Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Wiley and Canadian Economics Association are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend
access to The Canadian Journal of Economics / Revue canadienne d'Economique.
http://www.jstor.org
L'impact des politiques monetaires et fiscales en r6gime de taux de change fixes et fluctuants.
Le but de cet article est d'elargir les discussions recentes de l'efficacite relative des
politiques mon6taires et fiscales en regime de taux de change fixes et fluctuants. Pour ce
faire, l'auteur elabore un modMle d'equilibre general ou' il introduit, 'a titre de cas speciaux.
la plupart des theories courantes, pour ensuite souligner les postulats specifiques a ces
theories. Tour a tour, on suppose la mobilit6 internationale du capital comme parfaite,
imparfaite et nulle; la sterilisation compl&te, incompl&te ou nulle. L'hypothbse d'une
elasticite infinie de l'offre n'est pas utilisee. A la maniere de Johnson, l'auteur s'attache
au cas ou, explicitement, la mobilite internationale du capital est fonction du taux d'inter6t
et du niveau du revenu national d'un pays. Le taux d'inter6t peut atteindre un plancher,
ou bien si la mobilite du capital est parfaite, ou bien s'il existe une situation u Keynesienne
(du liquidity trap). Mais en generale, il est impossible que ces deux conditions obtiennent
en m6me temps. Seulement dans le cas d'une mobilite imparfaite du capital, pouvons-nous
explicitement considerer le cas de l'impossibilite d'abaisser ce taux d'inter6t. Aprbs tout, il
s'agit lI de l'hypothbse la plus importante de cette theorie macroeconomique traditionnelle
a partir de laquelle nous concluons a l'insuffisance de la politique monetaire. Le present
modMle tient explicitement compte de l'effet des encaisses reelles sur la consommation et
l'investissement. Toute l'analyse s'effectue dans le cadre d'un petit pays. La generalite du
modMle permet evidemment l'etude de cas qui, auparavant, furent compl&tement ignores.
Finalement, ce mnodeleconduit A l'obtention de resultats nouveaux: plus particuliUrement,
a des conditions generales (au nombre desquelles une condition necessaire et une condition
suffisante) de l'efficacit6 des politiques mon6taires et fiscales 'a augmenter la production
et l'emploi, dans une economie ouverte au commerce international et aux mouvements
de capitaux.
I / Introduction
It is often argued' that under flexible exchange rates and international capital
movements, fiscal policy results in a small increase in output and employment,
whereas monetary policy tends to result in a strong increase. Although this
conclusion is rather striking, the basic argument is not difficult to understand.
I will review it here to introduce the subject of the paper.
*The contents of this paper were first presented in a lecture which I gave at Purdue University
in April 1967. I am grateful to my colleague June Flanders for stimulating discussions on this
topic. I am also grateful to Nancy Baggott, Lee Brown, Marvin Margolis, Erik Haites, and
Yutaka Horiba, all students in my course, for their comments and for checking the mathema-
tical computations, and especially to Miss Baggott who carefully checked all the computations.
Students other than those mentioned above, also contributed many interesting comments. I
also benefited from the fact that this paper was written parallel to one by N. Baggott and
M. J. Flanders, "A Guide to Johnson: The Theory of Economic Policy in an Open Economy,"
unpublished manuscript, June 1967, which pointed out computational errors in a recent paper
by H. G. Johnson, "Some Aspects of the Theory of Economic Policy in a World of Capital
Mobility," in T. Gabiotti, ed., Essays in Honour of Marco Fanno (Padova, 1966). I am also
grateful to Ian Drummond and a referee for this JOURNAL for their many helpful comments.
1See R. A. Mundell, "Capital Mobility and Stabilization Policy Under Fixed and Flexible
Exchange Rates," Canadian Journal of Economics and Political Science, XXIX (Nov. 1963).
