Imperfect Knowledge

For macroeconomists, an individual is rational if she uses her understanding of the way the economy works in making decisions that do not conflict with her objectives.

The present-value model of stock prices is a workhorse in financial economics. The model relates today’s price of a stock (or a basket of stocks) to the market’s forecasts of next-period’s price and dividend, appropriately discounted.

In this paper, we examine one of the core puzzles in International Macroeconomics, the so-called “forward-discount anomaly.”

A core premise of contemporary economic models is that researchers can adequately specify in probabilistic terms how individuals alter the way they make decisions and how the processes underpinning market outcomes unfold over time.

The first part of this text comes back on the standard economic viewpoint on expectational coordination, a viewpoint that the recent events have challenged.

Uncertainty is an unavoidable feature of economic life, although we may cope with it sometimes by ignoring it. Institutions, conventions and behaviour are all conditioned by uncertainty, and they in turn condition uncertainty in a reflexive manner.

My remarks today will be focused primarily on features of the developed world’s financial system which led to the crisis of 2008 and to the Great Recession that followed, from which we are only slowly and painfully emerging.

In his recent lecture at the Cass Business School, Lord Turner noted that even mentioning the possibility of overt monetary financing was akin to breaking a taboo.

Paper revised for the Institute’s Plenary Conference in Berlin

Financial stability, or the lack thereof.

Albeit the majority of the profession either ignores Minskyís Financial Instability Hypothesis (FIH) or considers it plainly wrong, at least since the mid-80’s a few influential economists —who have certainly not embraced any unorthodoxcredo —have grown more receptive to this idea and eager to incorporate it in their models, even if diluted and sometimes disguised in order to make it more palatable to the conventional “representative” macroeconomist

Elephant seals have got too big for their beaches. A large specimen might weigh over 8000 lbs (3700 kg).Their size has a simple evolutionary explanation. Large males fight for the right to mate with a whole beach full of females. For elephant seals it is, quite literally, winner-takes-all. And the key to winning is simple – size.

We have grown accustomed to regulating financial markets based on imagined, not real markets. Real markets are shaped by and co-evolve with institutional arrangements within two fundamental constraints: Imperfect knowledge and the threat of illiquidity.