Tape 128 - Analysis of recent international money market activity

Download
- Rights
- Limited Re-Use
  CC BY-NC 4.0
  More Rights Info
- Files (1)
- MP3
- Please be patient with media downloads. They are often large files.
Share

Embed Code
<iframe src='https://idn.duke.edu/ark:/87924/r4c53fh5v?embed=true' height='125px' width='100%' frameborder='0' marginwidth='0' marginheight='0' scrolling='no' loading='lazy' allowfullscreen></iframe>
Permalink

https://idn.duke.edu/ark:/87924/r4c53fh5v
Skip to Item Info

Loading the media player...

Files for this Item

Transcript

Transcripts may contain inaccuracies.

-	Welcome once again as MIT Professor Paul Samuelson	0:02
	discusses the current economic scene.	0:05
	This series is produced	0:07
	by Instructional Dynamics, Incorporated.	0:08
	This program was recorded May 15.	0:10
-	The big news today is the rise in the price of gold	0:13
	in the free markets of London, Paris, and Zurich.	0:18
	I had a report just this morning	0:23
	that the price of gold had gone well above $100,	0:25
	$125, but I can't vouch for the accuracy	0:29
	of that particular report.	0:33
	Of course, this makes news, and of course,	0:35
	there is no shortage of explanations	0:38
	for the increase in price.	0:41
	The usual explanation given is that people	0:43
	abroad and perhaps in the United States	0:48
	are upset by the Watergate affair.	0:50
	There's a credibility gap	0:52
	concerning the American government.	0:54
	Presumably, if we try to connect this up	0:56
	with economic events, it means	0:59
	that there's some doubt as to whether the president	1:00
	and his administration can govern,	1:03
	but to add to the fun, to add to the speculative run	1:07
	against the dollar in favor of gold,	1:15
	there has been a recurring rumor	1:19
	that the German Mark was going to be up valued once again.	1:21
	As far as I know, no substance has appeared	1:26
	to confirm that particular rumor,	1:31
	but the speculators who are buying gold	1:33
	as if there were no tomorrow obviously have the hope	1:36
	that this will become a self-fulfilling prophecy,	1:38
	and so we have to ask ourself, what does this mean	1:42
	for the American economy?	1:46
	What does it mean for the American rate of unemployment,	1:48
	level of production, price level,	1:51
	and what does it mean for the possibility	1:54
	of another dollar depreciation?	1:59
	After all, we've already had two dollar depreciations	2:02
	just this year, in February and in March,	2:05
	and this follows, more or less, hard on the heels	2:08
	of the Smithsonian agreement of December 1971.	2:11
	This morning, the Department of Commerce	2:19
	released the bad news in connection	2:22
	with the first quarter's balance of payments deficit.	2:26
	That balance of payments deficit	2:29
	for the first quarter went to over $10 billion,	2:31
	much worse than in the fourth quarter of last year.	2:35
	Of course, my telephone rang, and the NBC radio	2:39
	wanted me to comment on that.	2:43
	I had to say that the first quarter	2:45
	was the quarter of the two dollar depreciations,	2:50
	and you have in that first quarter	2:52
	all of the panic conditions that took place	2:54
	in February and March.	2:59
	If one looks at the hard economic news	3:01
	divorced from the speculative markets,	3:05
	there actually was a cheerful improvement	3:08
	in the balance of payments on merchandise accounts	3:13
	in March, the third month of the quarter.	3:18
	That's the last month for which we have actual reports.	3:21
	Instead of being deeply in the negative,	3:26
	deeply in deficits, our merchandise balance,	3:30
	that is, our total of exports of goods	3:34
	and then subtracted from that, the total of our imports	3:39
	of goods by value, that came almost into balance.	3:42
	Very small, negative number.	3:46
	We mustn't attach too much importance to one month's news	3:50
	and to the ups and downs that take place in one month,	3:55
	but it at least is a movement in the right direction,	3:58
	but nevertheless, the, it will take a good deal of time	4:03
	to know whether the medicine of further dollar depreciation,	4:08
	which took place early in 1973,	4:13
	is working, and whether it is working in the correct dosage.	4:17
	The background against which this problem	4:22
	has to be noted is that we've had an upswing	4:25
	in the imports of goods into the United States,	4:29
	which has had an annual percentage rate of growth	4:32
	well above the annual percentage rate of growth	4:36
	of exports of the United States.	4:40
	Of course, that statistical time series	4:44
	is contaminated by the fact that everything's happening	4:49
	all at once.	4:52
	We have a recession in 1970.	4:53
	We have a very strong upturn in 1972	4:58
	and continuing into 1973, and Europe went into recession	5:01
	after we did and came out after we did	5:05
	and is now in a strong upturn,	5:08
	but even when you allow for that,	5:10
	there has been until recently an adverse trend	5:14
	in our import position relative to our export position,	5:18
	so the medicine of dollar depreciation	5:22
	has a lot of work to do.	5:27
	There's condition there which needs to be corrected.	5:28
	I don't suppose the economic historian of the future	5:32
	will necessarily say that America at this stage of the game	5:35
	needs a whopping balance of payment surplus	5:40
	on merchandise account because we are building up,	5:44
	gradually, a surplus on invisible account.	5:47
	This is because of our very heavy foreign investments	5:51
	abroad in earlier years, which can be expected	5:54
	to give rise to a stream of return dividends, interest,	5:58
	earnings, plow back on repatriated earnings and royalties.	6:02
	Moreover, that stream of investment,	6:11
	while it's happening, in some degree, adds to our export	6:13
	merchandise credit items.	6:19
	For example, if a Carbon Black company	6:22
	in America begins to invest in Europe,	6:26
	it may be exporting to itself a good deal of machinery	6:29
	and raw materials from its American plants.	6:34
	Nevertheless, as recently as 1964,	6:39
	we did have a fairly sizeable,	6:42
	$5 billion, $6 billion, $4 billion surplus	6:44
	on merchandise account, and it's that	6:50
	which has gone away since 1971,	6:52
	and it's that which in some measure must be corrected,	6:56
	and it's that which has been very slow	7:00
	to show definite signs of being corrected.	7:04
	If you interrogate six economists,	7:09
	six experts in the field of international economics,	7:12
	I think you can get three of them to say	7:15
	that the recent rash of dollar depreciations	7:17
	is, if anything, excessive, and they may be right,	7:23
	but it's too early to see in the data	7:29
	whether or not they are going to be right	7:33
	particularly since, as has been mentioned many times	7:36
	on these tapes, in the short run,	7:39
	the effects of a recent depreciation can well be perverse.	7:42
	Instead of having elasticity optimism in the very short run,	7:47
	we have elasticity pessimism, and that means	7:50
	that the depreciation makes things,	7:53
	in the very short run, look worse.	7:55
	We pay more for goods from abroad,	7:58
	and our physical imports haven't yet changed much,	8:01
	and we realize less from our exports.	8:06
	There's good deal of double counting in such calculations.	8:14
	I guess if I were asked to be one of those six economists	8:20
	and to give my view, I cannot conscientiously say	8:25
	that from the standpoint of the fundamental,	8:29
	basic balance of payments of the United States,	8:32
	that's from the fundamental balance on current account	8:35
	taking into account invisibles	8:39
	and taking into account our government expenditures,	8:41
	which we insist upon making, and taking into account	8:45
	our normal, long term, private foreign investment	8:48
	which our investors want to make,	8:53
	taking all those into consideration,	8:56
	if we had been in equilibrium for the last dozen years,	8:58
	then I don't think I could conscientiously say	9:02
	that the dollar ought to be depreciated further.	9:05
	I think I lean as far in that direction	9:10
	as most modern economists, but still,	9:13
	I try to be judicious in these matters.	9:17
	Nevertheless, it could be that the dollar	9:21
	is still overvalued, and we will learn that.	9:24
	It may be, though, to repeat, that the majority	9:28
	of the international experts are right,	9:32
	and that the dollar is no longer overvalued.	9:33
	Still, we have to ask ourselves this question,	9:38
	with the dollar having been toppled two	9:42
	or three times by frenzied speculative movements.	9:44
	These speculative movements weren't the origin	9:48
	of the problem, but they intensified the problem.	9:51
	Is it possible that even though the dollar	9:56
	shouldn't be further devalued from the standpoint	9:58
	of the basic balance, that it in fact	10:01
	will be further depreciated, and I guess I have to say	10:03
	yes, there is a perfectly good chance of that.	10:07
	In fact, you'd be rash, in the middle of a monetary crisis,	10:10
	to predict that the crisis is going to go away	10:13
	and that we're gonna return to business	10:16
	as usual at the status quo ante crisis	10:18
	as far as the parity is concerned.	10:24
	We know that with $80 billion already swelling	10:28
	the gorged stomachs of the central banks abroad,	10:32
	I am referring to Germany, for example, I am referring	10:36
	to Japan, that they may not be so blithely willing	10:40
	to meet any new crisis, even if they think	10:45
	that this new crisis is unjustified,	10:50
	by continuing to support the dollar.	10:52
	I must say, I wouldn't advise them to do so.	10:55
	The result then would be that if they don't support	10:59
	the dollar, and they don't put in exchange control,	11:01
	and if they don't put in split exchange rates,	11:03
	that the dollar, during the crisis period	11:06
	will depreciate further, the Mark will rise,	11:09
	and if we had freely floating exchange rates,	11:13
	that would presumably be the way to meet the crisis.	11:16
	Let the dollar depreciate.	11:19
	Separate the men from the boys among the speculators	11:21
	because once the dollar has depreciated,	11:24
	then you've got just as bad a chance of being whipsawed	11:26
	by a movement against you if you take a position	11:32
	in Marks and away from the dollars	11:35
	as you have of getting a movement in your favor.	11:37
	Whereas, while there's support operations,	11:41
	then you, as a speculator, have pretty much a one way ride.	11:44
	Heads, you win, and tails, you don't lose.	11:50
	Nevertheless, there doesn't seem to be any very good signs	11:56
	that the religion of floating exchange rates	12:00
	has been converting the officials of the rest of the world,	12:04
	so it's premature to speculate	12:11
	as to what will happen from this particular crisis.	12:14
	I guess it's fair to say there's a 40% it'll go away,	12:16
	a 40% chance that there'll be some kind of controls	12:20
	in the form of interest rate penalties in Germany,	12:29
	and that leaves you with at least a 20% chance	12:36
	that the Germans will give up and will let	12:39
	the Mark float in the short run.	12:41
	Once again, one might point out,	12:44
	that is, an economist might point out,	12:46
	that if the Germans do let that Mark float upward,	12:48
	it's not quite as tragic for their export industries	12:52
	as you might think because if this is only	12:55
	an unjustified crisis brought about by a war of nerves,	12:58
	by a set of jitters, by a Watergate political incident,	13:03
	by the hope that it can be converted	13:08
	into a self-fulfilling prophecy,	13:10
	but if no more than that is at the bottom,	13:12
	then the Mark, which floats upward,	13:16
	can, at a later date, float downward.	13:18
	This is the sort of topic, of course,	13:25
	which we have encountered again and again,	13:27
	and I dare say that in the months ahead,	13:30
	we'll find ourselves discussing,	13:35
	once again, these very same factors.	13:37
	To return to a matter of recurring interest to people,	13:41
	what about the role of gold in our private system?	13:46
	Should American citizens have restored	13:54
	to them the right to hold gold?	13:58
	This topic does not die away.	14:00
	I have expressed my opinion on it.	14:03
	I have no reason to change that opinion.	14:05
	To repeat, I think that we should work	14:10
	towards getting gold out of the monetary system.	14:14
	We should work toward having a system	14:17
	of SDRs, a system of international reserves	14:21
	in which, perforce, the key currencies of the past,	14:26
	the pound before World War One	14:31
	and in a degree still before World War Two	14:34
	and the dollar, which was riding so high as a key currency	14:37
