Modelling Aggregate Demand for Labour: A Reply to Dowrick and Wells

Dowrick and Wells (2004) have attempted to point to what they see as a number of fundamental misinterpretations in a recent paper by Lewis and MacDonald (202) estimating demand for labour in Australia. However, it is argued that it is a particular assumption about a nominal price setting that leads...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: MacDonald, Garry
Format: Journal Article
Published: Blackwell Publishing Asia 2004
Online Access:http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/3509
_version_ 1848744251682193408
author MacDonald, Garry
author_facet MacDonald, Garry
author_sort MacDonald, Garry
building Curtin Institutional Repository
collection Online Access
description Dowrick and Wells (2004) have attempted to point to what they see as a number of fundamental misinterpretations in a recent paper by Lewis and MacDonald (202) estimating demand for labour in Australia. However, it is argued that it is a particular assumption about a nominal price setting that leads to their results being different from that of the standard literature on labour demand. When the usual assumption are adopted, the results of Lewis and MacDonald (2002) hold and, therefore, are correct.
first_indexed 2025-11-14T05:58:30Z
format Journal Article
id curtin-20.500.11937-3509
institution Curtin University Malaysia
institution_category Local University
last_indexed 2025-11-14T05:58:30Z
publishDate 2004
publisher Blackwell Publishing Asia
recordtype eprints
repository_type Digital Repository
spelling curtin-20.500.11937-35092017-09-13T15:54:29Z Modelling Aggregate Demand for Labour: A Reply to Dowrick and Wells MacDonald, Garry Dowrick and Wells (2004) have attempted to point to what they see as a number of fundamental misinterpretations in a recent paper by Lewis and MacDonald (202) estimating demand for labour in Australia. However, it is argued that it is a particular assumption about a nominal price setting that leads to their results being different from that of the standard literature on labour demand. When the usual assumption are adopted, the results of Lewis and MacDonald (2002) hold and, therefore, are correct. 2004 Journal Article http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/3509 10.1111/j.1475-4932.2004.00201.x Blackwell Publishing Asia restricted
spellingShingle MacDonald, Garry
Modelling Aggregate Demand for Labour: A Reply to Dowrick and Wells
title Modelling Aggregate Demand for Labour: A Reply to Dowrick and Wells
title_full Modelling Aggregate Demand for Labour: A Reply to Dowrick and Wells
title_fullStr Modelling Aggregate Demand for Labour: A Reply to Dowrick and Wells
title_full_unstemmed Modelling Aggregate Demand for Labour: A Reply to Dowrick and Wells
title_short Modelling Aggregate Demand for Labour: A Reply to Dowrick and Wells
title_sort modelling aggregate demand for labour: a reply to dowrick and wells
url http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/3509