dimelab dimelab: shrinking the gap between talk and action.

government spending Topic in The Credit Debacle Catalog

boost government spending (1); cut government spending (2); economy limits nominal government spending because (1); federal government spending dictate (1); federal government spends (2); finance government spending (2); government spending expansion (1); government spends directly employs 2 (1); government-spending-induced extended inflation (1); net government spending (2); profligate government spending (1).

Social Democracy for the 21st Century: A Post Keynesian Perspective Thu 2010-09-30 08:12 EDT

Would Keynes have endorsed Modern Monetary Theory/Neochartalism?

...what would Keynes have thought of neochartalism/modern monetary theory (MMT)? MMT developed from Abba Lerner's theory of functional finance, as well as G. F. Knapp's theory of chartalism, as propounded in his book The State Theory of Money...MMT tells us that the government is the monopoly issuer of its own currency. Hence the government is not revenue-constrained. Taxes and bond issues do not finance government spending. No entity with the power to create and destroy money at will requires anyone to ``fund'' its spending. Having said this, one must immediately say that, even though deficits are not ``financially'' constrained in the normal sense, they do face real constraints in the inflation rate, exchange rate, available resources, capacity utilization, labour available (= unemployment level), and external balance...My discussion is based on the fundamental article by David Colander on this subject...``Lerner approached Keynes and asked: `Mr. Keynes, why don't we forget all this business of fiscal policy, public debt and all those things, and have some printing presses.' Keynes, after looking around the room to see that no newspaper reporters could hear, replied: `It's the art of statesmanship to tell lies but they must be plausible lies.' ''...

21st century; endorsed Modern Monetary Theory/Neochartalism; Keynes; Post Keynesian Perspective; social democracy.

billy blog Wed 2010-09-29 10:15 EDT

Budget deficits do not cause higher interest rates

...An often-cited paper outlining the ways in which budget deficits allegedly push up interest rates is -- Government Debt -- by Elmendorf and Mankiw (1998 -- subsequently published in a book in 1999). This paper was somewhat influential in perpetuating the mainstream myths about government debt and interest rates...Their depiction of...Ricardian equivalence...alleges that: ``the choice between debt and tax finance of government expenditure is irrelevant...[because]...a budget deficit today...[requires]...higher taxes in the future...'' ...I have dealt with this view extensively...Ignoring the fact that the description of a government raising taxes to pay back a deficit is nonsensical when applied to a fiat currency issuing government, the Ricardian Equivalence models rest [on] several key and extreme assumptions about behaviour and knowledge. Should any of these assumptions fail to hold (at any point in time), then the predictions of the models are meaningless. The other point is that the models have failed badly to predict or explain key policy changes in the past. That is no surprise given the assumptions they make about human behaviour. There are no Ricardian economies. It was always an intellectual ploy without any credibility to bolster the anti-government case that was being fought then (late 1970s, early 1980s) just as hard as it is being fought now...So where do the mainstream economists go wrong? At the heart of this conception is the [pre-Keynesian] theory of loanable funds...where perfectly flexible prices delivered self-adjusting, market-clearing aggregate markets at all times...Mankiw claims that this ``market works much like other markets in the economy''...[assuming] that savings are finite and the government spending is financially constrained which means it has to seek ``funding'' in order to progress their fiscal plans. The result competition for the ``finite'' saving pool drives interest rates up and damages private spending. This is what is taught under the heading ``financial crowding out''...Virtually none of the assumptions that underpin the key mainstream models relating to the conduct of government and the monetary system hold in the real world...When confronted with increasing empirical failures, the mainstream economists introduce these ad hoc amendments to the specifications to make them more realistic...The Australian Treasury Paper [used advanced econometric analysis to find that] domestic budget deficits do not drive up interest rates. The long-run effect...is virtually zero. The short-run effect is zero!...toss out your Mankiw textbooks...

