You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
* Tom's Aug 19 edits of calvo_ml lecture
* Tom's Aug 20 edits of two lectures on calvo model
---------
Co-authored-by: thomassargent30 <[email protected]>
Copy file name to clipboardExpand all lines: lectures/calvo.md
+33-29Lines changed: 33 additions & 29 deletions
Display the source diff
Display the rich diff
Original file line number
Diff line number
Diff line change
@@ -38,7 +38,7 @@ In addition to what's in Anaconda, this lecture will need the following librarie
38
38
This lecture describes several linear-quadratic versions of a model that Guillermo Calvo {cite}`Calvo1978` used to illustrate the **time inconsistency** of optimal government
39
39
plans.
40
40
41
-
Like Chang {cite}`chang1998credible`, we use the models as a laboratory in which to explore consequences of timing protocols for government decision making.
41
+
Like Chang {cite}`chang1998credible`, we use these models as laboratories in which to explore consequences of timing protocols for government decision making.
42
42
43
43
The models focus attention on intertemporal tradeoffs between
44
44
@@ -71,7 +71,11 @@ We specify model fundamentals in ways that allow us to use
71
71
linear-quadratic discounted dynamic programming to compute an optimal government
72
72
plan under each of our timing protocols.
73
73
74
-
In addition to what's in Anaconda, this lecture will need the following libraries:
74
+
A sister lecture {doc}`calvo_machine_learn` studies some of the same models but does not use dynamic programming.
75
+
76
+
Instead it uses a **machine learning** approach that does not explicitly recognize the recursive structure structure of the Ramsey problem that Chang {cite}`chang1998credible` saw and that we exploit in this lecture.
77
+
78
+
In addition to what's in Anaconda, this lecture will use the following libraries:
75
79
76
80
```{code-cell} ipython3
77
81
:tags: [hide-output]
@@ -90,7 +94,7 @@ import pandas as pd
90
94
from IPython.display import display, Math
91
95
```
92
96
93
-
## Model components
97
+
## Model Components
94
98
95
99
There is no uncertainty.
96
100
@@ -224,7 +228,7 @@ $$ (eq_old5a)
224
228
The "bliss level" of real balances is $\frac{u_1}{u_2}$ and the inflation rate that attains
225
229
it is $-\frac{u_1}{u_2 \alpha}$.
226
230
227
-
## Friedman's optimal rate of deflation
231
+
## Friedman's Optimal Rate of Deflation
228
232
229
233
According to {eq}`eq_old5a`, the "bliss level" of real balances is $\frac{u_1}{u_2}$ and the inflation rate that attains it is
230
234
@@ -247,9 +251,9 @@ where $\theta^*$ is given by equation {eq}`eq:Friedmantheta`.
247
251
248
252
To deduce this recommendation, Milton Friedman assumed that the taxes that government must impose in order to acquire money at rate $\mu_t$ do not distort economic decisions.
249
253
250
-
- for example, the government imposes lump sum taxes that distort no decisions by private agents
254
+
- for example, perhaps the government can impose lump sum taxes that distort no decisions by private agents
251
255
252
-
## Calvo's perturbation of optimal deflation rate
256
+
## Calvo's Distortion of Friedman's optimal Deflation Rate
253
257
254
258
The starting point of Calvo {cite}`Calvo1978` and Chang {cite}`chang1998credible`
255
259
is that such lump sum taxes are not available.
@@ -353,7 +357,7 @@ A theory of government
353
357
decisions will make $\vec \mu$ endogenous, i.e., a theoretical *output* instead of an *input*.
354
358
355
359
356
-
## Intertemporal structure
360
+
## Intertemporal Structure
357
361
358
362
Criterion function {eq}`eq_old7` and the constraint system {eq}`eq_old4` exhibit the following
359
363
structure:
@@ -374,7 +378,7 @@ We'll study outcomes under a Ramsey timing protocol.
374
378
375
379
We'll also study outcomes under other timing protocols.
376
380
377
-
## Four timing protocols
381
+
## Four Timing Protocols
378
382
379
383
We consider four models of government policy making that differ in
380
384
@@ -429,7 +433,7 @@ We'll discuss that topic later in this lecture.
429
433
430
434
We'll begin with the timing protocol associated with a Ramsey plan.
