Talk:IS-LM model: Difference between revisions
imported>Nick Gardner |
imported>Nick Gardner No edit summary |
||
| (2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
There was no response to the above, so I have tackled the problem myself. Having drafted a verbal explanation, I have found some of it repeated under the heading of "history" so I have done some deleting. I plan some further clarification and I hope to deal with criticisms of Keynesianism elsewhere and then delete the references to it from this article. [[User:Nick Gardner|Nick Gardner]] 08:38, 19 November 2009 (UTC) | There was no response to the above, so I have tackled the problem myself. Having drafted a verbal explanation, I have found some of it repeated under the heading of "history" so I have done some deleting. I plan some further clarification and I hope to deal with criticisms of Keynesianism elsewhere and then delete the references to it from this article. [[User:Nick Gardner|Nick Gardner]] 08:38, 19 November 2009 (UTC) | ||
:Could you label, or make more vivid, the definitions of i and Y in the graphic? I assume they are interest and some metric of total income (disposable? other?). [[User:Howard C. Berkowitz|Howard C. Berkowitz]] 15:02, 20 November 2009 (UTC) | |||
::I wouldn't know how! I didn't create the graph and I don't know how to edit it (I have never mastered wiki graphics so advice on how to would be welcome) [[User:Nick Gardner|Nick Gardner]] 17:35, 21 November 2009 (UTC) | |||
Now that I have drafted a non-technical account of IS-LM, I am wondering what to do with the remaining text. Most of it is really about the Keynesian model rather than IS-LM as such - and that topic is dealt with now in the developing article on [[Keynesian theory]]. I am tempted to delete most of it and replace it with comments that are directly relevant to IS-LM. Any objections? [[User:Nick Gardner|Nick Gardner]] 17:43, 21 November 2009 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 11:43, 21 November 2009
My first impression is that this article is a model of clarity, drafted in impeccable English. However, I'm sure that it will repay a more careful reading, and I will return to it soon. Nick Gardner 11:27, 12 September 2008 (CDT)
- It looks very good to me too, but lacking some important developments about the limits of the model and the very important use that has been made of it (historical perspective and not only economic). --Quentin Michon 07:44, 13 September 2008 (CDT)
Suggestion for a change of format
This is an admirably clear and professional explanation of the Hicks-Hansen model, and I do not suggest altering any part of it. What I do suggest is an extension and a rearrangement that would bring its format in line with the other economics articles. The extension would be the addition of a piece of text aimed at the "intelligent layman" that would explain what IS-LM means without the use of equations or diagrams. I accept that this is very difficult to do, but I feel sure that it can be done in such a way as to satisfy that category of reader. The rearrangement would be the transfer of most of the existing text to a Tutorials subpage. Is anyone willing to tackle this? Nick Gardner 20:50, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
There was no response to the above, so I have tackled the problem myself. Having drafted a verbal explanation, I have found some of it repeated under the heading of "history" so I have done some deleting. I plan some further clarification and I hope to deal with criticisms of Keynesianism elsewhere and then delete the references to it from this article. Nick Gardner 08:38, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
- Could you label, or make more vivid, the definitions of i and Y in the graphic? I assume they are interest and some metric of total income (disposable? other?). Howard C. Berkowitz 15:02, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
- I wouldn't know how! I didn't create the graph and I don't know how to edit it (I have never mastered wiki graphics so advice on how to would be welcome) Nick Gardner 17:35, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
Now that I have drafted a non-technical account of IS-LM, I am wondering what to do with the remaining text. Most of it is really about the Keynesian model rather than IS-LM as such - and that topic is dealt with now in the developing article on Keynesian theory. I am tempted to delete most of it and replace it with comments that are directly relevant to IS-LM. Any objections? Nick Gardner 17:43, 21 November 2009 (UTC)