Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorAraújo, Luis
dc.contributor.authorFerraris, Leo
dc.date.accessioned2019-07-03T14:56:08Z
dc.date.available2019-07-03T14:56:08Z
dc.date.issued2018-02-19
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10438/27661
dc.description.abstractGu, Mattesini, and Wright (2016) show that credit is irrelevant in a monetary economy with permanent buyer and seller types. In particular, the size of debt limits do not matter for the determination of real allocations. We revisit their irrelevance result in a monetary economy with random types, as in Lagos and Wright (2005). The presence of random types creates a misallocation of liquidity that can be redressed with the use of monetary loans. In these circumstances, credit is not irrelevant and the size of debt limits matter for the determination of real allocations. We use the model to examine the implications of conventional and unconventional policy interventions.eng
dc.language.isoeng
dc.subjectMoneyeng
dc.subjectCrediteng
dc.subjectEssentialityeng
dc.subjectMonetary policyeng
dc.titleMoney and credit remixeng
dc.typePapereng
dc.subject.areaEconomiapor
dc.subject.areaFinançaspor
dc.contributor.unidadefgvDemais unidades::RPCApor
dc.subject.bibliodataPolítica monetáriapor
dc.subject.bibliodataCréditospor
dc.subject.bibliodataComérciopor
dc.contributor.affiliationFGV
dc.rights.accessRightsopenAccesseng


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record