Sustainability of Fiscal Policy and the Effects of Public Debt in the United States

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Schmid
2021 ◽  
Vol 2020 (67) ◽  
pp. 75-100
Author(s):  
مالك عبد الرحيم محمد ◽  
أ.د. ميثم العيبي إسماعيل

The American economy suffers from a general budget deficit, mainly due to the high public expenditures, especially the military, as the United States of America occupies the first place in the world in the proportion of military spending, and the budget deficit is mainly financed through the sale of government securities, which led to an increase in the volume of public debt In the United States of America, which is a dangerous indicator, especially after interest payments on public debt exceeded the barrier of $ 500 billion for the year 2018, which pushes them to borrow again to finance these benefits, this cumulative and continuous increase in the size of public debt works to influence the economic variables Monetary and financial. The research aims to analyze the development of internal public debt in the United States of America and its most important causes, in addition to clarifying the mechanisms and methods used to alleviate the severity of the internal public debt without compromising the ability of the economy or the ability to repay previous debts to maintain investor confidence in the strength of the American economy. The research reached several results, the most prominent of which is that the large increase in the volume of the internal public debt and the consequent increase in the money supply did not negatively affect the monetary side of the economy as inflation rates did not reach high levels and international reserves increased, accompanied by a decrease in interest rates. While the research presented several recommendations, including the need to achieve financial discipline and market access to borrow at the lowest possible costs by issuing debt regularly, in addition to avoiding resorting to any special measures to increase the volume of public debt and adhere to the debt ceiling approved by the US Congress.


Author(s):  
John Kenneth Galbraith ◽  
James K. Galbraith

This chapter examines the lessons of World War II with respect to money and monetary policy. World War I exposed the fragility of the monetary structure that had gold as its foundation, the great boom of the 1920s showed how futile monetary policy was as an instrument of restraint, and the Great Depression highlighted the ineffectuality of monetary policy for rescuing the country from a slump—for breaking out of the underemployment equilibrium once this had been fully and firmly established. On the part of John Maynard Keynes, the lesson was that only fiscal policy ensured not just that money was available to be borrowed but that it would be borrowed and would be spent. The chapter considers the experiences of Britain, Germany, and the United States with a lesson of World War II: that general measures for restraining demand do not prevent inflation in an economy that is operating at or near capacity.


Author(s):  
John Kenneth Galbraith

This chapter examines various developments in economics that are part of the present and will contend against the neoclassical tradition for recognition in the future. Industrial countries, including the United States, have already become deeply concerned with the economic ideas and more especially their practice in Japan. The chapter considers some of the lessons to come and that are coming from Japan, such as the industry–government cooperation and investment in human capital, It also discusses a number of ways to escape market discipline and deal with competition, including a return to tariff protection, and how the distinction between microeconomics and macroeconomics will blur and disappear due to factors such as the dynamic of prices and wages as a determinant of both inflation and unemployment. Finally, it comments on the future of domestic monetary and fiscal policy in relation to a nation's international position.


Author(s):  
William Keech ◽  
William Scarth

This chapter identifies the differing policies and outcomes that Canadians and Americans have pursued with respect to economic growth, stabilization, and income distribution, and it analyzes several factors that can partially explain why divergent policy choices have emerged. The United States (U.S.) has recorded better productivity growth, while Canada has achieved a more sustainable fiscal policy, a less fragile financial sector, and more generous distributional policies. These contrasting outcomes are related to differences in size and geography, in political culture, and in political institutions. The analysis also considers how much it may be possible for each country’s policymakers to benefit from the other’s experiences. While identifying some lessons in this regard, the authors conclude that the sheer difference in the size of the two economies affects which economic policies can be expected to be effective. As a result, it is concluded that convergence in economic policymaking will remain somewhat limited.


2013 ◽  
Vol 46 (03) ◽  
pp. 510-514
Author(s):  
Jasmine Farrier

The serial fiscal policy and budgeting woes of the United States over the last three decades have been compounded by a bipartisan evasion of institutional responsibility by elected leaders. Long before “sequestration” and “fiscal cliffs,” Louis Fisher argued that presidents and members of the House and Senate undermined constitutional power balance and the spirit of budgeting law. A variety of ill-conceived process “reforms” further damaged the separation of powers system. As a scholar, Fisher uses an institutional lens to explore budget concepts that are rare in political science, such ascapacity, accountability, andduty. And as a public intellectual, Fisher's relevance has been secured by his repeatedly broaching these scholarly and political taboos.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document