<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Larry Summers on Upward-Sloping AD</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.arnoldkling.com/blog/larry-summers-on-upward-sloping-ad/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.arnoldkling.com/blog/larry-summers-on-upward-sloping-ad/</link>
	<description>taking the most charitable view of those who disagree</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 21 Dec 2020 13:48:53 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
		<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=4.0.32</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Horspool</title>
		<link>http://www.arnoldkling.com/blog/larry-summers-on-upward-sloping-ad/#comment-454304</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Horspool]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 03 Nov 2014 19:07:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.arnoldkling.com/blog/?p=4194#comment-454304</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Perhaps I am just too thick to study economics, but I really don&#039;t get it.  How does increasing inflation decrease the real interest rate?  I mean, obviously absent state intervention higher inflation implies a higher nominal interest rate, since lenders will demand (real return + inflation) in nominal currency units.  And I could believe that inflation might push up real interest rates too, by increasing uncertainty-- the increased likelihood of default by borrowers whose income, fixed in nominal terms of currency units, decreases in real terms, might drive lenders to demand higher real rates as risk compensation.  But I can&#039;t think of a plausible mechanism running from more inflation to lower real interest rates.

Can anyone help me?  Dr. Kling?

Central-bank intervention has kept market interest rates low for several years, but only by monetizing government and TBTF debt.  Private lenders would like to demand higher interest rates but are competed down by central-bank money-printing.  Private borrowing seems low despite the low interest rates mainly, I think, because of credit rationing and the difficulty of identifying any investment likely to earn more than even the low nominal interest rate on borrowed capital.

It is a truism that on average over some time all investment classes offer the same return (net of taxes and some allowance for risk-- and subject to Eric-Falkenberg-type envy effects), because any class offering outsized returns attracts more investment until competed-down to average.  So in theory when the central bank says it will supply funds to any investment at a very low rate, no entrepreneur will pay more than that rate for funds, so no investor can expect to earn a return over that rate; possibly not even equal to it, net of transaction costs unsubsidized by the central bank.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Perhaps I am just too thick to study economics, but I really don&#8217;t get it.  How does increasing inflation decrease the real interest rate?  I mean, obviously absent state intervention higher inflation implies a higher nominal interest rate, since lenders will demand (real return + inflation) in nominal currency units.  And I could believe that inflation might push up real interest rates too, by increasing uncertainty&#8211; the increased likelihood of default by borrowers whose income, fixed in nominal terms of currency units, decreases in real terms, might drive lenders to demand higher real rates as risk compensation.  But I can&#8217;t think of a plausible mechanism running from more inflation to lower real interest rates.</p>
<p>Can anyone help me?  Dr. Kling?</p>
<p>Central-bank intervention has kept market interest rates low for several years, but only by monetizing government and TBTF debt.  Private lenders would like to demand higher interest rates but are competed down by central-bank money-printing.  Private borrowing seems low despite the low interest rates mainly, I think, because of credit rationing and the difficulty of identifying any investment likely to earn more than even the low nominal interest rate on borrowed capital.</p>
<p>It is a truism that on average over some time all investment classes offer the same return (net of taxes and some allowance for risk&#8211; and subject to Eric-Falkenberg-type envy effects), because any class offering outsized returns attracts more investment until competed-down to average.  So in theory when the central bank says it will supply funds to any investment at a very low rate, no entrepreneur will pay more than that rate for funds, so no investor can expect to earn a return over that rate; possibly not even equal to it, net of transaction costs unsubsidized by the central bank.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lord</title>
		<link>http://www.arnoldkling.com/blog/larry-summers-on-upward-sloping-ad/#comment-454176</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Lord]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 02 Nov 2014 16:45:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.arnoldkling.com/blog/?p=4194#comment-454176</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[PSST seems to be secular stagnation writ large, whether due to psychology or technology raising the questions why aren&#039;t we doing more to discover and exploit new ideas and where the bottlenecks are and why these are so synced though technology is recognized as lumpy.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>PSST seems to be secular stagnation writ large, whether due to psychology or technology raising the questions why aren&#8217;t we doing more to discover and exploit new ideas and where the bottlenecks are and why these are so synced though technology is recognized as lumpy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