	at the end of World War Two, these will,	14:41
	I believe, whatever we do about it,	14:43
	increasingly have less luster as a medium of exchange	14:47
	in which to hold your liquidity, as a medium of exchange	14:52
	in which to make international interventions in connection	14:56
	with floating or semi-floating exchange rates,	15:00
	or stabilized exchanged rates,	15:04
	and I think in terms of making contracts,	15:06
	that we will find that an awful lot of contracts	15:11
	will still be made in terms of dollars	15:14
	because the American GNP is still more	15:16
	than one quarter of the world GNP, and more	15:22
	than any other single currency units GNP.	15:24
	The American society, despite the shenanigans	15:31
	at Watergate, is still one of the more stable societies	15:35
	from the standpoint of expropriation of assets,	15:39
	and therefore, the dollar will not go out of fashion	15:44
	as an international holding overnight.	15:48
	Nevertheless, it will, I think,	15:52
	never again be what it could be at the end	15:54
	of World War Two, when the dollar was undervalued,	15:57
	which meant it was a very good thing to hold,	16:01
	when America had, probably, more than 50%	16:03
	of world GNP, and I think we have to accept that	16:07
	as a fact of life.	16:15
	Agreed then, that the hope is to move gold	16:20
	out of the monetary system gradually,	16:25
	but we must equally be agreed that that date	16:30
	at which it has been removed is still very far off.	16:32
	There still is a great deal of the gold virus	16:36
	in the cells of the central bankers of the world,	16:39
	in the cells of governments abroad.	16:45
	Indeed, the very fuss about the right to hold gold	16:49
	in the United States shows that the gold virus	16:53
	is not out of the cells of the United States' citizenry,	16:55
	and I may add, it's not completely out of the cells	17:00
	of the United States' government officials	17:03
	and central bank officials.	17:06
	Therefore, anything which increases	17:10
	the demand for gold now, in the free market,	17:14
	it seems to me, adds to the fetish of gold	17:18
	and is not to be encouraged.	17:23
	Consequently, I think it would both be dangerous	17:27
	to pass the legislation which was proposed	17:31
	in the House and Senate, that individual citizens	17:35
	are again to have the right to hold gold,	17:38
	to pass it in its original form.	17:41
	I think it would be less dangerous	17:44
	if it's passed in the most likely form	17:45
	in which it's gonna be passed, which is that,	17:48
	at the discretion of the president,	17:52
	when he says that the time is safe	17:54
	for American citizens to hold gold,	17:56
	then they shall given the right.	17:58
	That would be very dangerous if the president	18:02
	was very likely to use that power,	18:04
	to give citizens the right to hold gold soon,	18:06
	but I think realism would keep any president,	18:09
	until the fundamentals have changed,	18:14
	from agreeing to that, but still,	18:17
	don't underestimate the political pressures.	18:20
	What about the other side of the supply and demand equation?	18:26
	What about permitting us to sell off	18:29
	from our $10 billion odd gold stock held in Fort Knox	18:31
	or elsewhere some of that gold at these high world prices?	18:36
	A case could be made for that.	18:44
	The trouble is that that's the only $10 billion	18:47
	worth of gold stock which we have,	18:50
	and when we get rid of it, it is gone,	18:52
	and who is to say what the future of gold price will be?	18:54
	Now, I don't want to say the United States	19:01
	should hold off selling at $120 dollars an ounce	19:03
	because I have a confident view	19:07
	that if we just wait a while, it'll be 140.	19:10
	That I'm not thinking about, but what I'm thinking	19:14
	about is that if we and some other central banks	19:16
	sell off gold, that could mean that most	19:20
	of the supply could only be sold at rates	19:24
	much lower than this, much lower are prevailing	19:27
	this morning and the hysterical market,	19:30
	and it could be that the longer term rate	19:32
	of gold as a metal, gold as something to be used	19:36
	in wedding rings and in dental inlays	19:39
	and in electric relays, that might have a higher price.	19:42
