| dc.contributor.author |
Blomgren-Hansen, Niels |
en_US |
| dc.date.accessioned |
2009-02-04T10:27:46Z |
|
| dc.date.available |
2009-02-04T10:27:46Z |
|
| dc.date.issued |
2005-11-16T00:00:00Z |
en_US |
| dc.identifier.uri |
http://hdl.handle.net/10398/7575 |
|
| dc.description.abstract |
Samuelson (1958) analyses a three-period model, whereas Diamod (1965) considers a two-period model. This difference poses the question whether the insights derived by analysing the simple two-period model carry over in the more complicated three-period case. They do. The Samuelson model (no productive capital) has only one positive solution (r = n); however, this root is unstable. The Diamond model (no nonproductive abode of purchasing power) has also only one positive solution; the root is stable but inefficient. In a model with both productive capital and a non-productive abode of purchasing power, the inefficient Diamond solution becomes unstable and the socially optimal solution becomes stable. |
en_US |
| dc.format.extent |
10 s. |
en_US |
| dc.language |
eng |
en_US |
| dc.relation.ispartofseries |
Working paper;2005-015 |
en_US |
| dc.title |
A Three-period Samuelson-Diamond Growth |
en_US |
| dc.type |
wp |
en_US |
| dc.accessionstatus |
modt05nov16 miel |
en_US |
| dc.contributor.corporation |
Copenhagen Business School. CBS |
en_US |
| dc.contributor.department |
Økonomisk Institut |
en_US |
| dc.contributor.departmentshort |
ECON |
en_US |
| dc.contributor.departmentuk |
Department of Economics |
en_US |
| dc.contributor.departmentukshort |
ECON |
en_US |
| dc.idnumber |
x656503911 |
en_US |
| dc.publisher.city |
København |
en_US |
| dc.publisher.year |
2005 |
en_US |