Billy Blog; budgets deficit; caused higher Interest rate.

billy blog Sat 2010-09-18 10:52 EDT

There is no solvency issue for a sovereign government

...There is no debt crisis in sovereign nations. The only public debt problems that have emerged in the current crisis have been in non-sovereign countries and even then with appropriate ``fiscal support'' those crisis were managed. I am referring to the intervention by the ECB when they decided to purchase outstanding public debt in the secondary bond markets -- which amounte to a fiscal act within a flawed monetary system. But blurring the distinction between sovereign and non-sovereign nations is the starting gate for this absurd journey in self-importance...From a Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) perspective public Debt/GDP ratios have no relevance at all. What exactly do they tell us? The implication is that the bigger the economy the larger the tax base and so the government can support more debt. But a sovereign government does not need to tax to spend and its taxation powers serve different functions...It might be that the size of the economy limits nominal government spending because it provides some indication of the real resource base but that doesn't tell us anything about the capacity of the government to service any outstanding debt. A sovereign government can always service its nominal debts. It simply credits a bank account when the interest or maturity payments are due...

Billy Blog; solvency issue; sovereign Government.

Phil's Favorites - By Ilene Thu 2010-08-19 15:58 EDT

Time for a New, New Deal?

...The Big Lie being told by the right is that we can solve our problems by cutting spending and (ROFL) lowering taxes...Of course, let's keep in mind that the $1.5Tn the government spends directly employs 2.7M people and millions more indirectly so, for every person you cut, make sure you add back $20,000 a year for unemployment benefits and administration (or are we going to throw them all on the street?)...the real glove-across-your-face insult to your intelligence comes when they try to tell you that giving tax breaks to the rich and to corporations will help...US Corporations only paid a grand total of $138Bn in taxes in 2009 (6.5% of all taxes collected)...US Corporations have done nothing but outsource America's future for decades and it is time for the bottom 99% of the income earners (those earning less than $250,000 a year) to wake up and smell the class warfare that is being waged against them. How can we even begin to entertain the idea of cutting government and cutting government spending when the sum total contribution of Big Business America represents a rounding error in our national budget?...When private business fails to expand, when the budgets cannot be balanced because 25% of the population is unable to make income tax contributions due to loss of jobs and homes -- then a wise man knows when it is time to step in and let the Government fill the void. Not with more bailouts to the rich who, like Reagan's deficit ``are big enough to care for themselves'' but with bold programs that invest in the future of this country and utilize the skills and labor of this country and make America strong and independent...

Ilene; new; new deal; Phil's Favorites; Time.

New Economic Perspectives Tue 2010-08-03 14:12 EDT

The CBO's Misplaced Fear of a Looming Fiscal Crisis

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has just released an 8-page brief titled "Federal Debt and the Risk of a Fiscal Crisis." In it you will find all the traditional arguments regarding government deficits and debt: "unsustainability," "crowding out", bond rates rising to "unaffordable" levels because of fears that the Treasury would default or "monetize the debt," the need to raise taxes to pay for interest servicing and government spending, the need "to restore investor's confidence" by cutting government spending and raising taxes. This gives us an opportunity to go over those issues one more time...

CBO's Misplaced Fear; looming fiscal crisis; New Economic Perspectives.

New Deal 2.0 Sun 2010-07-25 16:08 EDT

Marriner S. Eccles: Keynesian Evangelist Before Keynes

...From direct experience, [1930s Federal Reserve chairman Marriner S. Eccles] realized that bankers like himself, by doing what seemed sound on an individual basis, by calling in loans and refusing new lending in hard times, only contributed to the financial crisis. He saw from direct experience the evidence of market failure. He concluded that to get out of the depression, government intervention, something he had been taught was evil, was necessary to place purchasing power in the hands of the public. In the industrial age, the mal-distribution of income (which was hugely unequal) and the excessive savings for capital investment always lead to the masses exhausting their purchasing power, unable to sustain the benefits of mass production that such savings brought...By denying the masses necessary purchasing power, capital denies itself of the very demand that would justify its investment in new production. Credit can extend purchasing power but only until the credit runs out, which would soon occur without the support of adequate income...Eccles, who never attended university or studied economics formally, articulated his pragmatic conclusions in speeches a good three years before Keynes wrote his epoch-making The General Theory of Employment, Interest, and Money (1936)....Eccles' transformation from a businessman, brought up to believe in survival of the fittest, to his belief in government spending on the neediest can teach us many lessons today...The solution is to start the money flowing again by directing it not toward those who already have a surplus, but to those who have not enough. Giving more money to those who already have too much would take more money out of circulation into idle savings and prolong the depression...Eccles promoted a limited war on poverty and unemployment, not on moral but on utilitarian grounds.

