update_money_inflation_nonlinear

Delete 'this lecture' before {doc}.

Author: longye-tian

lectures/money_inflation_nonlinear.md

@@ -15,18 +15,18 @@ kernelspec:
 
 ## Overview
 
-We study stationary and dynamic *Laffer curves* in the inflation tax rate in a non-linear version of the model studied in this lecture {doc}`money_inflation`.
+We study stationary and dynamic *Laffer curves* in the inflation tax rate in a non-linear version of the model studied in {doc}`money_inflation`.
 
 We use the log-linear version of the demand function for money that  {cite}`Cagan`
-used in his classic paper in place of the linear demand function used in this lecture {doc}`money_inflation`. 
+used in his classic paper in place of the linear demand function used in {doc}`money_inflation`. 
 
 That change requires that we modify parts of our analysis.
 
 In particular, our dynamic system is no longer linear in state variables. 
 
 Nevertheless, the economic logic underlying an  analysis based on what we called ''method 2''  remains unchanged.  
 
-We shall discover qualitatively similar outcomes to those that we studied  in the lecture  {doc}`money_inflation`.
+We shall discover qualitatively similar outcomes to those that we studied  in {doc}`money_inflation`.
 
 That lecture presented a linear version of the model in this lecture.  
 
@@ -37,7 +37,7 @@ As in that  lecture,  we discussed these topics:
 * perverse dynamics under rational expectations in which the system converges to the higher stationary inflation tax rate
 * a peculiar comparative stationary-state analysis connected with that stationary inflation rate that assert that inflation can be *reduced* by running *higher*  government deficits 
 
-These outcomes will set the stage for the analysis of this lecture {doc}`laffer_adaptive` that studies a version of the present model that  uses a version of "adaptive expectations" instead of rational expectations.
+These outcomes will set the stage for the analysis of {doc}`laffer_adaptive` that studies a version of the present model that  uses a version of "adaptive expectations" instead of rational expectations.
 
 That lecture will show that 
 
@@ -314,7 +314,7 @@ print('eq_g == g:', np.isclose(eq_g(m_seq[-1] - m_seq[-2]), model.g))
 
 ## Slippery side of Laffer curve dynamics
 
-We are now equipped  to compute  time series starting from different $p_0$ settings, like those in  this  lecture {doc}`money_inflation`.
+We are now equipped  to compute  time series starting from different $p_0$ settings, like those in {doc}`money_inflation`.
 
 ```{code-cell} ipython3
 :tags: [hide-cell]
@@ -399,17 +399,17 @@ Those dynamics are "perverse" not only in the sense that they imply that the mon
 * the figure indicates that inflation can be *reduced* by running *higher*  government deficits, i.e., by raising more resources through  printing money. 
 
 ```{note}
-The same qualitive outcomes prevail in this lecture {doc}`money_inflation` that studies a linear version of the model in this lecture.
+The same qualitive outcomes prevail in {doc}`money_inflation` that studies a linear version of the model in this lecture.
 ```
 
 We discovered that 
 
 * all but one of the equilibrium paths converge to limits in which the higher of two possible stationary inflation tax prevails
 * there is a unique equilibrium path associated with "plausible" statements about how reductions in government deficits affect a stationary  inflation rate
 
-As in  this lecture {doc}`money_inflation`,
+As in {doc}`money_inflation`,
 on grounds of plausibility, we  again recommend  selecting the unique equilibrium that converges to the lower stationary inflation tax rate. 
 
-As we shall see, we  accepting  this recommendation is a key ingredient of outcomes of the "unpleasant arithmetic" that we describe in   lecture {doc}`unpleasant`.
+As we shall see, we  accepting  this recommendation is a key ingredient of outcomes of the "unpleasant arithmetic" that we describe in {doc}`unpleasant`.
 
-In lecture, {doc}`laffer_adaptive`, we shall explore how  {cite}`bruno1990seigniorage` and others justified our equilibrium selection in other ways.
+In {doc}`laffer_adaptive`, we shall explore how  {cite}`bruno1990seigniorage` and others justified our equilibrium selection in other ways.