000 03953nam a22005415i 4500
001 978-3-319-45967-7
003 DE-He213
005 20210420093752.0
007 cr nn 008mamaa
008 161209s2017 gw | s |||| 0|eng d
020 _a9783319459677
_9978-3-319-45967-7
024 7 _a10.1007/978-3-319-45967-7
_2doi
050 4 _aHJ9-9940
072 7 _aKFFD
_2bicssc
072 7 _aBUS051000
_2bisacsh
072 7 _aKFFD
_2thema
082 0 4 _a336
100 1 _aHeim, John J.
_eauthor.
_4aut
_4http://id.loc.gov/vocabulary/relators/aut
245 1 0 _aCrowding Out Fiscal Stimulus
_h[electronic resource] :
_bTesting the Effectiveness of US Government Stimulus Programs /
_cby John J. Heim.
250 _a1st ed. 2017.
264 1 _aCham :
_bSpringer International Publishing :
_bImprint: Palgrave Macmillan,
_c2017.
300 _aXXI, 272 p. 5 illus. in color.
_bonline resource.
336 _atext
_btxt
_2rdacontent
337 _acomputer
_bc
_2rdamedia
338 _aonline resource
_bcr
_2rdacarrier
347 _atext file
_bPDF
_2rda
505 0 _a1. Introduction -- 2. Theory of Crowd Out -- 3. Literature Review -- 4. Methodology -- 5. Test Results: Consumer Spending and Borrowing Models (1 Variable Deficit) -- 6. Test Results: Investment Spending and Borrowing Models (1 Variable Deficit) -- 7. Test Results: Consumer Spending and Borrowing Models (2 Variable Deficit) -- 8. Test Results: Investment Spending and Borrowing Models (2 Variable Deficit) -- 9. Are Findings of 1 and 2 Variable Consumer and Investment Deficit Models Consistent? -- 10. Effects of Stimulus Programs on GDP, Net of Crowd Out Effects -- 11. Dynamic Effects -- 12. Alternatives to Financing Stimulus Programs with Domestic Borrowing -- 13. A Note on the Disposable Income Variable in the Consumption Models -- 14. Do Crowd Out Effects Differ in Recessions and Nonrecession Periods? -- 15. Does the Gale/Orszag Hypothesis Explain Tax and Spending Effects Better in Recession than Nonrecession Periods? -- 16. Summary of Findings and Conclusions.
520 _aThis book presents overwhelming evidence that US government stimulus programs over the past fifty years have not worked. Using the best and most modern econometric testing models, it applies 228 separate hard science tests to examine the effects of different stimulus models that should, in theory, have shown positive results. By testing every possible alternative interpretation, starting with one time period and then retesting in three additional time periods, this definitive study finds that even when favoring pro-stimulus Keynesian models, public financing through government tax cuts and spending increase programs is more likely to drive down - or "crowd out" - as much private sector spending as it stimulates in the public sector.
650 0 _aFinance, Public.
650 0 _aMacroeconomics.
650 0 _aEconomic theory.
650 0 _aEconomic policy.
650 1 4 _aPublic Finance.
_0https://scigraph.springernature.com/ontologies/product-market-codes/611000
650 2 4 _aMacroeconomics/Monetary Economics//Financial Economics.
_0https://scigraph.springernature.com/ontologies/product-market-codes/W32000
650 2 4 _aEconomic Theory/Quantitative Economics/Mathematical Methods.
_0https://scigraph.springernature.com/ontologies/product-market-codes/W29000
650 2 4 _aEconomic Policy.
_0https://scigraph.springernature.com/ontologies/product-market-codes/W34010
710 2 _aSpringerLink (Online service)
773 0 _tSpringer Nature eBook
776 0 8 _iPrinted edition:
_z9783319459660
776 0 8 _iPrinted edition:
_z9783319459684
776 0 8 _iPrinted edition:
_z9783319834108
856 4 0 _uhttps://s443-doi-org.br.lsproxy.net/10.1007/978-3-319-45967-7
912 _aZDB-2-ECF
912 _aZDB-2-SXEF
942 _2ddc
_cEBK
999 _c380007
_d338569