I believe that we do not need diagrams as complicated as the ones he used, rather straight-
forward use of the IS- and LM-diagram appears to be sufficient. We note that these conclusions
are the result of a series of complicated discussions on related topics, in which Mundell plays a
Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'Economique, II, no. 2
May/mai 1969. Printed in Canada/Imprime au Canada.
most important role. See: R. E. Caves, "Flexible Exchange Rates," American Economic
Review, LIII (May 1963); J. M. Fleming, "Domestic Financial Policies under Fixed and under
Floating Exchange Rates," IMF Staff Papers, IX (Nov. 1962); H. G. Johnson, "Equilibrium
under Fixed Exchanges," American Economic Review, LIII (May 1963); "Major Issues in
Monetary and Fiscal Policies," Federal Reserve Bulletin, L (Nov. 1964); H. G. Johnson,
"Economic Policy in a World of Capital Mobility"; M. C. Kemp, "Monetary and Fiscal Policy
under Alternative Assumptions about International Capital Mobility," Economic Record, 42
(Dec. 1966); A. 0. Krueger, "The Impact of Alternative Government Policies under Varying
Exchange Systems," Quarterly Journal of Economics, LXXIX (May 1965); A. N. McLeod,
"Capital Mobility and Stabilization Under Fixed and Flexible Exchange Rates: A Comment,"
Canadian Journal of Economics and Political Science, XXX (Aug. 1964); J. R. Melvin, "Capital
Flows and Employment Under Flexible Exchange Rates," Canadian Journal of Economics,
1, 2 (May 1968); F. Modigliani and Giorgia La Malfa, "Inflation, Balance of Payments Deficit
and Their Cure through Monetary Policy: The Italian Example," Banca Nazionale del Lavoro,
Quarterly Review, 80 (March 1967); R. A. Mundell, "The Monetary Dynamics of International
Adjustment Under Fixed and Flexible Exchange Rates," Quarterly Journal of Economics,
LXXIV (May 1960); "The International Disequilibrium System," Kyklos, XIV (fasc. 2, 1961);
"A Theory of Optimum Currency Areas," American Economic Review, LI (Sept. 1961); "Flex-
ible Exchange Rates and Employment Policy," Canadian Journal of Economics and Political
Science, XXVII (Nov. 1961); "The Appropriate Use of Monetary and Fiscal Policy for Internal
and External Stability," IMF Staff Papers, IX (March 1962); "A Reply: Capital Mobility
and Size," Canadian Journal of Economics and Political Science, XXX (Aug. 1964); J. P. Quirk
and A. M. Zarley, "Policies to Attain External and Internal Balance: A Reappraisal," a paper
presented at the Midwest Economic Association, April 1967; R. Rhomberg, "A Model of the
Canadian Economy under Fixed and Fluctuating Exchange Rates," Journal of Political
Economy, LXXII (Feb. 1964); E. Sohmen, International Monetary Problems and the Foreign
Exchanges (Princeton, 1963); "Preisniveau and Preiserwartungen in der Makro6konomischen
Theorie," Zeitschrift des Instituts fur 14eltwirtschaft, 98-1, 1967; "Fiscal and Monetary Policies
under Alternative Exchange Rate Systems," Quarterly Journal of Economics, LXXXI (Aug.
1967). For an introduction to the general discussion of fixed exchange rates versus flexible
exchange rates, see M. 0. Clement, R. L. Pfister and K. J. Rothwell, Theoretical Issues in
International Economics (Boston, 1967), especially chap. 6.
2J. R. Hicks, "Mr. Keynes and the 'Classics', A Suggested Interpretation," Econometrica, 5
(April 1937). In the illustration of the problem, we assume that the price level is kept constant
so that there are no shifts of the LM-curve as a result of changes in the price level.
3Obviously we can replace the words "an increase in the net inflow of capital" by "a decrease
in the net outflow of capital," depending upon whether the country is a net debtor or creditor.
In this paper "capital" means financial capital (primarily of a short term nature) and not real
capital, thus direct international investment is completely assumed away.
4We assume a relevant stability condition for the foreign exchange market.
5There are further repercussions as a result of the increase in output, i.e., an increase in the
level of output (hence of income) may increase the amount imported thus creating a deteriora-
tion in the trade balance. This deteriorationi, in turn, shifts the IS-curve to the left. As long
as the marginal propensity to import is less than 1, the IS-curve will not move back to its
hand, monetary policy (through an open market purchase, for example) tends
to lower the level of the interest rate by shifting the LM-curve to the right.
This, in turn, causes a decrease in the net inflow (or an increase in the net
outflow) of capital. Hence a balance of payments equilibrium (through
fluctuations in the exchange rate) must mean an improvement of the trade
balance which, in turn, means a rightward shift of the IS-curve. Thus, the
initial increase in the level of output and employment due to the shift of the
LM-curve will result in an even greater increase because of this shift of the
IS-curve. The above argument can be illustrated by the following diagram
(Figure 1).
LM ~~~~~~~~LM
:1 ~ / -\ - X /
0 OUTPUT 0 OUTPUT
(a) (b)
FIGURE 1 The effectsof fiscal(a) andmonetary(b) policyunderflexibleexchangerates
If the country fixes its exchange rate the above argument is no longer valid.
Under fixed exchange rates, the balance of payments will not be automatically
brought into equilibrium. Hence an increase in the net capital inflow in the
case of a fiscal policy will tend to improve the country's balance of payments.
Unless a policy of complete sterilization is adopted, this increase in the net
inflow of capital will increase the country's money supply, causing a rightward
shift of the LM-curve and an increase in output and employment.6 On the
other hand, if a monetary expansion is undertaken the decrease in the net
capital inflow will tend to deteriorate the balance of payments. Unless complete
sterilization is undertaken, this decrease in the net capital inflow will decrease
the country's money supply further, thus causing an offsetting decrease in the
level of output and employment.' If the country is small enough and capital
is perfectly mobile, this capital movement mechanism will not be stopped until
original position. Here the trade balance is considered to be exogeneous to facilitate the
ordinary construction of the IS-curve.
6A policy of complete sterilization totally separates thecountry's money supply and its balance
of payments, thus there will be no shift of theLM-curve. In any case, if the balance of payments
turns to a surplus, gold or some other international means of payments will keep flowing into
the country and eventually this flow will have to be stopped by some sort of policy action by
the foreign country (or even the home country). There may be further repercussions through
an increase in imports, which causes a decrease in the level of output. See n. 5.
71f a policy of complete sterilization is undertaken, there is no further increase in the money
supply (see ns. 5 and 6).
the interest rate is brought back to its original level, and hence monetary
policy will have no effect on output and employment. The above argument
under fixed exchange rates can be illustrated by the following diagram
(Figure 2).
LA4 LM
,2't \\\ ~Lm' LM'
A~~~~~~~i, is1
? OUTPUT O OU'TPUT
(a) (b)
FIGURE 2 The effectsof fiscal( a) andimonetary( b) policyulnderfixedexcUangerates
original level, as long as the world level in constant. This creates a situation
similar to that of the "Keynesian" liquidity trap. In the subsequent analysis
we shall see that the Mundellian conclusion crucially hinges on this assump-
tion. Johnson's recognition of the imperfect mobility of capital, therefore, has
great theoretical significance.10
The purpose of this paper is to construct a general equilibrium model which
will include both of the above arguments as special cases and point out their
special assumptions.11 We shall focus on Mundell and Johnson, but shall
always be aware of other works on the topic. The generalization of the model
naturally will enable us to consider cases which were completely ignored before.
Furthermore, the model will bring forth completely unknown results - in
particular, the general conditions under which fiscal and monetary expansions
will raise GNP in an open economy.
We shall consider perfect, imperfect, and zero international mobility of
capital. We shall not assume an infinite elasticity of supply. We shall consider
policies of complete, incomplete, and no sterilization. Following Johnson, we
shall explicitly consider the case in which the international mobility of capital
is a function of the country's level of output (as well as the interest rate).
