chapter
stringlengths 1.97k
1.53M
| path
stringlengths 47
241
|
|---|---|
Learning Objective
1. Explain and illustrate graphically the concept of the aggregate production function. Explain how its shape relates to the concept of diminishing marginal returns.
2. Derive the long-run aggregate supply curve from the model of the labor market and the aggregate production function.
3. Explain how the long-run aggregate supply curve shifts in responses to shifts in the aggregate production function or to shifts in the demand for or supply of labor.
Economic growth means the economy’s potential output is rising. Because the long-run aggregate supply curve is a vertical line at the economy’s potential, we can depict the process of economic growth as one in which the long-run aggregate supply curve shifts to the right.
Figure 23.5 illustrates the process of economic growth. If the economy begins at potential output of Y1, growth increases this potential. The figure shows a succession of increases in potential to Y2, then Y3, and Y4. If the economy is growing at a particular percentage rate, and if the levels shown represent successive years, then the size of the increases will become larger and larger, as indicated in the figure.
Because economic growth can be considered as a process in which the long-run aggregate supply curve shifts to the right, and because output tends to remain close to this curve, it is important to gain a deeper understanding of what determines long-run aggregate supply (LRAS). We shall examine the derivation of LRAS and then see what factors shift the curve. We shall begin our work by defining an aggregate production function.
The Aggregate Production Function
An aggregate production functionFunction that relates the total output of an economy to the total amount of labor employed in the economy, all other determinants of production (capital, natural resources, and technology) being unchanged. relates the total output of an economy to the total amount of labor employed in the economy, all other determinants of production (that is, capital, natural resources, and technology) being unchanged. An economy operating on its aggregate production function is producing its potential level of output.
Figure 23.6 shows an aggregate production function (PF). It shows output levels for a range of employment between 120 million and 140 million workers. When the level of employment is 120 million, the economy produces a real GDP of \$11,500 billion (point A). A level of employment of 130 million produces a real GDP of \$12,000 billion (point B), and when 140 million workers are employed, a real GDP of \$12,300 billion is produced (point C). In drawing the aggregate production function, the amount of labor varies, but everything else that could affect output, specifically the quantities of other factors of production and technology, is fixed.
The shape of the aggregate production function shows that as employment increases, output increases, but at a decreasing rate. Increasing employment from 120 million to 130 million, for example, increases output by \$500 billion to \$12,000 billion at point B. The next 10 million workers increase production by \$300 billion to \$12,300 billion at point C. This example illustrates diminishing marginal returns. Diminishing marginal returnsSituation that occurs when additional units of a variable factor add less and less to total output, given constant quantities of other factors. occur when additional units of a variable factor add less and less to total output, given constant quantities of other factors.
It is easy to picture the problem of diminishing marginal returns in the context of a single firm. The firm is able to increase output by adding workers. But because the firm’s plant size and stock of equipment are fixed, the firm’s capital per worker falls as it takes on more workers. Each additional worker adds less to output than the worker before. The firm, like the economy, experiences diminishing marginal returns.
The Aggregate Production Function, the Market for Labor, and Long-Run Aggregate Supply
To derive the long-run aggregate supply curve, we bring together the model of the labor market, introduced in the first macro chapter and the aggregate production function.
As we learned, the labor market is in equilibrium at the natural level of employment. The demand and supply curves for labor intersect at the real wage at which the economy achieves its natural level of employment. We see in Panel (a) of Figure 23.7 that the equilibrium real wage is ω1 and the natural level of employment is L1. Panel (b) shows that with employment of L1, the economy can produce a real GDP of YP. That output equals the economy’s potential output. It is that level of potential output that determines the position of the long-run aggregate supply curve in Panel (c).
Changes in Long-Run Aggregate Supply
The position of the long-run aggregate supply curve is determined by the aggregate production function and the demand and supply curves for labor. A change in any of these will shift the long-run aggregate supply curve.
Figure 23.8 shows one possible shifter of long-run aggregate supply: a change in the production function. Suppose, for example, that an improvement in technology shifts the aggregate production function in Panel (b) from PF1 to PF2. Other developments that could produce an upward shift in the curve include an increase in the capital stock or in the availability of natural resources.