0; Keynes; Keynesian Evangelist; Marriner S. Eccles; new dealing 2.

Wed 2010-07-21 10:34 EDT

Paul Debates Jamie and MMT | Corrente

Paul Krugman, well-known for his opposition to the austerity concerns of the deficit terrorists and his advocacy of additional Government stimulus to lower unemployment and end the recession, just ignited a paradigm conflict which promises to clarify for many, the issues dividing ``deficit doves'' like Paul, from economists who take a Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) approach to economics, which holds, among other things, that Government deficits and surpluses are not, in themselves important, and that Government spending has to be evaluated relative to its impact on public purposes...this conclusion and also Paul's first post both set up a ``straw man,'' because Jamie never claimed that deficits are never a problem, and even pointed to circumstances (conditions of full employment) where deficits could lead to inflation. Given the comments on Paul's first blog, including a very clear comment by Marshall Auerback, it should have been clear to him that he was distorting the position of both Jamie and MMT. But evidently, Paul didn't want to admit that...Jamie and the MMT economists are opposed to the very idea, the very framing of Government's role in the economy in a way that makes everything subject to deficits, national debts, and debt-to-GDP ratios. The position of MMT is that these numbers are just endogenous consequences of real economic activity including Government fiscal activity, and that it is this activity that ought to drive them and not the other way around...

Corrente; MMT; Paul Debates Jamie.

Wed 2010-07-21 10:26 EDT

Professor Jamie Galbraith's testimony to Deficit Commission | Angry Bear

1. Clouds Over the Work of the Commission. ... 2. Current Deficits and Rising Debt were Caused by the Financial Crisis. ... 3. Future Deficit Projections are Generally Based on Forecasts which Begin by Assuming Full Recovery, but this Assumption is Highly Unrealistic. ... 4. Having Cured the Deficits with an Unrealistic Forecast, CBO Recreates them with Another, Very Different, but Equally Unrealistic Forecast. ... 5. The Only Way to Reduce Public Deficits is to Restore Private Credit. ... 6. Social Security and Medicare "Solvency" is not part of the Commission's Mandate. ... 7. As a Transfer Program, Social Security is Also Irrelevant to Deficit Economics. ... 8. Markets are not calling for Deficit Reduction; Now or Later. ... 9. In Reality, the US Government Spends First & Borrows Later; Public Spending Creates a Demand for Treasuries in the Private Sector. ... 10. The Best Place in History (for this Commission) Would be No Place At All.

Angry Bear; deficit Commission; Professor Jamie Galbraith's testimony.

Tue 2010-06-01 16:23 EDT

billy blog >> Blog Archive >> In the spirit of debate ...

Readers of my blog often ask me about how modern monetary theory sits with the views of the debt-deflationists (and specifically my academic colleague Steve Keen). Steve and I have collaborated in the last few days to foster some debate between us on a constructive level with the aim of demonstrating that the common enemy is mainstream macroeconomics and that progressive thinkers should target that school of thought rather than looking within...hopefully, this initiative will broaden the debate and bring more people up to speed on where the real enemy of full employment lies...The modern monetary system is characterised by a floating exchange rate (so monetary policy is freed from the need to defend foreign exchange reserves) and the monopoly provision of fiat currency. The monopolist is the national government. Most countries now operate monetary systems that have these characteristics...the monetary unit defined by the government has no intrinsic worth...The viability of the fiat currency is ensured by the fact that it is the only unit which is acceptable for payment of taxes and other financial demands of the government.The analogy that mainstream macroeconomics draws between private household budgets and the national government budget is thus false. Households, the users of the currency, must finance their spending prior to the fact. However, government, as the issuer of the currency, must spend first (credit private bank accounts) before it can subsequently tax (debit private accounts)... Taxation acts to withdraw spending power from the private sector but does not provide any extra financial capacity for public spending...As a matter of national accounting, the federal government deficit (surplus) equals the non-government surplus (deficit). In aggregate, there can be no net savings of financial assets of the non-government sector without cumulative government deficit spending...contrary to mainstream economic rhetoric, the systematic pursuit of government budget surpluses is necessarily manifested as systematic declines in private sector savings...Unemployment occurs when net government spending is too low. As a matter of accounting, for aggregate output to be sold, total spending must equal total income (whether actual income generated in production is fully spent or not each period). Involuntary unemployment is idle labour unable to find a buyer at the current money wage. In the absence of government spending, unemployment arises when the private sector, in aggregate, desires to spend less of the monetary unit of account than it earns. Nominal (or real) wage cuts per se do not clear the labour market, unless they somehow eliminate the private sector desire to net save and increase spending. Thus, unemployment occurs when net government spending is too low to accommodate the need to pay taxes and the desire to net save...Unlike the mainstream rhetoric, insolvency is never an issue with deficits. The only danger with fiscal policy is inflation which would arise if the government pushed nominal spending growth above the real capacity of the economy to absorb it...government debt functions as interest rate support via the maintenance of desired reserve levels in the commercial banking system and not as a source of funds to finance government spending...there is no intrinsic reason for...

