Re: Refuting supply-side economics
From: The Trucker (mikcob_at_verizon.net)
Date: 09/21/04
- Next message: Robert Vienneau: "Re: How Is This Possible?"
- Previous message: ian maclure: "Re: bush skipped a medical exam"
- In reply to: William F Hummel: "Re: Refuting supply-side economics"
- Next in thread: Some Guy: "Re: Refuting supply-side economics"
- Reply: Some Guy: "Re: Refuting supply-side economics"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2004 11:01:56 -0700
William F Hummel wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 16:05:48 GMT, trexo@encompass.net wrote:
>
>>In sci.econ Some Guy <bc76@midmaine.com> wrote:
>>
>>> A middle class tax cut funded by borrowing shifts resources from
>>> producers to consumers. The middle class gets the money which it
>>> spends on resources. Government borrowing to make up the difference
>>> crowds out capital investment in production. The same government
>>> spending takes place that would have otherwise.
>>
>>Crowding out only occurs when the governemt deficits are high enough
>>in relation to the total output that treasury bonds compete wtih
>>investments in the private sector. There isn't any set number to where
>>this is as it depends on the economic structure at any given point in
>>time.
>
> Crowding out in financial terms is a myth. Treasury bond sales don't
> compete with investment in the private sector. The proceeds from the
> sales are immediately deposited in the Treasury's accounts in
> commercial bank where they count as reserves of the banking system,
> and available to back loans.
>
> Furthermore, the only reason the Treasury sells bonds is to recapture
> its deficit spending. This reciprocal flow of funds has no net effect
> on the aggregate bank deposits of the private sector.
>
> Crowding out only occurs in real terms, if the government preempts
> labor and materials in demand by the private sector. The last time
> there was any significant crowding out was in World War II when
> rationing was imposed on a number of strategic materials, and the
> civilian labor force was strained to the limit due to the needs of the
> military.
"crowding out" is an inappropriate term. Hummel has uttered no falsehood
in his presentation. But the real characteristic that prevents this
"crowing out" is that money can be created at will by the government and
the Fed (the two can be looked at somewhat synonymously). But Mr.
Hummel does not do justice to the "if government preempts labor and
material". As the Fed raises interest rates the attraction of bonds
will increase and money will move from capital investment/speculation
into bonds. One might call this a "crowding out", but it seems a
misnomer.
-- "I know no safe depository of the ultimate powers of society but the people themselves; and if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise their control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them, but to inform their discretion by education." - Thomas Jefferson. http://GreaterVoice.org
- Next message: Robert Vienneau: "Re: How Is This Possible?"
- Previous message: ian maclure: "Re: bush skipped a medical exam"
- In reply to: William F Hummel: "Re: Refuting supply-side economics"
- Next in thread: Some Guy: "Re: Refuting supply-side economics"
- Reply: Some Guy: "Re: Refuting supply-side economics"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|