The shift in the production function to PF2 means that labor is now more productive than before. This will affect the demand for labor in Panel (a). Before the technological change, firms employed L1 workers at a real wage ω1. If workers are more productive, firms will find it profitable to hire more of them at ω1. The demand curve for labor thus shifts to D2 in Panel (a). The real wage rises to ω2, and the natural level of employment rises to L2. The increase in the real wage reflects labor’s enhanced productivityThe amount of output per worker., the amount of output per worker. To see how potential output changes, we see in Panel (b) how much output can be produced given the new natural level of employment and the new aggregate production function. The real GDP that the economy is capable of producing rises from Y1 to Y2. The higher output is a reflection of a higher natural level of employment, along with the fact that labor has become more productive as a result of the technological advance. In Panel (c) the long-run aggregate supply curve shifts to the right to the vertical line at Y2.
This analysis dispels a common misconception about the impact of improvements in technology or increases in the capital stock on employment. Some people believe that technological gains or increases in the stock of capital reduce the demand for labor, reduce employment, and reduce real wages. Certainly the experience of the United States and most other countries belies that notion. Between 1990 and 2007, for example, the U.S. capital stock and the level of technology increased dramatically. During the same period, employment and real wages rose, suggesting that the demand for labor increased by more than the supply of labor. As some firms add capital or incorporate new technologies, some workers at those firms may lose their jobs. But for the economy as a whole, new jobs become available and they generally offer higher wages. The demand for labor rises.
Another event that can shift the long-run aggregate supply curve is an increase in the supply of labor, as shown in Figure 23.9. An increased supply of labor could result from immigration, an increase in the population, or increased participation in the labor force by the adult population. Increased participation by women in the labor force, for example, has tended to increase the supply curve for labor during the past several decades.
In Panel (a), an increase in the labor supply shifts the supply curve to S2. The increase in the supply of labor does not change the stock of capital or natural resources, nor does it change technology—it therefore does not shift the aggregate production function. Because there is no change in the production function, there is no shift in the demand for labor. The real wage falls from ω1 to ω2 in Panel (a), and the natural level of employment rises from L1 to L2. To see the impact on potential output, Panel (b) shows that employment of L2 can produce real GDP of Y2. The long-run aggregate supply curve in Panel (c) thus shifts to LRAS2. Notice, however, that this shift in the long-run aggregate supply curve to the right is associated with a reduction in the real wage to ω2.
Of course, the aggregate production function and the supply curve of labor can shift together, producing higher real wages at the same time population rises. That has been the experience of most industrialized nations. The increase in real wages in the United States between 1990 and 2007, for example, came during a period in which an increasing population increased the supply of labor. The demand for labor increased by more than the supply, pushing the real wage up. The accompanying Case in Point looks at gains in real wages in the face of technological change, an increase in the stock of capital, and rapid population growth in the United States during the 19th century.
Our model of long-run aggregate supply tells us that in the long run, real GDP, the natural level of employment, and the real wage are determined by the economy’s production function and by the demand and supply curves for labor. Unless an event shifts the aggregate production function, the demand curve for labor, or the supply curve for labor, it affects neither the natural level of employment nor potential output. Economic growth occurs only if an event shifts the economy’s production function or if there is an increase in the demand for or the supply of labor.
Key Takeaways
• The aggregate production function relates the level of employment to the level of real GDP produced per period.
• The real wage and the natural level of employment are determined by the intersection of the demand and supply curves for labor. Potential output is given by the point on the aggregate production function corresponding to the natural level of employment. This output level is the same as that shown by the long-run aggregate supply curve.
• Economic growth can be shown as a series of shifts to the right in LRAS. Such shifts require either upward shifts in the production function or increases in demand for or supply of labor.
Try It!
Suppose that the quantity of labor supplied is 50 million workers when the real wage is \$20,000 per year and that potential output is \$2,000 billion per year. Draw a three-panel graph similar to the one presented in Figure 23.9 to show the economy’s long-run equilibrium. Panel (a) of your graph should show the demand and supply curves for labor, Panel (b) should show the aggregate production function, and Panel (c) should show the long-run aggregate supply curve. Now suppose a technological change increases the economy’s output with the same quantity of labor as before to \$2,200 billion, and the real wage rises to \$21,500. In response, the quantity of labor supplied increases to 51 million workers. In the same three panels you have already drawn, sketch the new curves that result from this change. Explain what happens to the level of employment, the level of potential output, and the long-run aggregate supply curve. (Hint: you have information for only one point on each of the curves you draw—two for the supply of labor; simply draw curves of the appropriate shape. Do not worry about getting the scale correct.)
Case in Point: Technological Change, Employment, and Real Wages During the Industrial Revolution
Figure 23.10
Wikimedia Commons – public domain.