	I don't think that people have thought through	19:49
	the many proposals that I read about in the newspapers,	19:53
	and when I read Congressional testimony,	19:58
	which is that the two tier system should be dropped.	20:01
	There's nothing sacred about the two tier system	20:06
	in which all the central banks	20:07
	never again do any trading with the free market,	20:09
	but what isn't realized is that if you go	20:13
	into a halfway house and certain central banks	20:15
	are permitted, at their discretion,	20:19
	to sell gold, then you will succeed in creating	20:22
	de facto what is already a partial fact,	20:26
	namely, that within the official tier system,	20:30
	although SDRs are supposed to be as good as gold,	20:33
	although various promises and swaps between nations	20:35
	are to be as good as gold, in fact,	20:39
	nobody in his right mind in the official family	20:42
	of 125 nations thinks of gold as being worth $42.22	20:45
	an ounce, and they would be mad to think that	20:50
	if just around the corner is the possibility	20:53
	that we will be joining the two tiers	20:57
	with conduits between them and that you'll be able	21:00
	to get rid of some of your gold	21:02
	at $80, $90, $100 an ounce.	21:04
	What you've done, in effect, by having the uncertainty	21:08
	on this manner, is to completely immobilize	21:11
	all official gold as any kind of an effective reserve	21:15
	because it's a reserve which nobody	21:19
	will ever pay out in the present state of affairs.	21:21
	Well, let's wait for a future occasion	21:27
	to see how the international situation develops.	21:29
	Let me turn now to a question	21:33
	that I am being increasingly asked.	21:34
	I am being asked, what is the effect	21:37
	of the Watergate scandals upon the American economy?	21:40
	And there seems to be a conviction	21:47
	that since it has such a great political effect,	21:49
	at least for the moment, we don't know how long	21:52
	memories are in these matters,	21:54
	that it must have a great economic effect.	21:56
	It certainly is doing very well	22:02
	as an explanation for everything	22:04
	which observers want to explain.	22:05
	The American stock market has been behaving very poorly.	22:08
	We're now down below the lows of the year.	22:11
	It's a very convenient thing to blame the drop	22:15
	in the stop market, 18 points yesterday, for example,	22:18
	on the gold speculation and on the Watergate uneasiness.	22:22
	Is there anything reasonable in that?	22:29
	Well, where something so mercurial	22:32
	as the animal spirits that guide the stock markets	22:36
	of the world, which determine the price earnings ratios	22:39
	at which equities are valued as against the basic,	22:43
	GNP forces which determine those earnings	22:47
	and the path of growth of those earnings,	22:49
	where such ephemeral, psychological matters are concerned,	22:53
	I see no reason to rule out concern over Watergate	23:00
	as a causal factor.	23:05
	Of course, concern over Watergate translates itself,	23:09
	rationally, into a concern as to how much the president	23:12
	is implicated and how much he's going to be hampered	23:16
	in his ability to govern.	23:20
	For example, will he be able to make his vetos stick?	23:21
	Will we have an impasse between the president and Congress?	23:25
	We've already seen, in connection with the financing	23:28
	of the Cambodian bombing, that now,	23:31
	for the first time, both houses have gone on record	23:34
	as refusing financing for that purpose,	23:37
	and so if you think that the ship of state	23:43
	is going to be without a rudder,	23:46
	I'm not talking now about the more ominous possibilities,	23:47
	such as the impeachment of the president	23:51
	or such as his voluntary resignation	23:54
	or such as the impeachment of the president	23:56
	plus a successful conviction of him	24:00
	by the Senate and removing of him from office.	24:04
	I'm just talking about the fact that his mandate,	24:07
	his majority, has been very much hampered.	24:10
	I must say, as one who didn't fully approve	24:16
	of the way he was using what he conceived to be his mandate,	24:21
	I don't find this a completely bad thing,	24:24
	and I think you could, on a rational basis,	24:27
