Friedman, “The role of monetary policy,” American Economic Review, vol. 58, pp. 1–17, 1968.
[17]
T. Asada, C. Chiarella, P. Flaschel, and R. Franke, Monetary Macrodynamics, Routledge, London, UK, 2010.
[18]
J. Tobin, “Keynesian models of recession and depression,” American Economic Review, vol. 65, pp. 195–202, 1975.
[19]
C. Diks, C. Hommes, V. Panchenko, and R. Weide, “E&F chaos: a user friendly software package for nonlinear economic dynamics,” Computational Economics, vol. 32, no. 1-2, pp. 221–244, 2008.