de Groot, Richter, and Throckmorton, 2018 argue that the model in Basu and Bundick, 2017 can match the empirical evidence only because the model assumes an asymptote in the economy's response to an uncertainty shock. In this Reply, we provide new results showing that our model's ability to match the data does not rely either on assuming preferences that imply an asymptote nor on a particular value of the intertemporal elasticity of substitution. We demonstrate that shifting to preferences that are not vulnerable to the Comment's critique does not change our previous conclusions about the propagation of uncertainty shocks to macroeconomic outcomes.
MLA
Basu, Susanto, and Brent Bundick. “Uncertainty Shocks in a Model of Effective Demand: Reply.” Econometrica, vol. 86, .no 4, Econometric Society, 2018, pp. 1527-1531, https://doi.org/10.3982/ECTA16262
Chicago
Basu, Susanto, and Brent Bundick. “Uncertainty Shocks in a Model of Effective Demand: Reply.” Econometrica, 86, .no 4, (Econometric Society: 2018), 1527-1531. https://doi.org/10.3982/ECTA16262
APA
Basu, S., & Bundick, B. (2018). Uncertainty Shocks in a Model of Effective Demand: Reply. Econometrica, 86(4), 1527-1531. https://doi.org/10.3982/ECTA16262
The Executive Committee of the Econometric Society has approved an increase in the publication fees for papers in its two Open Access journals, Quantitative Economics and Theoretical Economics.
By clicking the "Accept" button or continuing to browse our site, you agree to first-party and session-only cookies being stored on your device. Cookies are used to optimize your experience and anonymously analyze website performance and traffic.