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

dc.contributor.author	MacDonald, Garry
dc.date.accessioned	2017-01-30T10:31:46Z
dc.date.available	2017-01-30T10:31:46Z
dc.date.created	2010-05-18T20:03:07Z
dc.date.issued	2004
dc.identifier.citation	Lewis, Philip E.T. and MacDonald, Garry. 2004. Modelling Aggregate Demand for Labour: A Reply to Dowrick and Wells. Economic Record. 80 (251): pp. 441-459.
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/3509
dc.identifier.doi	10.1111/j.1475-4932.2004.00201.x
dc.description.abstract	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.
dc.publisher	Blackwell Publishing Asia
dc.title	Modelling Aggregate Demand for Labour: A Reply to Dowrick and Wells
dc.type	Journal Article
dcterms.source.volume	80
dcterms.source.number	251
dcterms.source.startPage	441
dcterms.source.endPage	459
dcterms.source.issn	00130249
dcterms.source.title	Economic Record
curtin.accessStatus	Fulltext not available
curtin.faculty	Curtin Business School
curtin.faculty	School of Economics and Finance