On the Likelihood and Welfare Effects of “Stop–and–go” Policies
Rui Baleiras () and
Journal of Public Economic Theory, 2003, vol. 5, issue 1, 121-133
Baleiras and Santos (2000) show that “stop–and–go” policies may be inherent in the institutional set–up rather than result from the wrong timing of expansionary vs. contractionary policies or any form of players’ irrationality. We use this set–up, involving ultrarational players and perfect foresight, to show that stop–and–go policies are more likely (in a statistical sense) than the opposite type of phenomenon. Moreover, it is shown that having the voters’ and the business community's preferences concerning the cycle converge to the socially optimal cycle pattern may entail a welfare loss.
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: Track citations by RSS feed
Downloads: (external link)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:bla:jpbect:v:5:y:2003:i:1:p:121-133
Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.blackwell ... bs.asp?ref=1097-3923
Access Statistics for this article
Journal of Public Economic Theory is currently edited by Rabah Amir, Gareth Myles and Myrna Wooders
More articles in Journal of Public Economic Theory from Association for Public Economic Theory Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Wiley Content Delivery ().