Billy Blog; blogs Archive; Debate; Spirit.

Sat 2010-05-22 20:00 EDT

"Drop Dead Economics": The Financial Crisis in Greece and the European Union

Financial lobbyists are using the Greek crisis as an object lesson to warn about the need to cut back public spending on Social Security and Medicare. This is the opposite of what the Greek demonstrators are demanding: to reverse the global tax shift off property and finance onto labor, and to give labor's financial claims for retirement pensions priority over claims by the banks to get fully paid on hundreds of billions of dollars of recklessly bad loans recently reduced to junk status. The Greek bailout should be thought of as a TARP for German and other European bankers and global currency speculators. Almost $1 trillion is being provided by governments (mainly Germany, at the cost of its own domestic spending) into a kind of escrow account for the Greek government to pay foreign bondholders who bought up these securities at plunging prices over the past few weeks. They will make a killing, as will buyers of hundreds of billions of dollars of credit-default swaps on the Greek government bonds, speculators in euro-swaps and other casino-capitalist gamblers. (Parties on the losing side of these swaps now will need to be bailed out as well, and so on ad infinitum.) This windfall is to be paid by taxpayers -- ultimately those of Greece (in effect labor, because the wealthy have been untaxed) -- to reimburse Euro-governments, the IMF and even the U.S. Treasury for its commitment to predatory finance. The ³sanctity of debt -- sacrificing the economy to pay bondholders -- is to be used as an excuse to slash Greek public services, pensions and other government spending...

Drop Dead Economics; European Union; Financial Crisis; Greece.

Thu 2010-05-13 13:39 EDT

The People v. the Bankers

Financial lobbyists here in the U.S. are using the Greek crisis as an object lesson to warn about the need to cut back public spending on Social Security and Medicare. This is the opposite of what the Greek demonstrators are demanding: to reverse the global tax shift off property and finance onto labor, and to give labor's financial claims for retirement pensions priority over claims by the banks to get fully paid on hundreds of billions of dollars of recklessly bad loans recently reduced to junk status. Let's call the ``Greek bailout'' what it is: a TARP for German and other European bankers and global currency speculators. The money is being provided by other governments (mainly the German Treasury, cutting back its domestic spending) into a kind of escrow account for the Greek government to pay foreign bondholders who bought up these securities at plunging prices over the past few weeks...This windfall is to be paid by taxpayers -- ultimately those of Greece (in effect labor, because the wealthy have been untaxed) -- to reimburse Euro-governments, the IMF and even the U.S. Treasury for its commitment to predatory finance. The payment to bondholders is to be used as an excuse to slash Greek public services, pensions and other government spending. It will be a model for other countries to impose similar economic austerity...

bankers; people.

Mon 2010-04-26 15:01 EDT

Economic Plague in the Euro Zone

President Obama has long decried our ``out of control'' government spending. He clearly gets this nonsense from the manic deficit terrorists who do not understand these accounting relationships that we've sketched out. As a result he continues to advocate that the government leads the charge by introducing austerity packages -- just when the state of private demand is still stagnant or fragile. By perpetuating these myths, then, the President himself becomes part of the problem. He should be using his position of influence, and his considerable powers of oratory, to change public perceptions and explain why these deficits are not only necessary, but highly desirable in terms of sustaining a full employment economy...

economic plague; Euro Zone.

