tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4900303239154048192.post4916755106590333955..comments2024-03-06T06:34:42.881-05:00Comments on EconoSpeak: Is U.S. Fiscal Policy Near the Tipping Point?Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4900303239154048192.post-57438789266895002492013-02-26T13:18:21.390-05:002013-02-26T13:18:21.390-05:00"notice that in the late 1990’s, we did see t..."notice that in the late 1990’s, we did see total taxes as a share of GDP reach 31%. So can we get back to that level and keep spending at 30% of GDP?"<br /><br />Revenue was only that high because the $10 trillion stock market bubble was boosting capital gains. Absent another bubble, it would take MUCH HIGHER tax rates to get to that level of revenue.<br />Joehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01709995807329945280noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4900303239154048192.post-67079913517574673142013-02-26T07:25:30.254-05:002013-02-26T07:25:30.254-05:00“Real global GDP growth averaged 4.9%a year in the...“Real global GDP growth averaged 4.9%a year in the Golden Age years from 1950 through 1973, but dropped to 3.4% annually in the unstable period between 1974 and1979. Dissatisfied with the instability, inflation, low profits and falling financial asset prices of the 1970s, advanced country elites pushed hard for a switch to a more business friendly political-economic system; global Neoliberalism was the result. World GDP growth averaged 3.3% a year in the early Neoliberal period of the 1980s, then slowed dramatically to 2.3% from 1990-99 as Neoliberalism strengthened, making the 1990s by far the slowest growth decade of the post war era.” (James Crotty)<br /><br />With the exception of parts of Asia, economic development throughout the world failed to gain traction, chronic excess capacity on one hand and credit fueled financial exuberance on the other.<br /><br />Given the system’s inability to create employment so rapidly as required, a glut of labor and an expanding informal sectors as well. All the ‘better’ to intensify the international (and domestic) competition among workers, drive and hold wages down so also make consumer credit increasingly important to retention of living standards, no matter that this has been only another transfer to loan capital.<br /><br />Average weekly earnings, constant 1982 dollars, for all private nonfarm workers in the U.S. peaked in 1972 at $331.59, falling to $257.95 in 1992 until ‘recovering’ to $277.57 in 2004 and likely having faltered again since then.<br /><br />It is at least interesting that conditions of surplus labor, lower wages, deficit funding, tech innovations, etc, have not been able to generate another long wave expansionary phase.<br /><br /><br /><br /><br />juanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09891629364963900116noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4900303239154048192.post-60801895581747790392013-02-26T04:58:15.539-05:002013-02-26T04:58:15.539-05:00While it is true that real interest rates were mod...While it is true that real interest rates were modest and real growth averaged 3.5% per year up to 1980 but we did run primary surpluses. Plus the inflation of the lates 60's and the 70's played a role. Then again - the Reagan fiscal irresponsibility changed all that - lowering growth to 3% per year and driving up real interest rates as we run primary deficits. And guess what happened to the debt/GDP ratio? ProGrowthLiberalhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17138489390594441753noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4900303239154048192.post-53759582612638375882013-02-25T22:25:27.295-05:002013-02-25T22:25:27.295-05:00we did manage to pay down the massive Federal debt...<i>we did manage to pay down the massive Federal debt after World War II </i><br /><br />Nope. Wrong. Debt ratios fell after World War II because g > r. Primary surpluses had nothing to do with it. JW Masonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10664452827447313845noreply@blogger.com