Dallas Fed President Richard W. Fisher discusses the impact deficit spending and fiscal policy have on the conduct of monetary policy.
AUTHORS: Fisher, Richard W.
Government spending: an economic boost?
The severe global economic downturn and the large stimulus programs that governments in many countries adopted in response have generated a resurgence in research on the effects of fiscal policy. One key lesson emerging from this research is that there is no single fiscal multiplier that sums up the economic impact of fiscal policy. Rather, the impact varies widely depending on the specific fiscal policies put into effect and the overall economic environment.
AUTHORS: Wilson, Daniel J.
Sectoral shocks, reallocation frictions, and optimal government spending
What is the optimal policy response to a negative sectoral shock? How do frictions in goods and labor markets affect the nature and speed of the process of reallocating resources across alternative uses? Should government controlled inputs be allocated to compensate for frictions faced by the private sector or, rather, should they be deployed to complement private sector decisions? In this paper we make a first attempt to understand what features of an economy determine the answers to the previous questions. We study a model in which the drop in the private demand for structures frees up resources that can be used to produce government capital. For a reasonable calibration, we find that government spending increases in response to the drop in private demand, but that the size of the increase is inversely related to the level of frictions: the 1 larger the costs that the economy faces to reallocate resources (capital and labor) across sectors, the smaller the optimal level of government spending.
AUTHORS: Manuelli, Rodolfo E.; Peralta-Alva, Adrian
Come and get it
Federal spending in district states has increased significantly since the early 1990s.
AUTHORS: Wirtz, Ronald A.; Genov, Genko
Who benefits from increased government spending? a state-level analysis
We simultaneously identify two government spending shocks: military spending shocks as defined by Ramey (2008) and federal spending shocks as defined by Perotti (2008). We analyze the effect of these shocks on state-level personal income and employment. We find regional patterns in the manner in which both shocks affect state-level variables. Moreover, we find differences in the propagation mechanisms for military versus nonmilitary spending shocks. The former benefits economies with larger manufacturing and retail sectors and states that receive military contracts. While nonmilitary shocks also benefit states with the proper industrial mix, they appear to stimulate economic activity in more-urban, lower-income states.
AUTHORS: Owyang, Michael T.; Zubairy, Sarah
Government policy response to war-expenditure shocks
A theory of government policy determination, based on intertemporal distortion-smoothing and limited commitment, matches the set of stylized facts of U.S. wartime policy.
AUTHORS: Martin, Fernando M.
Both sides of the pork trough
Earmarks are easy to want, easier to criticize. Though inefficient at a number of levels, the political economy of pork barrel spending suggests some benefits are also ignored.
AUTHORS: Wirtz, Ronald A.; Clement, Douglas
This little piggy came home
Earmarks are plentiful in the Ninth District and vary widely.
AUTHORS: Clement, Douglas
Earmarks can meet local needs; they can also leave locals hanging
AUTHORS: Clement, Douglas
A primer on the empirical identification of government spending shocks
The empirical literature on the effects of government spending shocks lacks unanimity about the responses of consumption and wages. Proponents of shocks identified by structural vector auto-regressions (VARs) find results consistent with New Keynesian models: consumption and wages increase. On the other hand, proponents of the narrative approach find results consistent with neoclassical models: consumption and wages decrease. This paper reviews these two identifications and confirms their differences by using standard economic series. It also uses alternative measures of government spending, output, and the labor market and shows that, although there are minor fluctuations within each identification, the disparate results between the two are robust to the alternative measures. However, under the structural VAR approach, the authors find some differences between the responses to federal and state/local government spending.
AUTHORS: Engemann, Kristie M.; Owyang, Michael T.; Zubairy, Sarah