ther long description about deflation both in the introduction and then again in the second paragraph exclusively devoted to explaining the same (A serious error though is evident in the second page, line four, stating “ Two main causes for deflation are stocks to aggregate supply and stocks to aggregate demand”. On the contrary, deflation is marked by an aggregation of supplies, but demand does not. Barring this blemish, the explanations on deflation, its character, causes and effect are worthy of praise, considering its simplicity and subtle reasoning. Considering the background situation, the papers’ comparison of the Japanese deflation and the Great Depression of US and the identification of the similarities is commendable. Backing it up with comparative data would have given more credibility to the argument.
The sections in the paper present a logical organization of the content to be described. Naturally, the introduction is followed by the description of the intended area of study, the primary tools of correction, their effect in countering deflation, and finally, the conclusion transgress in a clear and coherent way. The construction of the sentences and presentation of facts affects the clarity of thought, spoiling the understanding of the intended message. To cite an example, page three, second paragraph, first sentence states, “The money supply and money velocity did not decrease, however it did not immediately increase to make up for the shocks in the good and services market”. Of course, the statement is true, but it could have been presented better. Say, the sentence could have been in this way, “Though the monetary supply and velocity was adequately maintained, it did not react immediately and increase to make up for the shocks in the goods and services market”. It would have also made the next sentence more meaningful and continuous. This accentuates the easy understanding of the complex nature of the subject.
The paper is presented