トップPDF chap14 Recent site activity Junji Kageyama's Homepage

14.2 日本の財政 『日本の財政関係資料』： 財務省が発行するパンフレット (HP 上で入手可能 ) • 景気と財政の間にはトレードオフ ( 二律背反 ) があるので、財政のコントロールがむずかしい 14.3 財政の 3 大機能：景気の安定・所得の再分配・社会資本の供給

流動性のわなにおける財政政策と金融政策の効果を、 IS-LM モデルのグラフを用いつつ説明せよ。. 56.[r]

14.4 成長した国・成長している国・貧しい国 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76 14.5 発展を決める要因 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77 14.6 貧困のわな：最貧国が発展しない理由 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77 14.7 発展することによって生じる問題 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77

ある土地から毎期 100 万円の地代が得られる。利子率が 4%のとき、その土地の合理的な値. 段を計算せよ。ただし地代、利子率は将来にわたって一定であるとする。[r]

インフレ (物価上昇) が生じている場合の名目 GDP 成長率と実質 GDP 成長率の関係を示せ。. 好況の際の総需要と潜在 GDP の関係を示せ。.[r]

投資が利子率に対してより弾力的 ( 投資が利子率の変化に対してより大きく反応する ) になったとする。この時、投資と利子. 率のグラフはどうななるか。グラフを書きつつ説明せよ。[r]

6.4 定式化準備：変数一覧 内生変数 ( モデル内で決まる変数 ) ： Y : GDP 、 R: 利子率。小文字の変数は外生変数 ( モデル外で数値が与えられる変数 ) IS ： C : 消費、 I : 投資、 G : 政府支出、 T : 税金、 N X : 純輸出、 EX : 輸出、 IM : 輸入、 a : 基礎消費、 b : 限界消費性向、 m : 限界輸入性向、 i : 基礎投資、 d : 正の定数、 g : 基礎輸出、 n : 正の定数 LM ： M s

明海大学マクロ経済学：影山純二 ( 学生用 ) IS 曲線の導出： 得られた 3 つの条件を 1 つのグラフにまとめる 7.2 貨幣市場の均衡： LM 曲線のグラフ表現 貨幣市場の均衡条件 ( 貨幣需要 = 実質マネーサプライ ) ： L 1 + L 2 = M s

上級ミクロ経済学：影山純二 14.5 クイズ 1. ある土地から毎期 200 万円の地代が得られる。利子率が 4%のとき、その土地の合理的な値 段を計算せよ。ただし地代、利子率は将来にわたって一定であるとする。

実質マネーサプライ： 名目マネーサプライから物価の影響を排除したもの = M s P • 名目マネーサプライで、実際にどれだけモノを購買できるか表す 例： 名目マネーサプライが 20% 、物価が 20% 上がる場合 • 実質マネーサプライは変化しない

depends on educational input in the previous period. Specifically, they are respectively given by y t = ωh t and h t = s β t−1 where ω is wage rate and β < 1 is an efficiency parameter. Sixth, individuals are endowed with income-dependent relative preferences, meaning that in- dividuals are concerned with their own relative standing and that the degree of such concerns is increasing in income. Seventh, parents care about the well-being of their children as well as their own. However, as parents cannot directly observe their children’s utility, I assume that parents perceive children’s utility through empathy. Empathy helps the parents understand the feelings of children but through the parents’ own scale of utility. 1

Updates and Implications (Human Capital Updated Files)』CID Working Paper no.[r]

とする。この時の短期的な変化を IS-LM と AD-AS のグラフを用いて示せ。 2.[r]

This is rooted in the findings in Kageyama （2012） , which empirically showed that the relationships between LEGAP and these happiness indicators are bidirectional. In one direction, LEGAP negatively affects both HPN and HPGAP . An increase in LEGAP raises women ’ s widowhood ratio, and, since widows are, on average, less happy, it lowers women ’ s average happiness, HPN, and HPGAP . We call this effect the “ marital-status composition effect ” as the marital-status composition plays a central role.

