菲利普斯曲线否定之否定的发展

菲利普斯曲线自提出以来,就受到了凯恩斯主义经济学家的高度重视,同时也受到了反凯恩斯主义学派的反对,围绕菲利普斯曲线,凯恩斯学派和反凯恩斯学派的争论从没有停止。以弗里德曼为首的货币主义学派认为短期菲利普斯曲线有效而长期无效,理性预期学派则从根本上否认了菲利普斯曲线的存在。但是,菲利普斯曲线作为反映通货膨胀率和失业率之间关系的是客观存在的,只是由于客观经济条件发生了变化,菲利普斯曲线存在的条件改变了,菲利普斯曲线才发生了移动。菲利普斯曲线只是说明通货膨胀和失业的相关性,并不意味着二者是因果关系,通货膨胀和失业的原因是不一致的。

The Development of Phillips Curve in the Negative

Since put forward, the Phillips Curve has been stressed by Keynes schools,but also was attacked by anti-Keynes schools. The debates around Keynes schools have never been interrupted. Monetarism, led by Friedman, considers that Phillips Curve is valid in short-term, but is invalid in long-term. The School of Rational Expectation Hypothesis consider that Phillips Curve is invalid no matter whether it is in long-term or short-term. But, Phillips Curve, which reflects the relation between inflation and unemployment exists no matter whether it was being disproved or proved. It was conditions Phillips Curve exists was changed that Phillips Curve shifted. Phillips Curve only expressed the relation between inflation and unemployment, not expressed the relation of result-cause, because inflation and unemployment contribute to different factors.