Phantom escribió:No es un problema de liquidez. Es un problema de solvencia.
Más precisamente es una Trampa de Liquidez: La solución no es Monetaria.
http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trampa_de_la_liquidez
albert escribió:ahi para mi esta el kit de la cuestion,si con semejante estimulo no pudieron hacer arrancar la economia.........
si viene deflacion no veo la forma que aumenten los comodities ni la renta variable.
saludos
Velocity
A related way to think about a liquidity trap is in terms of monetary velocity: nominal GDP divided by the monetary base. (The identity, which is true by definition, is M * V = P * Y - the monetary base times velocity is equal to the price level times real output).
Velocity is just the dollar value of GDP that the economy produces per dollar of monetary base.
You can also think of velocity as the number of times that one dollar "turns over" each year to purchase goods and services in the economy. Rising velocity implies that money is "turning over" more rapidly, so that nominal GDP is increasing faster than the stock of money. If velocity rises, holding the quantity of money constant, you'll observe either growth in real output or inflation. Falling velocity implies that a given stock of money is being hoarded, so that nominal GDP is growing slower than the stock of money. If velocity falls, holding the quantity of money constant, you'll observe either a decline in real GDP or deflation.
The belief that an increase in the money supply will result in an increase in GDP relies on the assumption that velocity will not decline in proportion to the increase in money. Unfortunately for the proponents of "quantitative easing," this assumption fails spectacularly in the data - both in the U.S. and internationally - particularly at a zero interest rate.
http://www.fxstreet.com/fundamental/ana ... 010/11/08/