Under the assumption of the perfect mobility of capital, we cannot have a
"Keynesian" liquidity trap situation since both of these assumptions hold the
interest rate constant, but they do not necessarily hold the interest rate
constant at the same level (thus the two may in fact be inconsistent). When
we recognize the imperfect mobility of capital, we can explicitly consider the
case of the liquidity trap. After all, this is probably the most important of the
assumptions of traditional macrotheory from which we conclude that monetary
theory is inadequate. 12 Finally, our model explicitly recognizes the "real
balance effect" on consumption and investment. Throughout the paper, we
shall retain the small country assumption.
Under the fixed exchange rate system, the balance of payments of a country
is not necessarily in equilibrium. Even if it is in equilibrium in the beginning,
the adoption of monetary or fiscal policy will in general disturb this equili-
brium. Hence it may be of some interest to examine an appropriate "mix" of
fiscal and monetary policies, i.e., the policy mix which will increase the level
of output and employment while keeping the balance of payments in equili-
brium.13One of our conclusions in this context is that under the fixed exchange
rate system, it is usually undesirable to increase both government expenditures
lOThis does not mean that Mundell's assumption is altogether unrealistic. It is often pointed
out that international (especially US) capital is quite interest sensitive in the Canadian market.
See, for example, W. Poole, "The Stability of the Canadian Flexible Exchange Rate, 1950-1962,"
Canadian Journal of Economics and Political Science, XXXIII (May 1967).
"Krueger, "Alternative Government Policies under Varying Exchange Systems," also recog-
nized the special nature of these assumptions. However, neither she nor Johnson made clear
the circumstances under which the assumption of imperfect capital mobility leads to a situation
different from that found under the assumption of perfect capital mobility.
12When Mundell emphasized the effectiveness of monetary policy under flexible exchange rates,
he assumed there was no liquidity trap. As we shall show later (section IV), under the liquidity
trap monetary policy is quite ineffective even with the flexible exchange rate system. Hence
Mundell's conclusion is quite misleading in this sense. See his "Capital Mobility and Stabiliza-
tion Policy under Fixed and Flexible Exchange Rates."
"3Using the model in this paper, we can easily include a wage (or profit) policy in this mix.
However, we shall not attempt to do so, for it may blur the more important points and because
the wage policy may be difficult to carry out in practice in some countries.
11 / Model
Or we may write:
(2) V(i, Y, A/p) + G/p + T/p = 0, where V I - S.
From our knowledge of macroeconomic theory, we may impose the following
restrictions on the signs of the partial derivatives of V in the above equation17:
where ir is the exchange rate (the price of foreign currency in terms of the
domestic currency). Note that Xris defined such that an increase in 7rmeans
the devaluation of the domestic currency vis-a-vis the foreign currency. We
may impose the following restrictions on the partial derivatives of T:
(5) Tp < O, T, >_0, and Ty <0 (or > 0).19
these policies are mixed together. For example, an increase in government expenditures
financed by borrowing from the central bank can be analysed by simply grafting the analysis
of increase in M to the effect of an increase in G. Notice also that the "terms of trade effect"
is assumed away here. I.e., the "real" income, investment, etc., means the ones deflated by
the price level of the domestic output, p, and the effect of the import price is neglected.
17Throughout this paper we shall denote partial derivatives by putting a subscript which
indicates the differentiating variable below and to the right of the relevant variable. For
example 0 V/ci Vi, a V/a Y = Vy, and a V/a(A/p) = VA/P. Similarly aT/8p= Tp,
aL/ai = Li, and aF/ai = Fi, etc.
18In ordinary macro textbooks, it is often (implicitly) assumed that Si = 0 and VA/P = 0.
These two assumptions are made to facilitate the diagrammatical exposition of the macro-
equilibrium mechanism. Since these two assumptions can have very serious implications, we
should make them explicit. V= 0 holds if both investment and saving are completely interest
inelastic. V; < 0 is usually justified by the assumption that investment is a decreasing function
of the interest rate and that savings is either an increasing function of the interest rate or its
dependence on the level of the interest rate is small relative to the sensitivity of investment to
the interest rate. Vy < 0 means ly - Sr < 0. In the simple Keynesian analysis using the
"Keynesian cross diagram" this is considered as the "stability" condition for the goods market.