Technological change and the capital investment that typically comes with it are often criticized because they replace labor with machines, reducing employment. Such changes, critics argue, hurt workers. Using the model of aggregate demand and aggregate supply, however, we arrive at a quite different conclusion. The model predicts that improved technology will increase the demand for labor and boost real wages.
The period of industrialization, generally taken to be the time between the Civil War and World War I, was a good test of these competing ideas. Technological changes were dramatic as firms shifted toward mass production and automation. Capital investment soared. Immigration increased the supply of labor. What happened to workers?
Employment more than doubled during this period, consistent with the prediction of our model. It is harder to predict, from a theoretical point of view, the consequences for real wages. The latter third of the 19th century was a period of massive immigration to the United States. Between 1865 and 1880, more than 5 million people came to the United States from abroad; most were of working age. The pace accelerated between 1880 and 1923, when more than 23 million people moved to the United States from other countries. Immigration increased the supply of labor, which should reduce the real wage. There were thus two competing forces at work: Technological change and capital investment tended to increase real wages, while immigration tended to reduce them by increasing the supply of labor.
The evidence suggests that the forces of technological change and capital investment proved far more powerful than increases in labor supply. Real wages soared 60% between 1860 and 1890. They continued to increase after that. Real wages in manufacturing, for example, rose 37% from 1890 to 1914.
Technological change and capital investment displace workers in some industries. But for the economy as a whole, they increase worker productivity, increase the demand for labor, and increase real wages.
Answer to Try It! Problem
The production function in Panel (b) shifts up to PF2. Because it reflects greater productivity of labor, firms will increase their demand for labor, and the demand curve for labor shifts to D2 in Panel (a). LRAS1 shifts to LRAS2 in Panel (c). Employment and potential output rise. Potential output will be greater than \$2,200 billion.
Figure 23.11 | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_(LibreTexts)/08%3A_Economic_Growth/8.2%3A_Growth_and_the_Long-Run_Aggregate_Supply_Curve.txt |
Learning Objective
1. Discuss the sources of economic growth.
2. Discuss possible reasons why countries grow at different rates.
In this section, we review the main determinants of economic growth. We also examine the reasons for the widening disparities in economic growth rates among countries in recent years.
The Sources of Economic Growth
As we have learned, there are two ways to model economic growth: (1) as an outward shift in an economy’s production possibilities curve, and (2) as a shift to the right in its long-run aggregate supply curve. In drawing either one at a point in time, we assume that the economy’s factors of production and its technology are unchanged. Changing these will shift both curves. Therefore, anything that increases the quantity or quality of factors of production or that improves the technology available to the economy contributes to economic growth.
The sources of growth for the U.S. economy in the 20th century were presented in the chapter on sources of production. There we learned that the main sources of growth for the United States from 1948 to 2002 were divided between increases in the quantities of labor and of physical capital (about 60%) and in improvements in the qualities of the factors of production and technology (about 40%). Since 1995, however, improvements in factor quality and technology have been the main drivers of economic growth in the United States.
In order to devote resources to increasing physical and human capital and to improving technology—activities that will enhance future production—society must forgo using them now to produce consumer goods. Even though the people in the economy would enjoy a higher standard of living today without this sacrifice, they are willing to reduce present consumption in order to have more goods and services available for the future.
As a college student, you personally made such a choice. You decided to devote time to study that you could have spent earning income. With the higher income, you could enjoy greater consumption today. You made this choice because you expect to earn higher income in the future and thus to enjoy greater consumption in the future. Because many other people in the society also choose to acquire more education, society allocates resources to produce education. The education produced today will enhance the society’s human capital and thus its economic growth.
All other things equal, higher saving allows more resources to be devoted to increases in physical and human capital and technological improvement. In other words, saving, which is income not spent on consumption, promotes economic growth by making available resources that can be channeled into growth-enhancing uses.
Explaining Recent Disparities in Growth Rates
Toward the end of the 20th century, it appeared that some of the world’s more affluent countries were growing robustly while others were growing more slowly or even stagnating. This observation was confirmed in a major study by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)1, whose members are listed in Table 23.1 “Growing Disparities in Rates of Economic Growth”. The table shows that for the OECD countries as a whole, economic growth per capita fell from an average of 2.2% per year in the 1980s to an average of 1.9% per year in the 1990s. The higher standard deviation in the latter period confirms an increased disparity of growth rates in the more recent period. Moreover, the data on individual countries show that per capita growth in some countries (specifically, the United States, Canada, Ireland, Netherlands, Norway, and Spain) picked up, especially in the latter half of the 1990s, while it decelerated in most of the countries of continental Europe and Japan.
