Consumption, savings, and the meaning of the wealth effect in general equilibrium", Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond Economic Quarterly 87(3
Bibliographic record
Abstract
O ver the latter half of the 1990s, the U.S. economy experienced botha substantial decrease in the savings rate and a significant run-upin household net worth. Between 1994 and 2000, the gross private savings rate fell from 17 to 12 percent, while the personal savings rate declined from above 6 percent to less than zero. Over the same period, the value of household sector equity holdings (including those owned by nonprofits, pensions, and other fiduciaries) increased nearly 150 percent for a dollar gain in excess of $6 trillion. At some level, the decline in savings and the rise in household equity value during that period appeared to point towards a strengthening of the economy. According to the Permanent Income Hypothesis (PIH), households save less in a given period if they expect future increases in their income. Along these lines, the dramatic gain in stock market wealth was thought to partly reflect future opportunities made available to firms by rapid advances in information technology. Both the fall in savings and the rise in net wealth seemed consistent with the rapid growth of consumption during that period. Despite the rosy outlook implied by the PIH at the close of the decade, the U.S. economy slowed down considerably in 2000. Specifically, the growth rate of per capita consumption fell to 2 percent in the first quarter of 2001 from nearly 7 percent in the same quarter of the previous year. Between the first quarter of 2000 and that of 2001, household net worth fell by 8 percent, or The views expressed in this article are the authors ’ and do not necessarily represent those of the Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond or the Federal Reserve System. We wish to thank
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".