Research Database

This paper examines entrepreneurship in order to analyze, first, the degree to which the opportunity to start or own a business affects the household's saving behavior and the implication of this behavior for the distribution of wealth and, second, the relationship between the extent of entrepreneurship in the economy and socioeconomic mobility, that is, the movement of families across wealth classes over time. First, a number of stylized facts based on data from the Panel Study of Income Dynamics (PSID) and the Survey of Consumer Finances (SCF) are outlined. They show relevant differences in asset holdings and wealth mobility between entrepreneurs—economic agents that own a business—and workers. Second, a dynamic general equilibrium model of income and wealth distribution with an explicit entrepreneurial choice is developed. The model is calibrated to match the key features of the data, and it is then used to obtain an estimate of the quantitative importance for capital accumulation and wealth concentration of households that undertake entrepreneurial activities, via their different microeconomic behavior. Through the modeling of the entrepreneurial activities, the model economy developed in this study generates a stationary distribution of wealth with a degree of concentration that accounts for the inequality observed in the U.S. economy. The model also successfully replicates the main patterns of socioeconomic mobility in which entrepreneurs experience higher upward mobility than workers.

This paper uses a simple, graphical approach to analyze what happens to commodity prices and economic welfare when futures markets are introduced into an economy. It concludes that these markets do not necessarily make prices more or less stable. It also concludes that, contrary to common belief, whatever happens to commodity prices is not necessarily related to what happens to the economic welfare of market participants: even when futures markets reduce the volatility of prices, some people can be made worse off. These conclusions come from a series of models that differ in their assumptions about the primary function of futures markets, the structure of the industries involved, and the tastes and technologies of the market participants.

This paper investigates interest rate determination and evolutions of nominal and real variables in alternative monetary, general equilibrium models. Three approaches to characterizing monetary transactions services are utilized: a cash-in-advance approach, in which agents face cash constraints on goods purchases; a transaction-cost approach, in which goods are sacrificed in transactions; and a shopping-time approach, in which leisure is sacrificed in transactions. Models which employ these approaches are used to examine liquidity effects of monetary innovations on interest rates and real activity.

Includes title, "Banking Trends in the Rural Communities of Minnesota 1913-1929 pt.2"

We study the ex-dividend day behavior of Japanese stock prices for the period 1983–87. We find that, contrary to previous findings, prices of ex-day stocks drop by nearly the full amount of the dividend. However, ex-day stocks shows an abnormal return. Also, for the many ex-dividend day stocks that also go ex-rights on the same ex-day, we find that the return is on average higher than that for stocks without rights issues. We thus conclude that the ex-day behavior of Japanese stocks are qualitatively similar to that of U.S. stocks.

This article describes a debate about the validity of the quantity theory of money and offers further evidence against it. The evidence is primarily from the North American colonies of Virginia, New York, and Pennsylvania and regards the issue of measuring the money supply. Studies have shown that changes in colonial money and inflation are inconsistent with the quantity theory. Some have argued that those studies measure money wrong: specie belongs in the measure because the colonies were on a fixed exchange rate system with Britain; changes in colonial paper money were offset by specie flows. When specie is counted, the quantity theory stands. This study responds with evidence that the critics are wrong: the colonies had no such fixed exchange rate regime, and movements in the stock of colonial paper currency cannot have been offset by specie flows.

This article contends that the various measures of the contribution of technology shocks to business cycles calculated using the real business cycle modeling method are not corroborated. The article focuses on a different and much simpler method for calculating the contribution of technology shocks, which takes account of facts concerning the productivity/labor input correlation and the variability of labor input relative to output. Under several standard assumptions, the method predicts that the contribution of technology shocks must be large (at least 78 percent), that the labor supply elasticity need not be large to explain the observed fluctuation in labor input, and that the contribution of technology shocks can be estimated fairly precisely. The method also estimates that the contribution of technology shocks could be lower than 78 percent under alternative assumptions.

The standard real business cycle model fails to adequately account for two facts found in the U.S. data: the fact that hours worked fluctuate considerably more than productivity and the fact that the correlation between hours worked and productivity is close to zero. In this paper, in a unified framework, the authors describe and analyze four extensions of the standard model, by introducing nonseparable leisure, indivisible labor, government spending, and household production.