Table 23.1 Growing Disparities in Rates of Economic Growth
Trend Growth of GDP per Capita
Country 1980–1990 1990–2000 1996–2000
United States 2.1 2.3 2.8
Japan 3.3 1.4 0.9
Germany 1.9 1.2 1.7
France 1.6 1.5 1.9
Italy 2.3 1.5 1.7
United Kingdom 2.2 2.1 2.3
Canada 1.4 1.7 2.6
Austria 2.1 1.9 2.3
Belgium 2.0 1.9 2.3
Denmark 1.9 1.9 2.3
Finland 2.2 2.1 3.9
Greece 0.5 1.8 2.7
Iceland 1.7 1.5 2.6
Ireland 3.0 6.4 7.9
Luxembourg 4.0 4.5 4.6
Netherlands 1.6 2.4 2.7
Portugal 3.1 2.8 2.7
Spain 2.3 2.7 3.2
Sweden 1.7 1.5 2.6
Switzerland 1.4 0.4 1.1
Turkey 2.1 2.1 1.9
Australia 1.6 2.4 2.8
New Zealand 1.4 1.2 1.8
Mexico 0.0 1.6 2.7
Korea 7.2 5.1 4.2
Hungary 2.3 3.5
Poland 4.2 4.8
Czech Republic 1.7 1.4
OECD242 2.2 1.9 2.2
Standard Deviation of OECD24 0.74 1.17 1.37
Variation in the growth in real GDP per capita has widened among the world’s leading industrialized economies.
The study goes on to try to explain the reasons for the divergent growth trends. The main findings were:
• In general, countries with accelerating per capita growth rates also experienced significant increases in employment, while those with stagnant or declining employment generally experienced reductions in per capita growth rates.
• Enhancements in human capital contributed to labor productivity and economic growth, but in slower growing countries such improvements were not enough to offset the impact of reduced or stagnant labor utilization.
• Information and communication technology has contributed to economic growth both through rapid technological progress within the information and communication technology industry itself as well as, more recently, through the use of information and communication technology equipment in other industries. This has made an important contribution to growth in several of the faster growing countries.
• Other factors associated with more growth include: investments in physical and human capital, sound macroeconomic policies (especially low inflation), private sector research and development, trade exposure, and better developed financial markets. Results concerning the impact of the size of the government and of public sector research and development on growth were more difficult to interpret.
• With qualifications, the study found that strict regulation of product markets (for example, regulations that reduce competition) and strict employment protection legislation (for example, laws that make hiring and firing of workers more difficult) had negative effects on growth.
• All countries show a large number of firms entering and exiting markets. But, a key difference between the United States and Europe is that new firms in the United States start out smaller and less productive than those of Europe but grow faster when they are successful. The report hypothesizes that lower start-up costs and less strict labor market regulations may encourage U.S. entrepreneurs to enter a market and then to expand, if warranted. European entrepreneurs may be less willing to experiment in a market in the first place.
The general concern in the second half of the 1970s and the 1980s was that economic growth was slowing down and that it might not be possible to reverse this pattern. The 1990s and early 2000s, in which growth picked up in some countries but not in others, suggested that the problem was not universal and led to a search for the reasons for the disparities in growth rates that emerged. The OECD study described above gives some possible explanations. The findings of that study practically beg countries to examine closely their economic policies at a variety of levels and to consider changes that may add flexibility to their economies.
In closing, it is worth reiterating that economic freedom and higher incomes tend to go together. Countries could not have attained high levels of income if they had not maintained the economic freedom that contributed to high incomes in the first place. Thus, it is also likely that rates of economic growth in the future will be related to the amount of economic freedom countries choose. We shall see in later chapters that monetary and fiscal policies that are used to stabilize the economy in the short run can also have an impact on long-run economic growth.
Key Takeaways
• The main sources of growth for the United States from 1948 to 2002 were divided between increases in the quantities of labor and of physical capital (about 60%) and in improvements in the qualities of the factors of production and technology (about 40%). Since 1995, however, improvements in factor quality and technology have been the main drivers of economic growth in the United States.
• There has been a growing disparity in the rates of economic growth in industrialized countries in the last decade, which may reflect various differences in economic structures and policies.
Try It!
All other things unchanged, compare the position of a country’s expected production possibility curve and the expected position of its long-run aggregate supply curve if:
1. Its labor force increases in size by 3% per year compared to 2% per year.
2. Its saving rate falls from 15% to 10%.
3. It passes a law making it more difficult to fire workers.
4. Its level of education rises more quickly than it has in the past.
Case in Point: Economic Growth in Poor Countries … or Lack Thereof
Figure 23.12
Alan – A Home in Sullivan’s Gulch (A Portland Hooverville) – CC BY-NC-ND 2.0.
