Productivity and the Post-1990 U.S. Economy
In this paper, the authors show that ignoring corporate intangible investments gives a distorted picture of the post-1990 U.S. economy. In particular, ignoring intangible investments in the late 1990s leads one to conclude that productivity growth was modest, corporate profits were low, and corporate investment was at moderate levels. In fact, the late 1990s was a boom period for productivity growth, corporate profits, and corporate investment.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)
|Date of creation:||2005|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Society for Economic Dynamics Marina Azzimonti Department of Economics Stonybrook University 10 Nicolls Road Stonybrook NY 11790 USA|
Web page: http://www.EconomicDynamics.org/
More information through EDIRC
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Ellen R. McGrattan & Edward C. Prescott, 2005.
"Taxes, regulations, and the value of U.S. and U.K. corporations,"
309, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.
- Ellen R. McGrattan & Edward C. Prescott, 2004. "Taxes, Regulations, and the Value of U.S. and U.K. Corporations," Levine's Bibliography 122247000000000715, UCLA Department of Economics.
- Dale W. Jorgenson & Mun S. Ho & Kevin J. Stiroh, 2003. "Lessons for Canada from the U.S. Growth Resurgence," International Productivity Monitor, Centre for the Study of Living Standards, vol. 6, pages 3-18, Spring.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:red:sed005:274. 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: (Christian Zimmermann)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.