IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cpr/ceprdp/11382.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The New Keynesian Transmission Mechanism: A Heterogenous-Agent Perspective

Author

Listed:
  • Broer, Tobias
  • Harbo Hansen, Niels-Jakob
  • Krusell, Per
  • Öberg, Erik

Abstract

We argue that a 2-agent version of the standard New Keynesian model - where a 'worker' receives only labor income and a'capitalist' only profit ncome - offers insights about how income inequality affects the monetary transmission mechanism. Under rigid prices, monetary policy affects the distribution of consumption, but it has no effect on output as workers choose not to change their hours worked in response to wage movements. In the corresponding representativeagent model, in contrast, hours do rise after a monetary policy loosening due to a wealth effect on labor supply: profits fall, thus reducing the representative worker's income. If wages are rigid too, however, the monetary transmission mechanism is active and resembles that in the corresponding representative-agent model. Here, workers are not on their labor supply curve and hence respond passively to demand, and profits are procyclical.

Suggested Citation

  • Broer, Tobias & Harbo Hansen, Niels-Jakob & Krusell, Per & Öberg, Erik, 2016. "The New Keynesian Transmission Mechanism: A Heterogenous-Agent Perspective," CEPR Discussion Papers 11382, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  • Handle: RePEc:cpr:ceprdp:11382
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.cepr.org/active/publications/discussion_papers/dp.php?dpno=11382
    Download Restriction: CEPR Discussion Papers are free to download for our researchers, subscribers and members. If you fall into one of these categories but have trouble downloading our papers, please contact us at subscribers@cepr.org

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Schmitt-Grohe, Stephanie & Uribe, Martin, 2003. "Closing small open economy models," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(1), pages 163-185, October.
    2. Buffie, Edward F., 2013. "The Taylor principle fights back, Part I," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 37(12), pages 2771-2795.
    3. Bilbiie, Florin O., 2008. "Limited asset markets participation, monetary policy and (inverted) aggregate demand logic," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 140(1), pages 162-196, May.
    4. Brent Neiman, 2014. "The Global Decline of the Labor Share," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 129(1), pages 61-103.
    5. Christiano, Lawrence J. & Eichenbaum, Martin & Evans, Charles L., 1997. "Sticky price and limited participation models of money: A comparison," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 1201-1249, June.
    6. King, Robert G. & Plosser, Charles I. & Rebelo, Sergio T., 1988. "Production, growth and business cycles : II. New directions," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(2-3), pages 309-341.
    7. Piketty, Thomas & Zucman, Gabriel, 2014. "Wealth and Inheritance in the Long Run," CEPR Discussion Papers 10072, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    8. Greg Kaplan & Benjamin Moll & Giovanni L. Violante, 2018. "Monetary Policy According to HANK," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 108(3), pages 697-743, March.
    9. Timo Boppart & Per Krusell, 2016. "Labor Supply in the Past, Present, and Future: a Balanced-Growth Perspective," NBER Working Papers 22215, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Lawrence Christiano & Martin Eichenbaum & Sergio Rebelo, 2011. "When Is the Government Spending Multiplier Large?," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 119(1), pages 78-121.
    11. Francis, Neville & Ramey, Valerie A., 2005. "Is the technology-driven real business cycle hypothesis dead? Shocks and aggregate fluctuations revisited," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(8), pages 1379-1399, November.
    12. Adrien Auclert, 2019. "Monetary Policy and the Redistribution Channel," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 109(6), pages 2333-2367, June.
    13. Lawrence J. Christiano & Martin Eichenbaum & Charles L. Evans, 2005. "Nominal Rigidities and the Dynamic Effects of a Shock to Monetary Policy," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 113(1), pages 1-45, February.
    14. Alisdair McKay & Emi Nakamura & Jón Steinsson, 2016. "The Power of Forward Guidance Revisited," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 106(10), pages 3133-3158, October.
    15. Erceg, Christopher J. & Henderson, Dale W. & Levin, Andrew T., 2000. "Optimal monetary policy with staggered wage and price contracts," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(2), pages 281-313, October.
    16. Nils Gornemann & Keith Kuester & Makoto Nakajima, 2016. "Doves for the Rich, Hawks for the Poor? Distributional Consequences of Monetary Policy," International Finance Discussion Papers 1167, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
    17. King, Robert G. & Plosser, Charles I. & Rebelo, Sergio T., 1988. "Production, growth and business cycles : I. The basic neoclassical model," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(2-3), pages 195-232.
    18. Emmanuel Saez & Gabriel Zucman, 2016. "Editor's Choice Wealth Inequality in the United States since 1913: Evidence from Capitalized Income Tax Data," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 131(2), pages 519-578.
    19. Lindé, Jesper, 2009. "The effects of permanent technology shocks on hours: Can the RBC-model fit the VAR evidence?," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 597-613, March.
    20. Guido Lorenzoni, 2009. "A Theory of Demand Shocks," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(5), pages 2050-2084, December.
    21. Edward N. Wolff, 2014. "Household wealth trends in the United States, 1983–2010," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 30(1), pages 21-43.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ralph Luetticke, 2018. "Transmission of Monetary Policy with Heterogeneity in Household Portfolios," Discussion Papers 1819, Centre for Macroeconomics (CFM).
    2. Alisdair McKay & Ricardo Reis, 2018. "Countercyclical fiscal policy in a low r∗ world," 2018 Meeting Papers 621, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    3. repec:aea:aecrev:v:109:y:2019:i:2:p:427-72 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Bilbiie, Florin Ovidiu, 2018. "Monetary Policy and Heterogeneity: An Analytical Framework," CEPR Discussion Papers 12601, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    5. Cantore, Cristiano & Ferroni, Filippo & León-Ledesma, Miguel A., 2018. "The missing link: monetary policy and the labor share," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 90873, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    6. Helen Hughson & Gianni La Cava & Paul Ryan & Penelope Smith, 2016. "The Household Cash Flow Channel of Monetary Policy," RBA Bulletin (Print copy discontinued), Reserve Bank of Australia, pages 21-30, September.
    7. Acharya, Sushant & Dogra, Keshav, 2018. "Understanding HANK: insights from a PRANK," Staff Reports 835, Federal Reserve Bank of New York, revised 01 Aug 2018.
    8. Joshua K. Hausman & Paul W. Rhode & Johannes F. Wieland, 2019. "Recovery from the Great Depression: The Farm Channel in Spring 1933," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 109(2), pages 427-472, February.
    9. Bilbiie, Florin Ovidiu, 2017. "The New Keynesian Cross: Understanding Monetary Policy with Hand-to-Mouth Households," CEPR Discussion Papers 11989, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    10. Gilberto Tadeu Lima & Jaylson Jair da Silveira, 2018. "Macrodynamic Implications of Employee Profit Sharing as Effort Elicitation Device," Working Papers, Department of Economics 2018_02, University of São Paulo (FEA-USP).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Heterogeneous Agents; inequality; Monetary Transmission; New Keynesian Model;

    JEL classification:

    • E31 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - Prices, Business Fluctuations, and Cycles - - - Price Level; Inflation; Deflation
    • E32 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - Prices, Business Fluctuations, and Cycles - - - Business Fluctuations; Cycles
    • E52 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - Monetary Policy, Central Banking, and the Supply of Money and Credit - - - Monetary Policy

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:cpr:ceprdp:11382. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (). General contact details of provider: .

    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.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.