Economist William Easterly in his aptly named book The Elusive Quest for Growth: Economists’ Adventures and Misadventures in the Tropics admits that after 50 years of searching for the magic formula for turning poor countries into rich ones, the quest remains elusive.
Poor countries just need more physical capital, you say? Easterly points out that between 1960 and 1985, the capital stock per work in both Gambia and Japan rose by over 500%. The result? In Gambia, output per worker over the 25-year period rose 2%; in Japan, output per worker rose 260%.
So, it must be that poor countries need more human capital? Again, he finds startling comparisons. For example, human capital expanded faster in Zambia than in Korea, but Zambia’s annual growth rate is 7 percentage points below Korea’s.
Too much population growth? Too little? More foreign aid? Too much? As Easterly proceeds, writing a prescription for growth seems ever more difficult: “None has delivered as promised,” he concludes (p. xi).
While Easterly does not offer his own new panacea for how to move countries to a higher level of per capita GDP, where the model presented in this chapter does seem to provide some explanations of why a country’s growth rate may vary over time or differ from another country’s, he does argue that creating incentives for growth in poor countries is crucial. Acknowledging a role for plain luck, Easterly argues that good government policies—ones that keep low such negatives as inflation, corruption, and red tape—and quality institutions and laws—ones that, for example, honor contracts and reward merit—will help.
How to actually improve such incentives might constitute the next great quest:
“We have learned once and for all that there are no magical elixirs to bring a happy ending to our quest for growth. Prosperity happens when all the players in the development game have the right incentives. It happens when government incentives induce technological adaptation, high-quality investment in machines, and high-quality schooling. It happens when donors face incentives that induce them to give aid to countries with good policies where aid will have high payoffs, not to countries with poor policies where aid is wasted. It happens when the poor get good opportunities and incentives, which requires government welfare programs that reward rather than penalize earning income. It happens when politics is not polarized between antagonistic interest groups. . . . The solutions are a lot more difficult to describe than the problems. The way forward must be to create incentives for growth for the trinity of governments, donors, and individuals.” (p. 289–90)
Answer to Try It! Problem
Situations 1 and 4 should lead to a shift further outward in the country’s production possibility curve and further to the right in its long-run aggregate supply curve. Situations 2 and 3 should lead to smaller outward shifts in the country’s production possibility curve and smaller rightward shifts in its long-run aggregate supply curve.
1The material in this section is based on Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, The Sources of Economic Growth in OECD Countries, 2003.
2Excludes Czech Republic, Hungary, Korean, Mexico, Poland, and Slovak Republic | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_(LibreTexts)/08%3A_Economic_Growth/8.3%3A_Determinants_of_Economic_Growth.txt |
Summary
We saw that economic growth can be measured by the rate of increase in potential output. Measuring the rate of increase in actual real GDP can confuse growth statistics by introducing elements of cyclical variation.
Growth is an exponential process. A variable increasing at a fixed percentage rate doubles over fixed intervals. The doubling time is approximated by the rule of 72. The exponential nature of growth means that small differences in growth rates have large effects over long periods of time. Per capita rates of increase in real GDP are found by subtracting the growth rate of the population from the growth rate of GDP.
Growth can be shown in the model of aggregate demand and aggregate supply as a series of rightward shifts in the long-run aggregate supply curve. The position of the LRAS is determined by the aggregate production function and by the demand and supply curves for labor. A rightward shift in LRAS results either from an upward shift in the production function, due to increases in factors of production other than labor or to improvements in technology, or from an increase in the demand for or the supply of labor.
Saving plays an important role in economic growth, because it allows for more capital to be available for future production, so the rate of economic growth can rise. Saving thus promotes growth.
In recent years, rates of growth among the world’s industrialized countries have grown more disparate. Recent research suggests this may be related to differing labor and product market conditions, differences in the diffusion of information and communications technologies, as well as differences in macroeconomic and trade policies. Evidence on the role that government plays in economic growth was less conclusive.
Concept Problems
1. Suppose the people in a certain economy decide to stop saving and instead use all their income for consumption. They do nothing to add to their stock of human or physical capital. Discuss the prospects for growth of such an economy.
2. Singapore has a saving rate that is roughly three times greater than that of the United States. Its greater saving rate has been one reason why the Singapore economy has grown faster than the U.S. economy. Suppose that if the United States increased its saving rate to, say, twice the Singapore level, U.S. growth would surpass the Singapore rate. Would that be a good idea?
