Mankiw, Romer and Weil (1992) (cont’d)

# Mankiw, Romer and Weil (1992) (cont’d)
## Macroeconomics (2017Q2)
### Kenji Sato
### 2017-06-29

---

## Homework / Exercises

Visit [kjst.jp/ma17q2pr](http://kjst.jp/ma17q2pr) now to check your submission status.

**Purple icon**

Your submission is complete unless it's merged mistakenly by yourself.

]

**Green icon**

Your submission is _not_ complete yet. Read my comment and follow the instructions.

]

---

## Problem Set

Solve Problem Set (doc# G).

10:45 - 11:10

* First three problems are the take-away exercise from the last class.
* Last problem is new.

---

## Midterm Report

`mid` on the Solow model

Visit [kjst.jp/ma17q2hw](kjst.jp/ma17q2hw)

> Due 2017-07-14 18:00.
> Hand in by Pull Request.

---

---

## Production function

Let `$0 < \alpha + \beta < 1$`, `$\alpha, \beta > 1$`. The output is given by

`$$Y = K^\alpha H^\beta (AL)^{1 - \alpha - \beta}$$`

* `$H =$` stock of human capital
* `$K =$` stock of physical capital
* `$A =$` knowledge
* `$L =$` labor

`$$\begin{aligned}
  k = \frac{K}{AL},\quad
  h = \frac{H}{AL},\quad
  y = \frac{Y}{AL} = k^\alpha h^\beta
\end{aligned}$$`

---

## Investment

They assume that the constant investment rate for both capitals.

* `$s_k =$` saving rate for physical capital
* `$s_h =$` saving rate for human capital

Verify that

`$$\begin{aligned}
  \dot k &= s_k y - (\delta + g + n) k\\
  \dot h &= s_h y - (\delta + g + n) h
\end{aligned}$$`

---

## Steady state

Compute the steady state

`$$k^* \quad \text{and} \quad h^*$$`

and verify that

`$$\begin{aligned}
h^{*} &=\left(\frac{s_{k}^{\alpha}s_{h}^{1-\alpha}}{\delta+g+n}\right)^{\frac{1}{1-\alpha-\beta}}\\
k^{*}&=\left(\frac{s_{k}^{1-\beta}s_{h}^{\beta}}{\delta+g+n}\right)^{\frac{1}{1-\alpha-\beta}}.
\end{aligned}$$`

---

## Model 1: Decomposition of Y/L, Eq. (11)

`$$\begin{multline}
  \ln \left( \frac{Y}{L} \right) =
  \log A(0) + gt + 
  \frac{\alpha}{1 - \alpha - \beta} \ln (s_k) \\ + 
  \frac{\beta}{1 - \alpha - \beta} \ln (s_h) - 
  \frac{\alpha + \beta}{1 - \alpha - \beta} \ln (\delta + g + n)
\end{multline}$$`

* The coefficient, `$\alpha / (1-\alpha-\beta)$` on `$\ln (s_k)$` is greater 
  than `$\alpha / (1 - \alpha)$` because `$1 - \alpha > \beta > 0$`
* The coefficient on `$\ln (\delta + g + n)$` is larger in absolute value 
  than the coefficient on `$\ln (s_k)$` i.e.,
  `$$\frac{\alpha}{1 - \alpha - \beta} < \frac{\alpha + \beta}{1 - \alpha - \beta}$$`

---

## Model 2: Another decomposition, Eq. (12)

`$$\begin{multline}
  \ln\left(\frac{Y}{L}\right) = 
  \ln A(0)+gt+\frac{\alpha}{1-\alpha}\ln(s_{k}) \\ -
  \frac{\alpha}{1-\alpha}\ln(\delta+g+n)+\frac{\beta}{1-\alpha}\ln(h^{*})
\end{multline}$$`

This specification is almost identical to the equation we used in the last session.

By omitting `$\ln(h^{*})$` term, the previous linear regression 
is subject to omitted-variable bias because `$h^*$` may be

* positively correlated with `$s_k$`
* negatively with `$n$`

---

## Model Choice made by MRW

Which of `$s_h$` and `$h^*$` is easier to measure?

As a proxy for `$s_h$`, MRW measured the percentage of the working-age population 
that is in secondary school.

`$$\begin{multline}
\texttt{SCHOOL} =
\frac{\text{# of people in secondary school}}{\text{# of people aged 12-17}}\\
\times
\frac{\text{school age population (15-19)}}{\text{working age population}}
\end{multline}$$`

Then they used this variable to test Model 1.

---

---

## Coefficients

`$$\begin{aligned}
  \frac{\alpha}{1 - \alpha - \beta} 
    &\simeq 0.70\\
  \frac{\beta}{1 - \alpha - \beta}
    &\simeq 0.73\\
  \frac{\alpha + \beta}{1 - \alpha - \beta}
    &\simeq -1.50
\end{aligned}$$`

These estimates suggest

`$$\alpha \simeq 0.3 \quad \text{and}\quad \beta \simeq 0.3$$`

Consistent with the common wisdom.

---

## Your empirical task in mid-term

Using the PWT v9.0, conduct regression analyses for

1. text-book Solow model
    * non-restricted, bivariate OLS
    * restricted, simple OLS
2. augmented Solow model
    * non-restricted, trivariate OLS

In the analysis of the latter model, use equation (12) in MRW.

The variable `hc` that PWT v9.0 contain is an index for human capital and 
thus serves as a proxy more likely for `$h^*$` than `$s_h$`.

---

---

## Question

Suppose that you have just heard that your tax you had already paid 
(say, 10,000 Yen) will be reimbursed next month.

What would you do with the expected windfall gains?

1. Nothing. Wait until you have the cash.
2. Go shopping or go for a drink this weekend, expecting the refund.

---

## Why Solow not enough?

In the Solow model, **the saving rate is exogenous**. Take a tax reduction 
for example. In the Solow model, consumers raises consumption at the time 
of enforcement of the new tax system.

But usually governments would inform the change of tax well before the enforcement and we might drink a toast to the tax reduction.

Similarly, in case of tax hike, it is possible that consumers consume
more immediately after knowing that they will have to pay more to the
government.

---

## Why Solow not enough? (Cont'd)

So, the Solow model is missing an important aspect of our economic activity: **Expectation formation**.

Although rigorously dealing with the problem of expectations is beyond the scope of this 
course, the **Ramsey model** will serve as the skeleton of more elaborate models.