Search

Begin New Search Topic Investment Political Geography North America

51. Do Fundamentals Explain the International Impact of U.S. Interest Rates? Evidence at the Firm Level

Author:
John Ammer, Clara Vega, and Jon Wongswan
Publication Date:
10-2008
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System
Abstract:
This paper analyzes the impact of U.S. monetary policy announcement surprises on U.S. and foreign firm-level equity prices. We find that U.S. monetary policy has important influences on foreign equity prices on average, but with considerable variation across firms. We have found that this differing response reflects a range of factors, including the extent of a foreign firm's exposure to U.S. demand, its dependence on external financing, the behavior of interest rates in its home country, and its sensitivity to portfolio adjustment by U.S. investors. The cross-firm variation in the response is correlated with the firm’s CAPM beta; but it cannot fully explain this variation. More generally, we see these results as shedding some additional light on the nature and extent of the monetary and financial linkages between the United States and the rest of the world. In particular, since we are able to explain differences across foreign firms’ responses through established theories of monetary transmission, our results are consistent with the surprisingly large average foreign response to U.S. rates reflecting fundamentals, rather than an across-the-board behavioral over-reaction.
Topic:
Monetary Policy, Investment, Interest Rates, and Credit
Political Geography:
United States and North America

52. The Columbian Exchange and the Reversal of Fortune

Author:
Thomas Grennes
Publication Date:
01-2007
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
The Cato Journal
Institution:
The Cato Institute
Abstract:
It is difficult to think about modern American food without including hamburgers and hotdogs. It is also difficult to think about popular American history without cowboys mounted on horseback tending herds of cattle. However, before the arrival of Columbus in 1492 there were no cattle or pigs in America to provide beef and pork for hamburgers and hotdogs. There was no wheat to make hamburger and hotdog buns. There were no horses for cowboys or Indians to ride. The European settlers brought with them cattle, pigs, horses, wheat, and many other plants and animals that became the foundation for modern food and agriculture in the Western Hemisphere. It is also difficult to think about modern Mexican food without including rice, tacos filled with meat, refried beans in animal fat, cheese in enchiladas, and sugar, cinnamon, and milk in chocolate. However, Mexico in 1492 had none of these ingredients. The massive transplantation of plants and animals across the Atlantic Ocean in both directions has been called the Columbian Exchange (Crosby 1972). It has been described as the “greatest human intervention in nature since the invention of agriculture (Fernandez-Armesto 2002: 165), and it has had an enormous effect on the Americas and the entire world. The Columbian Exchange altered the kind of food Americans and Mexicans eat, the kind of agricultural products produced in both countries, and the entire pattern of world economic growth. This article will concentrate on the effects of the Columbian Exchange, but the exchange of plants and animals was part of a broader process of trade, migration, investment, colonization, and exchange of ideas that followed the voyages of discovery by Columbus and others. The same Old World plants and animals were introduced to the two regions that would become the United States and Mexico, but the effects in the two countries were substantially different.1 The United States was the poorer neighbor in 1492, but it became relatively richer. The purpose of this article is to show how differences in institutional development affected responses to the same opportunities. I shall concentrate on developments in the United States and Mexico, but the Canadian experience was similar to the U.S. response, and the response in the rest of Latin America was similar to the Mexican response (Cole et al. 2005).
Topic:
Migration, History, Food, Investment, Trade, and Columbian Exchange
Political Geography:
North America, Mexico, and United States of America