Talk:Macroeconomics

Comment by 80.161.140.17

      Four-rate formula and Exchange-rate Formula?

Four-rate formula explains the mathematical relation of change rate in price, wage, interest rate and GDP (or GNP).

Exchange rate reqlll8888888888formula help to calculate exchange rate between different money with different productivity.

This book introduces a new theory of price system and a general theory of interest rate.

Please read a new mook:

THING AND ITS LAW, Chapter 3: Productive force ( the theory of price system)ISBN 1-58939-525-5. Published 2003 by Virtualbookworm.com Publishing Inc.

xiaozhong zhai

Comment by 203.146.108.8

People who edit this page should know something about economics. Do you think that Lucas would have received the nobel prize for simply a suggesting?

Furthermore, New Keysian economics does not provide strong micro foundations to Keysian economics.

Also, these so called schools of economic thought have no bearing on relevant macroeconomics and are very outdated and not used by anyone who knows economics anymore.

can i know more about the goals of macro economics?

am a young economist and i wish to ask certain questions on national income

Austrian economics is not a form of "macroeconomics"

Austrian economics rejects "macroeconomics", hence it's not a form of macroeconomics. Macroeconomics deals with the behavior of economic sectors and aggregate forces. Their methodological individualism explicitly rejects the macroeconomic\microeconomic distinction, the mainstream notion that firms and individuals act in ways that are quite different from the way that economic sectors act. 69.138.16.202 (talk) 11:49, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Suppose that government spending was increased by 10 units and that this increase was financed by a 10 unit increase in taxes. Would equilibrium income change or remain the same as result of these two policy action? If Equilibrium incime changed, in which direction would it move, and by how much? please explain. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.185.68.121 (talk) 04:15, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Comment -- the is ridiculous, intellectual error created by a simple semantic confusion. Boom and bust phenomena take place and must be explained. This is "macroeconomics" and Friedrich Hayek spent a good part of his career working in this field. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Greg Ransom (talk • contribs) 04:45, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Short-run link

I know nothing about economics, but it's not clear to me that link to short-run links to the correct article. It doesn't seem related.

The entry is an intellectual embarrassment

The history contained in this entry is massively false.

Example 1: There was all sorts of macroeconomic empirical work pre-1936. There were business cycle research institutes in many of the major countries of the world in the 1920s. Many of these still exist today. Mitchell's work was widely known far before 1936.

Example 2: There were all sorts of people working on trade cycle and monetary problems in the 100 years prior to 1936, folks in Germany, England, Sweden, and America. And its a fraud to represent these people as some sort of uniform "classical economics".

Example 3: Much or most of what people take to be "Keynesian Economics" existed in the work of other economists prior to Keynes' 1936 work (see Laidler, Fabricating the Keynesian Revolution", and the main pillar of 1930s-1970 "Keynesian Economics" wasn't Keynes, it was Hicks and Meade, etc.

Can't we fix this massive intellectual embarrassment? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Greg Ransom (talk • contribs) 04:40, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Innovation Economics

Uh, while there was a substantial literature that started in the 90's that focused on long term growth and innovation, I'm not sure that calling it an "alternative school of macroeconomics" is accurate - it was just one strand of Macro lit.radek (talk) 19:09, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

The list of "three approaches" is completely nonstandard (and unsupported by citations). Rinconsoleao (talk) 11:20, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

I removed the innovation economics as a school of macro thought.--Bkwillwm (talk) 17:42, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

need answers

investigate the requirement at the different stages of growth of an organization? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.0.7.1 (talk) 12:06, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

investigate the requirement at the different stages of growth of an organisation?

investigate the requirement at the different stages of growth of an organization?