IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/san/cdmawp/0504.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

How to Compare Taylor and Calvo Contracts: a comment on Michael Kiley

Author

Listed:
  • Huw Dixon

    ()

  • Engin Kara

    ()

Abstract

In a recent paper, Michael Kiley argued that the Calvo model of price adjustment is both quantitatively and qualitatively different from the Taylor model. What we show is that Kiley (along with most other people) are choosing the wrong parameterization to compare the two models. In effect they are comparing the average age of Calvo contracts with the completed length of Taylor contracts. When we compare the average age of Taylor contracts with the average of Calvo, the differences become much smaller and easier to understand. We also show that autocorrelation of output can be larger in a Taylor economy than in the age-equivalent Calvo economy.

Suggested Citation

  • Huw Dixon & Engin Kara, 2005. "How to Compare Taylor and Calvo Contracts: a comment on Michael Kiley," CDMA Working Paper Series 200504, Centre for Dynamic Macroeconomic Analysis.
  • Handle: RePEc:san:cdmawp:0504
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~wwwecon/CDMA/papers/wp0504.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mark Bils & Peter J. Klenow, 2004. "Some Evidence on the Importance of Sticky Prices," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 112(5), pages 947-985, October.
    2. V. V. Chari & Patrick J. Kehoe & Ellen R. McGrattan, 2000. "Sticky Price Models of the Business Cycle: Can the Contract Multiplier Solve the Persistence Problem?," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 68(5), pages 1151-1180, September.
    3. Michael Dotsey & Robert G. King & Alexander L. Wolman, 1999. "State-Dependent Pricing and the General Equilibrium Dynamics of Money and Output," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 114(2), pages 655-690.
    4. Emmanuel Dhyne & Luis J. Álvarez & Hervé Le Bihan & Giovanni Veronese & Daniel Dias & Johannes Hoffmann & Nicole Jonker & Patrick Lünnemann & Fabio Rumler & Jouko Vilmunen, 2005. "Price setting in the euro area: Some stylized facts from Individual Consumer Price Data," Working Paper Research 74, National Bank of Belgium.
    5. Lucas, Robert E, Jr, 1973. "Some International Evidence on Output-Inflation Tradeoffs," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 63(3), pages 326-334, June.
    6. Mikhail Golosov & Robert E. Lucas Jr., 2007. "Menu Costs and Phillips Curves," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 115, pages 171-199.
    7. Andrew S. Caplin & Daniel F. Spulber, 1987. "Menu Costs and the Neutrality of Money," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 102(4), pages 703-725.
    8. Andrew Caplin & John Leahy, 1997. "Aggregation and Optimization with State-Dependent Pricing," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 65(3), pages 601-626, May.
    9. 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.
    10. Eytan Sheshinski & Yoram Weiss, 1977. "Inflation and Costs of Price Adjustment," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 44(2), pages 287-303.
    11. Eytan Sheshinski & Yoram Weiss, 1983. "Optimum Pricing Policy under Stochastic Inflation," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 50(3), pages 513-529.
    12. Ricardo J. Caballero & Eduardo M. R. A. Engel, 1993. "Heterogeneity and Output Fluctuations in a Dynamic Menu-Cost Economy," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 60(1), pages 95-119.
    13. Blanchard, Olivier Jean & Kiyotaki, Nobuhiro, 1987. "Monopolistic Competition and the Effects of Aggregate Demand," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 77(4), pages 647-666, September.
    14. Robert J. Barro, 1972. "A Theory of Monopolistic Price Adjustment," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 39(1), pages 17-26.
    15. Matthew B. Canzoneri & Robert E. Cumby & Behzad T. Diba, 2004. "The Cost of Nominal Inertia in NNS Models," NBER Working Papers 10889, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    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:san:cdmawp:0504. 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: (the School of Economics). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/cdstauk.html .

    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 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.

    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.