"In the long run you have got to pay for it. The medium and long-run effect is definitely negative. You can't just keep borrowing forever. Eventually taxes are going to be higher, and that has a negative effect," he [Robert Barro] said.Read the complete article here.
"The lesson is you want government spending only if the programmes are really worth it in terms of the usual rate of return calculations. The usual kind of calculation, not some Keynesian thing. The fact that it really is worth it to have highways and education. Classic public finance, that's not macroeconomics."
Turning to the $600bn (£373bn) to $800bn US package, he added it was "mainly a waste of money". Stimulus programmes, he said, offer little more than "rearranging the timing" of economic growth. "Possibly you could make an argument that it's worth it. But it's going to be a negative-sum thing overall, so you have to think it's a big benefit for boosting the recovery."
Thursday, July 7, 2011
Stimulus Rearranges The Timing Of Economic Growth: Does Not Create Growth: Robert Barro
From The Telegraph, "Fiscal stimulus doesn't work, claims Harvard economics professor Robert Barro" by By Philip Aldrick:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment