"This
paper employs a new empirical approach for identifying the impact of government
spending on the private sector. Our key innovation is to use changes in
congressional committee chairmanship as a source of exogenous variation in
state-level federal expenditures. In doing so, we show that fiscal
spending shocks appear to significantly dampen corporate sector investment and
employment activity" --- Study by Harvard Business School 2011.
The trick which the authors apply to come to their conclusion is somewhat unique American: they have determined that whenever a committee in Congress gets a new chairperson, that new chairperson uses his/her influence to steer public/federal money into his/her constituency. In other words, increased public spending. They have measured that federal funds which flow into their constituencies increased by 9% during the first year. Public orders which are given to the private sector in those constituencies increased even by 24%. According to theory, that should make for a significant impulse for the private sector in the constituency.
The opposite development was observed. Private companies reduced their investment in machinery & equipment on average by 15%. Expenditures for R&D also declined, as did employment in R&D. The authors conclude that increased public spending seems to crowd out activities in the private sector.
Perhaps EU policy makers should take a look at this study.
The opposite development was observed. Private companies reduced their investment in machinery & equipment on average by 15%. Expenditures for R&D also declined, as did employment in R&D. The authors conclude that increased public spending seems to crowd out activities in the private sector.
Perhaps EU policy makers should take a look at this study.
Only blindfolded observers ever believed that increased public spending helped the economic situation. That money most times was waisted and disappeared in some private pockets...
ReplyDeleteH.Trickler