3. Suppose an increase in air pollution causes capital to wear out more rapidly, doubling the rate of depreciation. How would this affect economic growth?
4. Some people worry that increases in the capital stock will bring about an economy in which everything is done by machines, with no jobs left for people. What does the model of economic growth presented in this chapter predict?
5. China’s annual rate of population growth was 1.2% from 1975 to 2003 and is expected to be 0.6% from 2003 through 2015. How do you think this will affect the rate of increase in real GDP? How will this affect the rate of increase in per capita real GDP?
6. Suppose technology stops changing. Explain the impact on economic growth.
7. Suppose a series of terrorist attacks destroys half the capital in the United States but does not affect the population. What will happen to potential output and to the real wage?
8. “Given the rate at which scientists are making new discoveries, we will soon reach the point that no further discoveries can be made. Economic growth will come to a stop.” Discuss.
9. Suppose real GDP increases during President Obama’s term in office at a 5% rate. Would that imply that his policies were successful in “growing the economy”?
10. Suppose that for some country it was found that its economic growth was based almost entirely on increases in quantities of factors of production. Why might such growth be difficult to sustain?
Numerical Problems
1. The population of the world in 2003 was 6.314 billion. It grew between 1975 and 2003 at an annual rate of 1.6%. Assume that it continues to grow at this rate.
1. Compute the doubling time.
2. Estimate the world population in 2048 and 2093 (assuming all other things remain unchanged).
2. With a world population in 2003 of 6.314 billion and a projected population growth rate of 1.1% instead (which is the United Nations’ projection for the period 2003 to 2015).
1. Compute the doubling time.
2. State the year in which the world’s population would be 12.628 billion.
3. Suppose a country’s population grows at the rate of 2% per year and its output grows at the rate of 3% per year.
1. Calculate its rate of growth of per capita output.
2. If instead its population grows at 3% per year and its output grows at 2% per year, calculate its rate of growth of per capita output.
4. The rate of economic growth per capita in France from 1996 to 2000 was 1.9% per year, while in Korea over the same period it was 4.2%. Per capita real GDP was \$28,900 in France in 2003, and \$12,700 in Korea. Assume the growth rates for each country remain the same.
1. Compute the doubling time for France’s per capita real GDP.
2. Compute the doubling time for Korea’s per capita real GDP.
3. What will France’s per capita real GDP be in 2045?
4. What will Korea’s per capita real GDP be in 2045?
5. Suppose real GDPs in country A and country B are identical at \$10 trillion dollars in 2005. Suppose country A’s economic growth rate is 2% and country B’s is 4% and both growth rates remain constant over time.
1. On a graph, show country A’s potential output until 2025.
2. On the same graph, show country B’s potential output.
3. Calculate the percentage difference in their levels of potential output in 2025.
Suppose country A’s population grows 1% per year and country B’s population grows 3% per year.
1. On a graph, show country A’s potential output per capita in 2025.
2. On the same graph, show country B’s potential output per capita in 2025.
3. Calculate the percentage difference in their levels of potential output per capita in 2025.
6. Two countries, A and B, have identical levels of real GDP per capita. In Country A, an increase in the capital stock increases the potential output by 10%. Country B also experiences a 10% increase in its potential output, but this increase is the result of an increase in its labor force. Using aggregate production functions and labor-market analyses for the two countries, illustrate and explain how these events are likely to affect living standards in the two economies.
7. Suppose the information below characterizes an economy:
Employment (in millions) Real GDP (in billions)
1 200
2 700
3 1,100
4 1,400
5 1,650
6 1,850
7 2,000
8 2,100
9 2,170
10 2,200
1. Construct the aggregate production function for this economy.
2. What kind of returns does this economy experience? How do you know?
3. Assuming that total available employment is 7 million, draw the economy’s long-run aggregate supply curve.
Suppose that improvement in technology means that real GDP at each level of employment rises by \$200 billion.
1. Construct the new aggregate production function for this economy.
2. Construct the new long-run aggregate supply curve for the economy.
8. In Table 23.1 “Growing Disparities in Rates of Economic Growth”, we can see that Japan’s growth rate of per capita real GDP fell from 3.3% per year in the 1980s to 1.4% per year in the 1990s.
1. Compare the percent increase in its per capita real GDP over the 20-year period to what it would have been if it had maintained the 3.3% per capita growth rate of the 1980s.