431
435
432
-
## A Ramsey planner
436
+
## A Ramsey Planner
433
437
434
438
Here we consider a Ramsey planner that chooses
435
439
$\{\mu_t, \theta_t\}_{t=0}^\infty$ to maximize {eq}`eq_old7`
@@ -592,7 +596,7 @@ $$
592
596
\theta_0 = \theta_0^R = - \frac{P_{21}}{P_{22}}
593
597
$$
594
598
595
-
### Representation of Ramsey plan
599
+
## Representation of Ramsey Plan
596
600
597
601
The preceding calculations indicate that we can represent a Ramsey plan
598
602
$\vec \mu$ recursively with the following system created in the spirit of Chang {cite}`chang1998credible`:
@@ -660,7 +664,7 @@ Variation of $ \vec \mu^R, \vec \theta^R, \vec v^R $ over time are symptoms o
660
664
equation {eq}`eq_old3`.
661
665
662
666
663
-
### Digression on timeless perspective
667
+
## Digression on Timeless Perspective
664
668
665
669
As our subsequent calculations will verify, $ \vec \mu^R, \vec \theta^R, \vec v^R $ are each monotone sequences that are bounded below and converge from above to limiting values.
666
670
@@ -698,7 +702,7 @@ that, relative to a Ramsey plan, alter either
698
702
- the timing protocol and/or
699
703
- assumptions about how government decision makers think their decisions affect the representative agent's beliefs about future government decisions
700
704
701
-
## Constrained-to-constant-growth-rate Ramsey plan
705
+
## Constrained-to-Constant-Growth-Rate Ramsey Plan
702
706
703
707
We now describe a model in which we restrict the Ramsey planner's choice set.
704
708
@@ -745,7 +749,7 @@ $$ (eq:vcrformula)
745
749
government in order eventually to highlight the time-variation of
746
750
$\mu_t$ that is a telltale sign of a Ramsey plan's **time inconsistency**.
747
751
748
-
## Markov perfect governments
752
+
## Markov Perfect Governments
749
753
750
754
We now describe yet another timing protocol.
751
755
@@ -845,7 +849,7 @@ Under the Markov perfect timing protocol
845
849
* we equate $\mu_t = \mu$ only *after* we have computed a time $t$ government's first-order condition for $\mu_t$.
846
850
847
851
(compute_lq)=
848
-
## Outcomes under three timing protocols
852
+
## Outcomes under Three Timing Protocols
849
853
850
854
We want to compare outcome sequences $\{ \theta_t,\mu_t \}$ under three timing protocols associated with
851
855
@@ -1148,7 +1152,7 @@ In the above graph, notice that $\theta^* < \theta_\infty^R < \theta^{CR} < \the
1148
1152
In some subsequent calculations, we'll use our Python code to study how gaps between
1149
1153
these outcome vary depending on parameters such as the cost parameter $c$ and the discount factor $\beta$.
1150
1154
1151
-
### Ramsey planner's value function
1155
+
### Ramsey Planner's Value Function
1152
1156
1153
1157
The next code plots the Ramsey Planner's value function $J(\theta)$ as well as the value function
1154
1158
of a constrained Ramsey planner who must choose a constant
@@ -1493,7 +1497,7 @@ in interesting ways.
1493
1497
1494
1498
We leave it to the reader to explore consequences of other constellations of parameter values.
1495
1499
1496
-
### Time inconsistency of Ramsey plan
1500
+
### Time Inconsistency of Ramsey Plan
1497
1501
1498
1502
The variation over time in $\vec \mu$ chosen by the Ramsey planner
1499
1503
is a symptom of time inconsistency.
@@ -1511,7 +1515,7 @@ is a symptom of time inconsistency.
1511
1515
A constrained-to-constant-$\mu$ Ramsey plan is time consistent by construction. So is a Markov perfect plan.
1512
1516
```
1513
1517
1514
-
### Implausibility of Ramsey plan
1518
+
### Implausibility of Ramsey Plan
1515
1519
1516
1520
In settings in which governments actually choose sequentially, many economists
1517
1521
regard a time inconsistent plan as implausible because of the incentives to
@@ -1526,7 +1530,7 @@ economists.
1526
1530
1527
1531
The *no incentive to deviate from the plan* property is what makes the Markov perfect equilibrium concept attractive.
1528
1532
1529
-
### Ramsey plan strikes back
1533
+
### Ramsey Plan Strikes Back
1530
1534
1531
1535
Research by Abreu {cite}`Abreu`, Chari and Kehoe {cite}`chari1990sustainable`
1532
1536
{cite}`stokey1989reputation`, and Stokey {cite}`Stokey1991` discovered conditions under which a Ramsey plan can be rescued from the complaint that it is not credible.
@@ -1537,7 +1541,7 @@ it that can serve to deter deviations.
1537
1541
1538
1542
We turn to such theories of *sustainable plans* next.
