[討論] Tobin的portfolio theory for money demand
新手po文請多指教
小弟在讀James Tobin的貨幣需求的資產組合理論時
發生了一個問題:
Gordon:Tobin's approach does not explain why anyone holds
currency or non-interest-bearing checking accounts
when safe, interest-bearing assets are available.
Mankiw:portfolio theories cannot explain the damand for
these dominated forms of money.
以上,我想問的是:
Tobin不就是說因為moeny可以分散風險,所以投資者才會將money納入
資產組合裡面.
那為什麼以上兩人會說資產組合理論不能解釋當有其它更
具價值(有報酬)的資產時,投資者還會將money(劣勢資產)納入組合裡.
阿不就是因為money可以分散風險嗎?
並且~
Mankiw還說該理論不適合於當money是限制於M1時的情形,若是限定在
M2,M3則非常合理.
請教各位版大~
謝謝!
--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc)
◆ From: 222.250.71.179
推
08/18 22:26, , 1F
08/18 22:26, 1F
→
08/18 22:27, , 2F
08/18 22:27, 2F
→
08/18 22:28, , 3F
08/18 22:28, 3F
→
08/18 22:29, , 4F
08/18 22:29, 4F
→
08/18 22:30, , 5F
08/18 22:30, 5F
推
08/18 22:43, , 6F
08/18 22:43, 6F
→
08/18 22:43, , 7F
08/18 22:43, 7F
推
08/19 00:58, , 8F
08/19 00:58, 8F
推
08/19 01:23, , 9F
08/19 01:23, 9F
推
08/19 12:34, , 10F
08/19 12:34, 10F
→
08/19 12:37, , 11F
08/19 12:37, 11F
→
08/19 12:39, , 12F
08/19 12:39, 12F
推
08/19 18:43, , 13F
08/19 18:43, 13F
推
08/21 22:54, , 14F
08/21 22:54, 14F
→
08/21 22:55, , 15F
08/21 22:55, 15F
→
08/21 22:58, , 16F
08/21 22:58, 16F