|
Good piece by Ned Davis today on fiscal policy and unemployment...Charts not shared because I can't (and you don't pay the yearly subscription so you don't get them.
| quote: | Most politicians and economists agree on one point--when unemployment is high and private demand is weak, it is the "job" of government to spend money to get demand going and jobs returning.
But I am suspicious of a "free lunch." Where exactly does the government get the money to increase spending? If it comes from higher taxes on income and work, isn't that a disincentive to private sector work and income? And, if it comes from borrowing, doesn't that "crowd out" money from the private sector to invest with, or possibly drive up interest rates? Of course, the Fed could help by monetizing the debt, but that often leads to bubbles or higher inflation.
In any case, I wanted to test the evidence that higher government spending has something to do with lowering the unemployment rate, so I plotted the year-to-year changes on the chart above (sorry guys). It looks to me as if higher government spending, in fact, is consistent with a higher, not lower, unemployment rate going all the way back 61 years.
I know there is another side to this argument; which comes first, the chicken or the egg? Clearly, there is a connection between government spending and the unemployment rate, but maybe higher unemployment leads to higher government spending due to automatic stabilizers such as unemployment insurance and not the other way around. So I cannot prove anything today, but again, I am suspicious of a Keynesian "free lunch," and I fear government spending, outside of investment spending, creates as many problems as it solves. |
|