<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Vincent Sterk | Macro Paper Warehouse</title><link>https://macropaperwarehouse.com/authors/vincent-sterk/</link><description>Vincent Sterk</description><generator>Hugo -- gohugo.io</generator><language>en-us</language><atom:link href="https://macropaperwarehouse.com/authors/vincent-sterk/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>Macroeconomic Fluctuations with HANK &amp; SAM: an Analytical Approach</title><link>https://macropaperwarehouse.com/papers/macroeconomic-fluctuations-with-hank-sam-an-analytical-approach/</link><guid>https://macropaperwarehouse.com/papers/macroeconomic-fluctuations-with-hank-sam-an-analytical-approach/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;This is a HANK model built to be solved on paper rather than on a computer. The motivation is stated as a gap in the literature: HANK models &amp;ldquo;have had a considerable impact on macroeconomics,&amp;rdquo; but &amp;ldquo;due to the complexity of such models, the literature has focused on numerically solved models and therefore little is known about their general properties.&amp;rdquo; The construction grafts Diamond-Mortensen-Pissarides search and matching frictions onto a monopolistically competitive economy with Rotemberg price adjustment costs, so that job prospects are uncertain and households can only self-insure. Tractability comes from three assumptions — no shorting equity and borrowing only by the employed, heterogeneity in both labour productivity and equity access, and exactly two household types — which together imply that &amp;ldquo;firms are owned by capitalists who drop out of bond and labor markets, while workers hold no equity and are either employed or unemployed,&amp;rdquo; everyone consumes their income period by period, and the real interest rate satisfies the employed workers&amp;rsquo; Euler equation. The result is an economy with &amp;ldquo;inequality in outcomes but the wealth distribution is degenerate,&amp;rdquo; which is what makes it analytically solvable. The new object is an endogenous earnings risk wedge in the employed workers&amp;rsquo; Euler equation, pinned down by labour market tightness because tightness determines both transition rates and wages. Because those two forces oppose each other — a tighter market means less unemployment risk but a larger income loss if the job is lost — the wedge can be countercyclical or procyclical, and every result turns on which. The authors argue countercyclicality is empirically plausible on three grounds: Storesletten, Telmer and Yaron&amp;rsquo;s finding that idiosyncratic risk is strongly countercyclical, Guvenen, Ozkan and Song&amp;rsquo;s finding that it comes from increased left-skewness in recessions rather than countercyclical variance, and a direct evaluation of the wedge using a 25.2 percent monthly job finding rate and 2 percent monthly job loss rate from CPS data (January 1990 to August 2019), a 20 percent consumption drop on job loss following Karabarbounis and Chodorow-Reich, and a wage semi-elasticity of −0.16 for job stayers from Gertler, Huckfeldt and Trigari. On that evaluation &amp;ldquo;the countercyclical effect of unemployment risk clearly dominates,&amp;rdquo; failing only when a 5 percent consumption drop is combined with a wage elasticity of −1.5. Four results follow. The economy may have three steady states rather than two, including an unemployment trap with a zero job finding rate and inflation between the intended steady state&amp;rsquo;s and the liquidity trap&amp;rsquo;s, which &amp;ldquo;cannot exist if prices are flexible, if markets are complete, or, if prices are sticky, when the endogenous earnings risk is either acyclical or procyclical.&amp;rdquo; The Taylor principle no longer suffices for local determinacy of the intended steady state, because &amp;ldquo;expectations of higher inflation may be self-fulfilling even if the central bank were to stabilize the direct impact of inflation on the real interest rate since demand (and thus inflation) is also stimulated by a decline in unemployment risk.&amp;rdquo; Nominal rigidities and market incompleteness become complements, so stickier prices can amplify productivity shocks and positive productivity shocks can be inflationary — which the authors support with a local projection of CPI inflation on Fernald TFP growth from 1980, where &amp;ldquo;higher TFP either leaves inflation unchanged or gives rise to higher inflation.&amp;rdquo; And the long-run real interest rate depends on policy parameters, while a liquidity trap need not be deflationary. The scope condition is theirs: &amp;ldquo;while our analysis rests on the analytical convenience produced by the simplifying assumptions that we make, we believe that the insights are general and apply to models with a non-degenerate wealth distribution and with more complicated asset structures&amp;rdquo; — a belief, supported by a numerical extension with capital accumulation, not a demonstration.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>