	make an argument that the president's inability	24:30
	to veto excessive appropriations,	24:35
	instead of in the short run being a bearish factor,	24:39
	say, for the GNP forecaster,	24:43
	could be an expansionary factor.	24:45
	I hate to say bullish factor because if the economy	24:48
	is over strong and you add fuel to the fire,	24:50
	and particularly if that flame spends itself	24:52
	primarily in increasing the rate of price inflation	24:56
	because it can no longer much expand the rate	25:00
	of output expansion, then the word bullish is misused.	25:03
	We're left, then, with the chronic guessing game	25:13
	which was been going on for some time,	25:19
	namely, although the economy is overly strong,	25:21
	our last quarterly figures for which we have data,	25:25
	that is, the first quarter of 1973,	25:29
	showed almost an 8% increase in the real GNP,	25:32
	more than 14% increase in the nominal, or money, GNP.	25:37
	After you add the price inflation rate	25:41
	of 6% to it, that is overly strong.	25:45
	That is adding to the lags and delivery time.	25:49
	That is expanding the amount of overtime	25:55
	in the American economy.	26:00
	That is ominously building a platform	26:02
	for a later slow down, and yet,	26:10
	at the same time that all of that is true,	26:15
	when we look at a dozen, really two dozen,	26:19
	different, new americo forecasts,	26:23
	you find that with rare exceptions,	26:26
	those forecasts, whether they are of a equational,	26:29
	computer type or whether they are of a judgmental type,	26:33
	with rare exceptions, those forecasts agree	26:37
	that by the fourth quarter of the rear,	26:40
	the rate of real growth in the American GNP	26:43
	will be way down from 8%, down by more than half,	26:47
	down in many cases, according to the forecaster,	26:54
	below 4%, and in particular, below the 4 1/3% rate	26:57
	which represents the long term par for the American economy.	27:03
	I might in this connection just read to you	27:09
	the latest Wharton quarterly model computer print out.	27:13
	This is something which was prepared this month,	27:21
	May 2nd, 1973, and the numbers I wanna call	27:24
	your attention to are the real GNP rate of growth.	27:30
	That's 7.9% in the first quarter.	27:36
	That's the first estimate.	27:39
	That is not a forecast.	27:41
	Then, for the second quarter, the quarter	27:43
	which we are now in, the quarter	27:45
	where we're right in the middle of it,	27:48
	the Wharton School Model predicts	27:50
	that that will drop to 6.1%.	27:52
	That is almost a 2% drop.	27:56
	I believe that if it works out that way,	27:59
	we have to regard that as a healthy development	28:01
	because 6% is as much as, I think,	28:06
	the doctor would order for the American economy	28:12
	at this stage of the game.	28:14
	There is almost a 1% in the price deflator	28:16
	for this second quarter.	28:22
	Now, that would be a happy outlook	28:25
	if that same moderation and tapering off continued	28:31
	and if we were then to float into a maintainable level.	28:37
	I wouldn't, for example, think that even 5%	28:43
	would be a bad annual rate of real growth	28:46
	because our productivity has been very strong	28:49
	in the first quarter of the year	28:53
	and in the last quarter of last year,	28:54
	and we might hope at this, I can't say early stage	28:56
	of the expansion, but not late stage of the expansion,	29:01
	that we could continue to have some good news	29:03
	on the productivity front, but let me tell you what.	29:05
	Already, by the third quarter, remember,	29:07
	we're talkin' now about just after the Fourth of July,	29:10
	and by Labor Day, the rate of real growth,	29:14
	according to the Wharton Model, is down to 2 1/3%.	29:18
	Now, the inflation is down to about 3 2/3%,	29:23
	but if you add those two together,	29:27
	you get only a 6% increase in the money, GNP.	29:29
	That itself, if it's continued for any length of time,	29:34
	has it be termed a mini-recession, a growth recession.	29:37
	Well, growth recession is perhaps	29:42
	the better word than a mini-recession.	29:43
	How does it go in the fourth quarter?	29:46
	Well, the fourth quarter of the year,	29:47
	the Wharton School Model, is down to 2 1/3,	29:48
	well, still 2 1/3% real growth.	29:51
