Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/238643 
Year of Publication: 
2020
Series/Report no.: 
Working Paper No. 953
Publisher: 
Levy Economics Institute of Bard College, Annandale-on-Hudson, NY
Abstract: 
The paper makes three contributions. First, following up on Nikiforos (2016), it provides an in-depth examination of the Federal Reserve measure of capacity utilization and shows that it is closer to a cyclical indicator than a measure of long run variations of normal utilization. Other measures, such as the average workweek of capital or the national emergency utilization rate are more appropriate for examining long-run changes in utilization. Second, and related to that, it argues that a relatively stationary measure of utilization is not consistent with any theory of the determination of utilization. Third, based on data on the lifetime of fixed assets it shows that for the issues around the “utilization controversy” the long run is a period after thirty years or more. This makes it a Platonic Idea for some economic problems.
Subjects: 
Accumulation
Growth
Distribution
Utilization
JEL: 
B22
O4
D3
D2
Document Type: 
Working Paper

Files in This Item:
File
Size
875.55 kB





Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.