Habit Formation and the Persistence of Monetary Shocks

This paper studies the persistent effects of monetary shocks on output. Previous empirical literature documents this persistence, but standard general equilibrium models with sticky prices fail to generate output responses beyond the duration of nominal contracts. This paper constructs and estimates a general equilibrium model with price rigidities, habit formation, and costly capital adjustment. The model is estimated via Maximum Likelihood using US data on output, the real money stock, and the nominal interest rate. Econometric results suggest that habit formation and adjustment costs to capital play an important role in explaining the output effects of monetary policy. In particular, impulse response analysis indicates that the model generates persistent, hump-shaped output responses to monetary shocks.

Les transferts de fonds virtuels – une technologie innovatrice et un moyen potentiel de blanchiment d’argent

Travail dirigé présenté à la Faculté des études supérieures et postdoctorales en vue de l’obtention du grade de Maître ès sciences (M.Sc) en Criminologie – Option sécurité intérieure

The Money Question and the Good Life

This paper proposes a theory of the good life for use in answering the question how much money the rich should spend on fighting poverty. The paper moves from the abstract to the concrete. To begin with, it investigates various ways to get an answer to the question what is good, and finds itself drawn to objective theories of the good. It then develops, taking Bernard Williams and Martha Nussbaum as its guides, a broad outline of a theory of the good. It holds that something evil happens to people if they do not have a real choice from a reasonable number of projects that realize most of their key capacities to a certain degree, and in connection to this it points to the great importance of money. The paper goes on specifically to consider what criticisms of Nussbaum's version of the capability approach are implied in this outline of a theory of the good. Next, it gets more specific and asks how much money the rich can give -and how they can be restricted in spending their money- without suffering any evil. It does three suggestions: the tithe suggestion, the ecological (or footprint) suggestion, and the fair trade suggestion. To conclude, the paper returns to the question how much money the rich should spend on fighting poverty.