'91f we assume that exports depend on the level of the home country's income (or output),
then Ty is the difference between the "marginal propensity to export" and the "marginal
propensity to import," which can be positive. However, it is usually assumed that the exports
do not depend on the home country's income. Then Ty - 0. T= 0 is clearly a limiting
assumption, but it is sometimes adopted in the literature. Note also that if there is no inter-
national trade, Tp = 0, T,X= 0 and Ty = 0.
In this section we shall be mainly concerned with the effects of fiscal and
monetary policy under flexible exchange rates. The shift parameters of the
system are G (government expenditures taxes) and M (money supply).
First we note that we can put p = r= 1 initially, without loss of generality,
by choosing the unit of measurement of each of the variables properly. Now
totally differentiating equations 1, 6, 8, and 13, we obtain
(17) Vidi + VydY+ (dG + dT + VA/pdA) - (G + T + VA/vA) dp = 0
(18) dM -Mdp = Lidi + LydY
(19) dY= cdp (ordp = dY/lo-)
(20) dB -dT + FydY + Fidi.
We assume, for simplicity, that there is no autonomous change in A.
However, a change in the money supply M may certainly induce a change in A.
Hence we write:
(21) dA = AdM where A ? 0.31
29Mundell, "Capital Mobility and Stabilization Policy under Fixed and Flexible Exchange
Rates," Johnson, "Economic Policy in a World of Capital Mobility."
30Depending on the type of analysis, the asset variable A can be considered as an exogenous
or an endogenous variable. In other words, if there is an increase in the money supply this will,
in general, increase the level of A. Thus, in this case, A is an endogenous variable. If there are
no changes which affect the level of A, it is an exogenous variable.
31The following quotation from Warren Smith may be useful as an explanation of ,. "Open
market purchases of government securities by the central bank from the non-bank public will
leave A unchanged, since the initial purchase transaction will result in a decline in the public's
security holdings and an equal increase in M, while any induced expansion of loans and invest-
ment by the banks will result in an increase in M offset by an equal increase in the public's
indebtedness to the banks. On the other hand if the Treasury prints currency and gives it to
the public, A will be increased by the same absolute amount as M but the increase in A will
be proportionately smaller than the increase in M (provided the public's holdings of government
securities exceed its indebtedness to the banks so that A > M)." W. L. Smith, "A Graphical
Exposition of the Complete Keynesian System," Southern Economic Journal, XXIII (Oct.
1956) n. 9. Note that in the above explanation, the interest induced real balance effect
("Metzler effect") is assumed away.
,y G + T + VAIpA + MVi/Li.
From equations 18 and 20, we have
(23) dB = dT + FydY + (dM - Mdp - LydY)FiLi.
Combining 22 and 23, and keeping 19 in mind, we obtain
(i) for the Keynesian case (oo > r> 0 or oo-*c)
+ MV/Li -FiMlLi)
Now we introduce the basic premise of the flexible exchange rate system,
dB = 0. In other words, we assume that in the final equilibrium, the balance
of payments is brought into equilibrium. We shall first confine our analysis
to the Keynesian case. From equation 24 with dB = 0, we obtain:
(28) adY + dG + dM O0.
The effects of fiscal and monetary policies can be examined by obtaining the
expressions for d Y/dG (with dM = 0) and d Y/dM (with dG = 0) from 28.
(29) dY/dG = -1/a = 1/[-a' + Fy - (FiLy)/Li + (y - FiM/Li)/la]
where a is given by equation 25.
(30) d Y/dM = /a
= [(V1/Li) + AVA/P) - F1/LjI/[-a' + FY - (FiLy/LL)
+ (y -FiM/L/i)l]
where a' and y are given by equation 22.
Hence a necessary and sufficient condition for fiscal or monetary policies to be
at all effective (dY/dG > 0 or dY/dM > 0) is a < 0 (since a > 0).
