This PDF contains only the abstract.

It is commonly asserted that with excess plant capacity, expansive policy stimulates output and lowers unemployment without substantially boosting inflation, while at full capacity most of the impact is on inflation. This assertion is critically examined. First, two common definitions of capacity--engineering and economic—are examined and found to be nebulous. The concepts of supply and demand are older, but better. Full capacity is reinterpreted as points where the supply curve is steep and excess capacity as points where it is fairly flat. Then the "Keynesian" model in which stimulative policy shifts only the demand curve is compared to the "classical" model where stimulative policy shifts both demand and supply curves. For the former model the assertion on capacity utilization is correct, while in the latter it is not. Empirical tests are performed to determine whether measured capacity utilization is useful for predicting inflation. The tests are ambiguous, but certainly do not strongly favor capacity utilization.

In "Open Market Operations in a Model of Regulated, Insured Intermediaries" [JPE, forthcoming] we show that once-for-all open market purchases need not be inflationary. Here we show this result can carry over to various stationary accommodation rules given stochastic deficits. In particular, the inflationary and deflationary effects of stochastic deficits are not offset by, nor welfare improved by, a monetary policy that leans toward monetarism. Moreover, a constant money growth rule is not in the class of stationary policies given the kind of stochastic deficit we analyze, which by itself is a serious indictment of the monetarist proposal.

A model is presented in which demand deposits backed by fractional currency reserves and public insurance can be beneficial. The model uses Samuelson's pure consumption-loans model. The case for demand deposits, reserves, and deposit insurance rests on costs of illiquidity and incomplete information. The effect of deposit insurance depends upon how, and at what cost, the government meets its insurer's obligation--something which is not specified in practice. It remains possible that demand deposits and deposit insurance are a distortion, and reserve requirements serve only to limit the size of this distortion.