1539
1543
1540
-
## A fourth model of government decision making
1544
+
## A Fourth Model of Government Decision Making
1541
1545
1542
1546
In this model
1543
1547
@@ -1554,7 +1558,7 @@ In this model
1554
1558
- at each $t$, the government chooses $\mu_t$ to maximize
1555
1559
a continuation discounted utility.
1556
1560
1557
-
### Government decisions
1561
+
### Government Decisions
1558
1562
1559
1563
$\vec \mu$ is chosen by a sequence of government
1560
1564
decision makers, one for each $t \geq 0$.
@@ -1584,7 +1588,7 @@ for each $t \geq 0$:
1584
1588
expect an associated $\theta_0^A$ for $t+1$. Here $\vec \mu^A = \{\mu_j^A \}_{j=0}^\infty$ is
1585
1589
an alternative government plan to be described below.
1586
1590
1587
-
### Temptation to deviate from plan
1591
+
### Temptation to Deviate from Plan
1588
1592
1589
1593
The government's one-period return function $s(\theta,\mu)$
1590
1594
described in equation {eq}`eq_old6` above has the property that for all
@@ -1610,7 +1614,7 @@ If the government at $t$ is to resist the temptation to raise its
1610
1614
current payoff, it is only because it forecasts adverse consequences that
1611
1615
its setting of $\mu_t$ would bring for continuation government payoffs via alterations in the private sector's expectations.
1612
1616
1613
-
## Sustainable or credible plan
1617
+
## Sustainable or Credible Plan
1614
1618
1615
1619
We call a plan $\vec \mu$ **sustainable** or **credible** if at
1616
1620
each $t \geq 0$ the government chooses to confirm private
@@ -1645,7 +1649,7 @@ But Dilip Abreu showed how to render manageable the number of plans that must be
1645
1649
1646
1650
The key is an object called a **self-enforcing** plan.
1647
1651
1648
-
### Abreu's self-enforcing plan
1652
+
### Abreu's Self-Enforcing Plan
1649
1653
1650
1654
A plan $\vec \mu^A$ (here the superscipt $A$ is for Abreu) is said to be **self-enforcing** if
1651
1655
@@ -1710,7 +1714,7 @@ agents' expectation.
1710
1714
We shall use a construction featured in Abreu ({cite}`Abreu`) to construct a
1711
1715
self-enforcing plan with low time $0$ value.
1712
1716
1713
-
### Abreu's carrot-stick plan
1717
+
### Abreu's Carrot-Stick Plan
1714
1718
1715
1719
Abreu ({cite}`Abreu`) invented a way to create a self-enforcing plan with a low
1716
1720
initial value.
@@ -1745,7 +1749,7 @@ $$
1745
1749
1746
1750
For an appropriate $T_A$, this plan can be verified to be self-enforcing and therefore credible.
1747
1751
1748
-
### Example of self-enforcing plan
1752
+
### Example of Self-Enforcing Plan
1749
1753
1750
1754
The following example implements an Abreu stick-and-carrot plan.
### Recursive representation of a sustainable plan
1868
+
### Recursive Representation of a Sustainable Plan
1865
1869
1866
1870
We can represent a sustainable plan recursively by taking the
1867
1871
continuation value $v_t$ as a state variable.
@@ -1892,7 +1896,7 @@ depends on whether the government at $t$ confirms the representative agent's
1892
1896
expectations by setting $\mu_t$ equal to the recommended value
1893
1897
$\hat \mu_t$, or whether it disappoints those expectations.
1894
1898
1895
-
## Whose plan is it?
1899
+
## Whose Plan is It?
1896
1900
1897
1901
A credible government plan $\vec \mu$ plays multiple roles.
1898
1902
@@ -1908,7 +1912,7 @@ the action that it wants.
1908
1912
1909
1913
An argument in favor of the *simply confirm* interpretation is gathered from staring at the key inequality {eq}`eq_old100a` that defines a credible policy.
1910
1914
1911
-
## Comparison of equilibrium values
1915
+
## Comparison of Equilibrium Values
1912
1916
1913
1917
We have computed plans for
1914
1918
@@ -1946,7 +1950,7 @@ These include
1946
1950
- a better plan -- possibly one that attains values associated with
1947
1951
Ramsey plan -- that is not self-enforcing.
1948
1952
1949
-
## Note on dynamic programming squared
1953
+
## Note on Dynamic Programming Squared
1950
1954
1951
1955
The theory deployed in this lecture is an application of what we nickname **dynamic programming squared**.
0 commit comments