Since Vi ? 0; Vy < 0; Li < 0; Ly > 0; Fy _ 0; and Fi 2 0, we can say
that a < 0 provided that G + T > 0. In other words, so long as G + P ? 0,
an increase in government expenditure or in the money supply will always
increase output and employment. There is certainly no a priori reason to
d Y/dG T 1' 1 1 1
dY/dM 1 ? 1 1 1ifVAlp=O =J ?.
or A=O if, O
32Depending upon which parameter is kept constant, we may call this the government expen-
diture multiplier, the tax multiplier, and the government deficit (or surplus) multiplier. In
general we call d Y/dG the "fiscal multiplier." We call d Y/dM the "monetary miultiplier."
Interesting conclusions can be obtained for some limiting cases without the
above assumption of lack of interaction between the structural coefficients.
For example, if F -0 oo (perfect capital mobility), we can easily show from
29 that dY/dG goes to zero regardless of the level of a-, Li, Fy, etc. This con-
clusion corresponds to Mundell's result,33 but note that it does not depend on
the assumption that a -- oo, which Mundell used.
The expression for d Y/dM when Fi oo is obtained from 30 as
(32) dY/dM = 1/(Ly + MIa-).
When Li -* -o0 (with a finite Fi), we can easily show that d Y/dM goes to
zero. This extends to an open economy the well-known conclusion that under
the liquidity trap monetary policy has no effect on output and employment.
This well-known result is completely disregarded by Mundell because of his
assumption that Fi >oo, which is inconsistent with Li >-00.34
The case in which there is no capital mobility (Fi = 0, Fy = 0) has some
practical importance. In this case, formulas for the fiscal and monetary
multipliers, much simpler than 29 and 30, can easily be obtained from those
equations. We shall leave this to the interested reader. If we further assume
that T 0 (no trade), Vi = 0 (completely interest-inelastic investment and
saving) or Li- -oo (liquidity trap), and Jy = 0 (no income induced
investment), then we can obtain the very familiar formula for the simple
government multiplier for a closed economy dY/dG = 1/Sr 1/marginal
propensity to save.
So much for the efficacy of fiscal and monetary policies in the Keynesian
case with flexible exchange rates. In the classical case, we can consider the
effect of changes in G and M on the general price level in an open economy. In
this section we shall consider this question in a regime of flexible exchange
rates.
Setting dB = 0 and dM = 0 or dG 0 in 27, we obtain
(33) dp/dG 1/[G + T + VA/pA + M(Vi Fi)/Li] -
Now we turn to the case of the fixed exchange rate system. Again we will
concentrate on the Keynesian case. The relevant equations for the model in
this case are equations 1, (or 2), 6, 8, 13, and 15. Here dB is no longer zero, a
new parameter (s), the "sterilization coefficient," is added in 15, and addi-
tional information from equation 4 (and relation 5) will be used. Note also
that here ir is assumed to be constant.
In order to analyse the case of fixed exchange rates, it is necessary to carry
our analysis of the beginning of the previous section a little further. First
using equations 15 and 23 we obtain35
(35) [1 -sFi/LL]dB = AdY + (F/Lj)dMh, where
(36) a- (Tpl/o-+ Ty + Fy) - (M/o- + Ly)Fi/Li.
Using equations 15, 22, and the above two equations, we obtain
(37) [-a' + 'y/o To- - - sf'6a/(1 -- sF1/Lj)IdY
= dG + {,B'+ (sf'Fj)/[(1 - sF/Lj)L1]}dMh.
We may recall that the expression for ,B'is given in 22. In the case of complete
sterilization, s = 0, and we can simplify 37 as
(38) [-a' + (-y - T,)/co - TYIdY dG + f3'dMh.
The magnitude of s reflects the country's policy on the degree of sterilization
and the country can affect the level of output and employment by changing
the magnitude of s. Here we omit such an analysis by assuming s = constant.36
Comparing 37 with 38, we see immediately that the analysis of the efficacy of
fiscal and monetary policy would be much simpler when s = 0 (Johnson's case).
