Ian Murray wrote:
Is acceptance of the crowding out argument a litmus test for econowonks in DC now?
Maybe, but Stiggy lives on the Upper West Side of Manhattan. I think he's motivated more by partisanship - Dems good, Reps bad. Dems raised taxes in '93, Reps cut taxes in 2001, 2002, and 2003.
Doug
No. Liberal Keynesians buy the "crowding out" argument under two sets of circumstances: (i) if the economy is at full employment, and (ii) if the central bank has a target unemployment rate, and responds to plans for fiscal stimulus by raising interest rates enough to neutralize the effects of fiscal policy.
But today neither of those apply. And even this card-carrying neoliberal Keyensian wants a bigger deficit for the next 24 months. (But budget surpluses four or more years out.)
Brad DeLong
- Re: Stiglitz on central banks, (continued)
- Re: Stiglitz on central banks, Ian Murray Wed 11 Jun 2003, 20:35 GMT
- Re: Stiglitz on central banks, Doug Henwood Wed 11 Jun 2003, 20:42 GMT
- Re: Stiglitz on central banks, Ian Murray Wed 11 Jun 2003, 20:51 GMT
- Re: Stiglitz on central banks, Ellen Frank Wed 11 Jun 2003, 21:11 GMT
- Re: Stiglitz on central banks, Brad DeLong Wed 11 Jun 2003, 21:29 GMT
- Re: Stiglitz on central banks, Devine, James Wed 11 Jun 2003, 21:15 GMT
- Re: Stiglitz on central banks, Barkley Rosser Thu 12 Jun 2003, 15:53 GMT
- Re: Stiglitz on central banks, Devine, James Wed 11 Jun 2003, 21:49 GMT
- indeterminacy & the balance of power, Devine, James Tue 10 Jun 2003, 23:39 GMT