2. Japan’s per capita GDP in 1980 was about \$24,000 (in U.S. 2000 dollars) in 1980. Calculate what it would have been if the growth rate of the 1980s had been maintained Calculate about how much it is, given the actual growth rates over the two decades.
3. In Table 23.1 “Growing Disparities in Rates of Economic Growth”, we can see that Ireland’s growth rate of per capita real GDP grew from 3.0% per year in the 1980s to 6.4% per year in the 1990s.
4. Compare the percent increase in its per capita real GDP over the 20-year period to what it would have been if it had maintained the 3.0% per capita growth rate of the 1980s.
5. Ireland’s per capita GDP in 1980 was about \$10,000 (in U.S. 2000 dollars). Calculate what it would have been if the growth rate of the 1980s had been maintained. Calculate about how much it is, given the actual growth rates over the two decades. | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_(LibreTexts)/08%3A_Economic_Growth/8.4%3A_Review_and_Practice.txt |
Thumbnail: https://unsplash.com/photos/eBWzFKahEaU
09: The Nature and Creation of Money
Learning Objective
1. Define money and discuss its three basic functions.
2. Distinguish between commodity money and fiat money, giving examples of each.
3. Define what is meant by the money supply and tell what is included in the Federal Reserve System’s two definitions of it (M1 and M2).
If cigarettes and mackerel can be used as money, then just what is money? Money is anything that serves as a medium of exchange. A medium of exchange is anything that is widely accepted as a means of payment. In Romania under Communist Party rule in the 1980s, for example, Kent cigarettes served as a medium of exchange; the fact that they could be exchanged for other goods and services made them money.
Money, ultimately, is defined by people and what they do. When people use something as a medium of exchange, it becomes money. If people were to begin accepting basketballs as payment for most goods and services, basketballs would be money. We will learn in this chapter that changes in the way people use money have created new types of money and changed the way money is measured in recent decades.
The Functions of Money
Money serves three basic functions. By definition, it is a medium of exchange. It also serves as a unit of account and as a store of value—as the “mack” did in Lompoc.
A Medium of Exchange
The exchange of goods and services in markets is among the most universal activities of human life. To facilitate these exchanges, people settle on something that will serve as a medium of exchange—they select something to be money.
We can understand the significance of a medium of exchange by considering its absence. Barter occurs when goods are exchanged directly for other goods. Because no one item serves as a medium of exchange in a barter economy, potential buyers must find things that individual sellers will accept. A buyer might find a seller who will trade a pair of shoes for two chickens. Another seller might be willing to provide a haircut in exchange for a garden hose. Suppose you were visiting a grocery store in a barter economy. You would need to load up a truckful of items the grocer might accept in exchange for groceries. That would be an uncertain affair; you could not know when you headed for the store which items the grocer might agree to trade. Indeed, the complexity—and cost—of a visit to a grocery store in a barter economy would be so great that there probably would not be any grocery stores! A moment’s contemplation of the difficulty of life in a barter economy will demonstrate why human societies invariably select something—sometimes more than one thing—to serve as a medium of exchange, just as prisoners in federal penitentiaries accepted mackerel.
A Unit of Account
Ask someone in the United States what he or she paid for something, and that person will respond by quoting a price stated in dollars: “I paid \$75 for this radio,” or “I paid \$15 for this pizza.” People do not say, “I paid five pizzas for this radio.” That statement might, of course, be literally true in the sense of the opportunity cost of the transaction, but we do not report prices that way for two reasons. One is that people do not arrive at places like Radio Shack with five pizzas and expect to purchase a radio. The other is that the information would not be very useful. Other people may not think of values in pizza terms, so they might not know what we meant. Instead, we report the value of things in terms of money.
Money serves as a unit of account, which is a consistent means of measuring the value of things. We use money in this fashion because it is also a medium of exchange. When we report the value of a good or service in units of money, we are reporting what another person is likely to have to pay to obtain that good or service.
A Store of Value
The third function of money is to serve as a store of value, that is, an item that holds value over time. Consider a \$20 bill that you accidentally left in a coat pocket a year ago. When you find it, you will be pleased. That is because you know the bill still has value. Value has, in effect, been “stored” in that little piece of paper.
Money, of course, is not the only thing that stores value. Houses, office buildings, land, works of art, and many other commodities serve as a means of storing wealth and value. Money differs from these other stores of value by being readily exchangeable for other commodities. Its role as a medium of exchange makes it a convenient store of value.
Because money acts as a store of value, it can be used as a standard for future payments. When you borrow money, for example, you typically sign a contract pledging to make a series of future payments to settle the debt. These payments will be made using money, because money acts as a store of value.