However, here we go to 37 and consequently obtain much more general
formulas (i.e., s > 0) for these multipliers. In other words
(39) d Y/dG = 1/Q where
-a' + ('y T)- - T- sf'/(1 - sFi/Li)
= (-Vy + ViLy/LL) + (G + T + VA/vA + MVi/LL -Tp)o-Ty
-s(Vi/Li + pAVAvp) [(Tp/a + Ty + Fy)
-(M/o-+Ly)F1/Lj]/(1 - sFi/Li);
4 _b ~b
D 1-
04
g A. 115.
t- 0
. _~- r"
D~~~I
4-5
O O
b O- 4-
b -+ .
(50) dp/dM = - T)
= (Vi/Li + ,IVA/V)/(G + T+ VA/pA + MVi/LL - Tv).
So long as G + T > 0, dp/dMh is in general positive (unless Li -* -oo and
VA/P = 0 for example). If Li -* -o 0 and VA/V = 0, then dp/dMh - 0. The
Hence, depending on the signs of r and (aer- f') we have various mixes of
fiscal and monetary policy. We summarize this in the following table.
TABLE III
APPROPRIATE MIXES OF FISCAL AND
MONETARY POLICIES
r > O
;~~~~<
< O
For example, if F, -*oo (so that r > 0 and (,r -,[') < 0 with a < 0), then
it is appropriate to increase the money supply but to decrease government
expenditures (or to increase taxes). Under the ordinary assumption of 'a < 0,
r > 0 will, in general, imply (aTr - 0') < 0. Hence under the fixed exchange
rate system the appropriate mix is hardly that of increasing both government
expenditures and the money supply.
If a study does not recognize its limitations, it does not contribute to progress.
Hence, in this section, we shall briefly summarize the major limitations of our
model.
We assumed that the country is small enough so that its level of economic
activity does not affect the level of economic activity for the rest of the world.
In other words, changes in variables such as Y, i, and p do not have any
significant repercussions on the world levels of these variables. This assumption
can be waived by imposing a similar model for "the rest of the world." For a
simple model such as the one discussed by Mundell with all the limiting
assumptions, this is not too difficult,37and Mundell attempted such a generali-
zation himself.38 Although we could carry out a similar analysis with respect to
our generalized model, such a task would involve very tedious calculations.
We neglected completely the "terms of trade effect," a heated issue in the
discussion of exchange devaluation in the 1950s (Spraos, Pierce, Day, Jones,
Tsiang, etc.)39 which followed the path-breaking works in 1950 by Laursen and
Metzler, Harberger and Stolper.40 Obviously under the fixed exchange rate
37The procedure is essentially similar to that adopted in the discussion of "foreign reper-
cussions" in the simple international trade multiplier theory.
38Mundell, "A Reply: Capital Mobility and Size." Also see M. C.Kemp, "Monetary and Fiscal
Policy under Alternative Assumptions about International Capital Mobility."
39See for example R. W. Jones, "Depreciation and the Dampening Effect of Income Change,"
Review of Economics and Statistics, XLII (Feb. 1960); S. C. Tsiang, "The Role of Money in the
Stability of Trade Balance and the Synthesis of Elasticity and Absorption Approaches,"
American Economic Review, LII (Sept. 1961); A. Takayama and L. W. McKenzie, "General
Equilibrium Analysis of International Trade," (unpublished manuscript).
40S. Laursen and L. A. Metzler, "Flexible Exchange Rates and the Theory of Employment,"
Review of Economics and Statistics, XXXI (Sept. 1950); A. Harberger, "Currency Depreciation,
Income and the Balance of Trade," Journal of Political Economy, LVIII (Feb. 1950); W. F.
Stolper, "The Multiplier, Flexible Exchanges and International Equilibrium," Quarterly
Journal of Economics, LXIV (Nov. 1950).
41See Sohmen, "Fiscal and Monetary Policies Under Alternative Exchange Rate Systems."
42The speculative demand for money also plays an important role in this context as long as it
constitutes a demand for money. The introduction of the speculative demand, moreover, will
be complicated by the possibility of speculation with regard to foreign securities.