	First quarter of next year, it pops up to 3 3/4%.	29:56
	Still, though, notice, below par of 4% or 4 1/3%,	30:00
	then it's 4% in the second quarter of 74,	30:06
	then down below 2% in the third quarter,	30:11
	then about 3%, and it isn't until the first part	30:14
	of 1975 that the economy is bouncing back	30:20
	to above its growth rate.	30:23
	For the year 1974 as against the year 1973,	30:26
	the Wharton Model shows only a 3.2% rate of real growth.	30:30
	I'm concentrating on the rate of real growth	30:35
	because it seems to be, that that's where the well-being	30:37
	of the American economy resides.	30:39
	Now, that picture, if it were true,	30:43
	would require me to change the advice	30:48
	which I have been giving, which I have been giving,	30:51
	now, for six or eight months, namely that we should lean	30:53
	against the wind, that we should try to make this expansion	30:57
	be a healthy, lasting one, rather than one	31:00
	which blows its top with just a few 8% quarters	31:03
	and is followed by an inventory turnaround	31:08
	and a mini-recession, and in the forecasts	31:11
	of many people, actually a genuine recession,	31:15
	in which the real GNP drops.	31:20
	If I believe the Wharton School Model,	31:23
	in view of the lags that take place	31:26
	between any policy which is followed now	31:28
	and the time in which that policy takes effect,	31:30
	it is too late for moderation to curb the excess	31:34
	of the boom, but although I have high respect	31:39
	for the Wharton Model, and although I have the humility	31:44
	not to try to go against all the forecasters	31:49
	when they are having a consensus,	31:51
	I still don't have all that much confidence	31:54
	about the ability of forecasters to forecast ahead	31:57
	and in particular, to forecast a change in the wind,	32:00
	and so I'm tempering my advice,	32:04
	but I have not yet gone over to the other side.	32:06
	I would not consider it a defeat	32:09
	or an inconsistency to go over to the other side	32:11
	because I do not believe that the way to minimize	32:13
	the squared deviations from good performance	32:17
	of the American economy is by a process of gradualism.	32:20
	I think that what you have to do	32:24
	is to form the best Bayesian probabilities	32:25
	of the situation about six months ahead	32:29
	and base your policy on that basis	32:30
	and be activistic, knowing that your later activism	32:33
	can negate you present activism	32:38
	if you've held on too long or have been going	32:42
	in the right direction, and if you use	32:43
	optimal control theory and if you have the opinion	32:46
	of kinds of errors which occur in the American economy	32:49
	which I have, you will find that that kind of activism	32:51
	is actually better than the gradualism	32:54
	as far as achieving good performance.	32:58
-	If you have any questions or comments	33:02
	for Professor Samuelson, address them	33:03
	to Instructional Dynamics, Incorporated,	33:05
	166 East Superior Street, Chicago, Illinois, 60611.	33:08

Item Info

Title:

Tape 128 - Analysis of recent international money market activity

Date:

1973

Contributor:

Samuelson, Paul A. (Paul Anthony), 1915-2009

Subject:

Format:

audiocassettes

Language:

English

Digital Collection:

Paul A. Samuelson papers, 1933-2010 and undated

Source Collection:

Paul A. Samuelson papers, 1933-2010

Series:

Economics Cassette Series: Paul Samuelson

Rights:

Limited Re-Use

CC BY-NC 4.0

Rights Note:

This material is made available for research, scholarship, and private study. Copyright in this material has not been transferred to Duke University. For reuses of this material beyond those permitted by fair use or otherwise allowed under the Copyright Act, please see our page on copyright and citations: https://library.duke.edu/rubenstein/research/citations-and-permissions.

Identifier:

RL10082-CS-0125
ref2389_jeh
samuelsonpaul
duke:325148
pstau001125
ark:/87924/r4c53fh5v
a2983b0d-5698-41e5-a331-dfd2852cedad

Permalink:

https://idn.duke.edu/ark:/87924/r4c53fh5v

Sponsor:

Sponsor this Digital Collection

Tape 128 - Analysis of recent international money market activity

Transcript

Item Info

Economists' Papers Archive

More Info & Options