Hall and Nobel (1987) use the Granger-causality test to show that volatility influences velocity, leading them to conclude that the recent decline in the velocity of Ml is due to increased volatility of money growth which is alleged to be caused by the Federal Reserve's new operating procedures....

What caused the observed shift of M1 demand in the 1980s? Rival candidate explanations stress (1) M1 growth volatility, (2) disinflation, (3) rising real value of stocks, (4) rising volume of financial transactions, (5) rising household financial wealth, and (6) introduction into M1 of...

Standard M2 demand regressions generate prediction errors in 1990, 1991, and 1992 that cumulate to an overprediction of M2 of about 4.2 to 4.3 percent by the second quarter of 1992. These prediction errors are not large and can be accounted for by M2 demand regressions that include a yield curve...

It is inappropriate to ignore the behavior of money in explaining the generation and evolution of aggregate inflation over time. It is shown that over the period 1977 to 1987 an inflation model based on M2 demand describes more accurately the actual behavior of inflation than an...

An error-correction model is used to study the long- and short-run determinants of U.S. demand for M2. The money demand function presented here exhibits parameter stability and predicts quite well the actual behavior of M2 growth in the 1980s.

Conventional M1 demand functions reformulated using error-correction and cointegration techniques neither depict parameter stability nor satisfactorily explain short-run changes in M1. Thus, M1 remains unreliable as an indicator variable for monetary policy.