IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/soecon/v76y2009i2p310-327.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Did Leaving the Gold Standard Tame the Business Cycle? Evidence from NBER Reference Dates and Real GNP

Author

Listed:
  • Andrew T. Young
  • Shaoyin Du

Abstract

Cover and Pecorino (2005) claim that the March 1933 departure from the gold standard is the most probable break point ushering in an era of longer U.S. expansions, both absolutely and relative to subsequent recessions. Their analysis is based on cycle durations as defined by National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) reference dates. However, much of macroeconomic analysis is based on (i) growth cycles (i.e., periods when the economy's production is above or below trend) rather than absolute increases or decreases in economic activity; and (ii) aggregate time series' volatility as the prime indicator of macroeconomic stability. In light of this, we reevaluate the March 1933 break point. First, using HP‐filtered quarterly gross national product (GNP), our analysis of growth cycle durations still implies a break point near 1933. Second, we test for structural breaks in the volatility of GNP growth rates and deviations from trends. These tests suggest a structural break considerably later than 1933, perhaps as late as the 1950s.

Suggested Citation

  • Andrew T. Young & Shaoyin Du, 2009. "Did Leaving the Gold Standard Tame the Business Cycle? Evidence from NBER Reference Dates and Real GNP," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 76(2), pages 310-327, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:soecon:v:76:y:2009:i:2:p:310-327
    DOI: 10.4284/sej.2009.76.2.310
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.4284/sej.2009.76.2.310
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.4284/sej.2009.76.2.310?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:soecon:v:76:y:2009:i:2:p:310-327. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1002/(ISSN)2325-8012 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.