Re: Son of unit roots -Reply

[ACSLKS@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx id <01HMVZ6URFNA8Y6RLT@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Fri, 10 Feb 1995 14:43:16 -0400 (EDT)]

> Dear JMC.
>
> I don't know but I think that you are expecting a response about
> certain factor variables not only included in, but certainly those
> that entirely compose, the extent of "knowledge" that is exchanged on
> these here channels - more or less that pertains to your inquiry
> about the econometric acceptability/feasibility/usabilty that certain
> of monterist/money&banking sort of variables have to make.  But, I do
> have a great suspectivness about your subject of general enquiry. It
> seems I have a problem in general with such abstract subjects as
> "money and banking" so to speak, just because it in itself might not
> be the provacative issue, rather its expediency in questioning the
> rigor of, hang on to your hats, the micro foudations of macro. I
> admire greatly moneteriest/money and banking groupies way of honing
> in on the quite conspicuous problematic of how micro foundations do
> not fit in within any context or attempts to understand distributive
> problems-  neoclassicl stuff is unable to grasp and understand the
> full complexity of the problems involeved - my question is why do all
> you post-keynsians insist on honing in on noe-classical solutions to
> problems that arose due immeditely to the acceptance of certain
> neo-classical errors - I think one has to get ones micro foundations
> correct - and than one will be in a better position to address
> realistic problems with realistic answers.
>
> By the way, what's it like living in Hong Kong?
>
> laura ebert
> New School for Social Research
> Civilization
> NYC, NY
> USA
>

With all due respect, what does your diatribe have to do with the questions
posed by JMC on unit roots????

Lonnie K. Stevans