) ↑→マネーサプライ (M s ) ↑→利子率 (R) ↓ • 90 年代前半まで、 M b ↑→ M s ↑→ R ↓。貨幣乗数が安定し、理論通り • 90 年代後半以降、 M b ↑→ M s 変わらず、 R は低位安定。流動性の罠へ陥る

バブル崩壊後より 2000 年代前半にかけて銀行の不良債権問題が日本の大きな経済問題だった。その解決法の 1 つとして銀行. 同士の合併が行われた。みずほ銀行、三井住友銀行、三菱東京 UFJ 銀行の母体となった銀行をそれぞれ調べて書け。[r]

and significant. This result suggests that banks’ BCR matters in firms’ investment decisions when firms are productive and thus have higher demand for investment. Using the estimated model, we conduct counterfactual experiments to quantify the effect of capital injections that took place in March 1998 and 1999 in Japan. The counterfactual experiments suggest that the capital injections had a negligible impact on the average investment rate, although there is a reallocation effect, with investment shifted from low- to high-productivity firms. The paper most closely related to ours is that of GS, who also examine the effects of bank recapitalization policies on the supply of credit and client firm performance, including firm investment, using matched firm–bank data from the Japanese banking crisis. The authors find that the size of the capital injection is important for its success: If capital injections are large enough so that recapitalized banks achieve capital requirements, such banks increase the supply of credit and firms that borrow from the recapitalized banks increase their investment. This paper’s contribution beyond that of GS is as follows. First, we examine whether firms’ loan and investment responses to their banks’ recapitalization depend on their TFP. This question naturally arises because, theoretically, the higher firm productivity, the larger firm investment and the demand for external finance tend to be. Therefore, bank lending attitude, which likely depends on BCR under the banking regulation, may be more important for high-productivity firms. The finding that high-productivity firms increase their investments more than low-productivity firms in response to their associated banks’ recapitalization would suggest that the resource is allocated toward more productive firms as a result of capital injection. 3 Second, we use the BCR as the main variable to

• We have assumed that there is only one hedge fund style. What might change if we consider multiple hedge fund styles in the model industry? If the manager’s talent also involves an aptitude for one style over another, then this would be equivalent to having several styles calibrated independently. Since the policy results hinge on broad features of the model and the data, the outcomes of policy experiments are unlikely to change much. The only difference is that some styles tend to rely more heavily on leverage than others, so those are more likely to be hurt by leverage limits. In the working version of the paper, we show that most styles have reported leverage around 1. Out of the fourteen styles considered, four report leverage of around 2 (Convertible Arbitrage, Fixed Income, Equity Market Neutral and Relative Value), and three styles report leverage higher than 2 (Fixed income arbitrage, CTAs and CPOs). Table 8 shows the impact of a leverage cap of 1 on the industry

ponent of ) S i g ∀q and weakly decreasing in q ∀s g i , for g ∈ {P, I, D}. Note that this assumption implies that learning other bidders’ signals does not affect one’s own valuation – i.e. we have a setting with private, not interdependent values. This assumption may be more palatable for certain securities (such as shorter term securities, which are essentially cash substitutes) than others, but is the most tractable one under which we can pursue the “demand heterogeneity” vs. “market power” decomposition. Note that under this assumption, the additional information that a primary dealer j possesses due to observing her customers’ orders, Z P

III.B. Search Costs/Information Frictions An additional (but not mutually exclusive from product dif- ferentiation) possible explanation for the observed price disper- sion is the influence of search/information frictions faced by in- vestors. A large theoretical literature shows that costly search can sustain price dispersion in homogeneous product markets (e.g., Burdett and Judd [1983], Carlson and McAfee [1983], and Stahl [1989]). Given the very large number of mutual funds offered, it seems reasonable to presume that investors must make some information-gathering investments before deciding between fund alternatives. The presence of a sizable market to reduce investor search costs supports this notion. Several commercial mutual fund ranking services and information aggregators exist (Morningstar, Lipper, Valueline, Yahoo!Finance, etc.). There is even a commercial Internet site (IndexFunds.com) devoted to providing information about index funds. Many fund companies spend considerable sums on marketing and distribution, also consistent with (although neither necessary nor sufficient for) the presence of limited investor information. Survey evidence also suggests considerable information-gathering. The Investment Company Institute [1997] reports that surveyed investors con- sulted a median of two source types (four for those who had consulted a fund-ranking service) and reviewed a median of four- teen different information items (gross returns, relative perfor- mance, etc.) before their most recent purchase. 14 To the extent