The document discusses NGDP targeting and its effects. It argues that NGDP targeting: 1) Only induces inflation and does nothing for real economic growth. 2) Diminishes the savings of older, poor, and middle-class savers by stealing value through inflation. 3) Data from several countries between 1950-1990 shows no correlation between money growth and real GDP growth, indicating that expanding the money base does not lead to real economic growth.

1. NGDP targeting is
- just inducing inflation, and
- does nothing for REAL growth
- diminishes the savings of older, poor and middle class savers
Country Money RGDP Inflation NGDP Time
growth growth growth period
Brazil 77.4% 5.6% 77.8% 83.4% 1963-90
Argentina 72.8% 2.1% 76.0% 78.1% 1952-90
Chile 47.3% 3.1% 42.2% 45.3% 1960-90
Israel 31.0% 6.7% 29.4% 36.1% 1950-90
Korea 22.1% 7.6% 12.8% 20.4% 1953-90
Iceland 18.4% 4.3% 18.8% 23.1% 1950-90
Portugal 11.5% 4.7% 9.9% 14.6% 1953-86
Britain 6.4% 2.4% 6.5% 8.9% 1951-90
U.S. 5.7% 3.1% 4.2% 7.3% 1950-90
Switzerland 4.6% 3.1% 3.2% 6.3% 1950-90
Robert Barro data, cited by
Scott Sumner 3-Apr-2012 in:
http://www.themoneyillusion.com/?p=13774

2. Growing the money base does NOTHING for REAL growth
Robert Barro data, cited by Scott Sumner 3-Apr-2012 in:
failure of NGDP targeting http://www.themoneyillusion.com/?p=13774
8%
data series for the 1950ties - 1990
7%
6%
5%
RGDP growth
4% Nothing !
3%
y = 0.003x + 0.0418
2% R2 = 0.0019
Series1
1% Linear (Series1)
0%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Money growth

3. Expanding money base just induces inflation
a.k.a. stealing from the older, and poor to middle class savers
Robert Barro data, cited by Scott Sumner 3-Apr-2012 in:
failure of NGDP targeting
http://www.themoneyillusion.com/?p=13774
90%
80% data series for the 1950ties - 1990
Expanding the
money base
70%
translates 1:1
60% into Inflation
in the long run
Inflation
50%
40%
30%
20%
y = 1.0342x - 0.0266
Series1
10% R2 = 0.9866 Linear (Series1)
0%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Money growth

4. Looks like a MINUS to me
http://www.themoneyillusion.com/?p=13760
“Germany has finally surpassed China, and now has the world’s
largest current account surplus; $202.9 billion according to
The Economist. But the US has an even more impressive
achievement; the world’s largest capital account surplus;
and astounding $473.4 billion. Germany may produce
nice cars, but no one can beat our assets.”
Looks like a PLUS to me
What that really means,
is a very different question,
see e.g. Barry Eichengreen
“Dark matter” !!
“The Economist” data on
trade, output etc.
http://www.economist.com/markets-data
latest (4/3/2012) trade data:
http://www.economist.com/node/21551521

5. Long term currency / trade and currency accounts
mid / long term developments can be predicted
Long term:
For mature countries are models: PPP, GSDEER, etc.
For emerging countries are models, too: Balassa-Samuelson, GS BRIC Nr. 99, etc.
Professional, non-academic models are better, of course : - )
Mid term:
Certain Currencies follow rather simple, models: Singapore, Malaysia, mainland China
Other currencies follow not so simple models: India, Brazil
Some (old and hard to understand) illustration of trade / FX rate modeling:
http://www.slideshare.net/genauer/currencies