zero hedge Fri 2010-01-29 16:36 EST

Guest Post: Government Spending, Bank Lending And Inflation

Submitted by Kletus Klump In his latest weekly commentary, Inflation Myth and Reality, Dr. John Hussman makes the argument that changes-in federal government spending dictate the future path of inflation. As shown below, his data set covers the period from 1951 through 2008 and there appears to be a decent correlation. However, his data set is incomplete in 2 respects: 1. It does not include the Great Depression years and 2. It does not include data on bank lending. The relationship between government spending and future inflation was vastly different during the years of 1932 to 1941. The correlation between the 2 series for this time period is negative 0.25. The factor causing this is change in mortgage-loan growth...fears of government-spending-induced extended inflation in terms of time and magnitude are not a concern until the lending mechanism improves.

bank lending; government spending; Guest Post; Inflation; Zero Hedge.

Mon 2009-10-05 11:23 EDT

New Bubble Threatens a V-Shaped Rebound

...What we are seeing now in the global economy is a pure liquidity bubble. It's been manifested in several asset classes. The most prominent are commodities, stocks and government bonds. The story that supports this bubble is that fiscal stimulus would lead to quick economic recovery, and the output gap could keep inflation down. Hence, central banks can keep interest rates low for a couple more years...I think the market is being misled. The driving forces for the current bounce are inventory cycle and government stimulus. The follow-through from corporate capex and consumption are severely constrained by structural challenges. These challenges have origins in the bubble that led to a misallocation of resources. After the bubble burst, a mismatch of supply and demand limited the effectiveness of either stimulus or a bubble in creating demand...he structural challenges arise from global imbalance and industries that over-expanded due to exaggerated demand supported in the past by cheap credit and high asset prices. At the global level, the imbalance is between deficit-bound Anglo-Saxon economies (Australia, Britain and the United States) and surplus emerging economies (mainly China and oil exporters)...The old equilibrium cannot be restored, and many structural barriers stand in the way of a new equilibrium. The current recovery is based on a temporary and unstable equilibrium in which the United States slows the rise of its national savings rate by increasing the fiscal deficit, and China lowers its savings surplus by boosting government spending and inflating an assets bubble.

New Bubble Threatens; Shaped Rebound.

Wed 2009-09-16 19:19 EDT

Why Default on U.S. Treasuries is Likely | Library of Economics and Liberty

Almost everyone is aware that federal government spending in the United States is scheduled to skyrocket, primarily because of Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. Recent "stimulus" packages have accelerated the process. Only the naively optimistic actually believe that politicians will fully resolve this looming fiscal crisis with some judicious combination of tax hikes and program cuts. Many predict that, instead, the government will inflate its way out of this future bind, using Federal Reserve monetary expansion to fill the shortfall between outlays and receipts. But I believe, in contrast, that it is far more likely that the United States will be driven to an outright default on Treasury securities, openly reneging on the interest due on its formal debt and probably repudiating part of the principal. Treasury default considered likely.

default; economic; liberties; libraries; likely; U. S. treasuries.

Fri 2009-06-26 00:00 EDT

Jesse's Café Américain: A Final Word on Inflation and Deflation

Jesse's Café Américain: A Final Word on Inflation and Deflation; ``serious monetary inflation is triggered by excessive government debt obligations, and not private debt, that can no longer be adequately serviced by a productive real economy and domestic taxation...the output gap is no sure barrier to this type of inflation is that it ironically serves to feed it in the presence of profligate government spending, since it dampens tax revenues and domestic GDP.

deflation; final words; Inflation; Jesse's Café Américain.

Mon 2008-07-07 00:00 EDT

Hussman Funds - Weekly Market Comment: The Outlook for Inflation and the Likelihood of $60 Oil - July 7, 2008

"government spending expansion, regardless of the form, will tend to raise the marginal utility of goods and services while lowering the marginal utility of government liabilities.", hence encouraging inflation

2008; 60 oil; Hussman Funds; Inflation; July 7; likelihood; outlook; weekly market comments.

Mon 2008-06-09 00:00 EDT

Hussman Funds - Weekly Market Comment - The Fed's Policy Rule: Regret-Minimax - June 9, 2008

"government spending is a much stronger determinant of persistent inflation trends than money itself."

2008; Fed's Policy Rule; Hussman Funds; June 9; Regret-Minimax; weekly market comments.