Money is not a risk-free store of value, however. We saw in the chapter that introduced the concept of inflation that inflation reduces the value of money. In periods of rapid inflation, people may not want to rely on money as a store of value, and they may turn to commodities such as land or gold instead.
Types of Money
Although money can take an extraordinary variety of forms, there are really only two types of money: money that has intrinsic value and money that does not have intrinsic value.
Commodity money is money that has value apart from its use as money. Mackerel in federal prisons is an example of commodity money. Mackerel could be used to buy services from other prisoners; they could also be eaten.
Gold and silver are the most widely used forms of commodity money. Gold and silver can be used as jewelry and for some industrial and medicinal purposes, so they have value apart from their use as money. The first known use of gold and silver coins was in the Greek city-state of Lydia in the beginning of the seventh century B.C. The coins were fashioned from electrum, a natural mixture of gold and silver.
One disadvantage of commodity money is that its quantity can fluctuate erratically. Gold, for example, was one form of money in the United States in the 19th century. Gold discoveries in California and later in Alaska sent the quantity of money soaring. Some of this nation’s worst bouts of inflation were set off by increases in the quantity of gold in circulation during the 19th century. A much greater problem exists with commodity money that can be produced. In the southern part of colonial America, for example, tobacco served as money. There was a continuing problem of farmers increasing the quantity of money by growing more tobacco. The problem was sufficiently serious that vigilante squads were organized. They roamed the countryside burning tobacco fields in an effort to keep the quantity of tobacco, hence money, under control. (Remarkably, these squads sought to control the money supply by burning tobacco grown by other farmers.)
Another problem is that commodity money may vary in quality. Given that variability, there is a tendency for lower-quality commodities to drive higher-quality commodities out of circulation. Horses, for example, served as money in colonial New England. It was common for loan obligations to be stated in terms of a quantity of horses to be paid back. Given such obligations, there was a tendency to use lower-quality horses to pay back debts; higher-quality horses were kept out of circulation for other uses. Laws were passed forbidding the use of lame horses in the payment of debts. This is an example of Gresham’s law: the tendency for a lower-quality commodity (bad money) to drive a higher-quality commodity (good money) out of circulation. Unless a means can be found to control the quality of commodity money, the tendency for that quality to decline can threaten its acceptability as a medium of exchange.
But something need not have intrinsic value to serve as money. Fiat money is money that some authority, generally a government, has ordered to be accepted as a medium of exchange. The currency—paper money and coins—used in the United States today is fiat money; it has no value other than its use as money. You will notice that statement printed on each bill: “This note is legal tender for all debts, public and private.”
Checkable deposits, which are balances in checking accounts, and traveler’s checks are other forms of money that have no intrinsic value. They can be converted to currency, but generally they are not; they simply serve as a medium of exchange. If you want to buy something, you can often pay with a check or a debit card. A check is a written order to a bank to transfer ownership of a checkable deposit. A debit card is the electronic equivalent of a check. Suppose, for example, that you have \$100 in your checking account and you write a check to your campus bookstore for \$30 or instruct the clerk to swipe your debit card and “charge” it \$30. In either case, \$30 will be transferred from your checking account to the bookstore’s checking account. Notice that it is the checkable deposit, not the check or debit card, that is money. The check or debit card just tells a bank to transfer money, in this case checkable deposits, from one account to another.
What makes something money is really found in its acceptability, not in whether or not it has intrinsic value or whether or not a government has declared it as such. For example, fiat money tends to be accepted so long as too much of it is not printed too quickly. When that happens, as it did in Russia in the 1990s, people tend to look for other items to serve as money. In the case of Russia, the U.S. dollar became a popular form of money, even though the Russian government still declared the ruble to be its fiat money.
Heads Up!
The term money, as used by economists and throughout this book, has the very specific definition given in the text. People can hold assets in a variety of forms, from works of art to stock certificates to currency or checking account balances. Even though individuals may be very wealthy, only when they are holding their assets in a form that serves as a medium of exchange do they, according to the precise meaning of the term, have “money.” To qualify as “money,” something must be widely accepted as a medium of exchange.
Measuring Money
The total quantity of money in the economy at any one time is called the money supply. Economists measure the money supply because it affects economic activity. What should be included in the money supply? We want to include as part of the money supply those things that serve as media of exchange. However, the items that provide this function have varied over time.
Before 1980, the basic money supply was measured as the sum of currency in circulation, traveler’s checks, and checkable deposits. Currency serves the medium-of-exchange function very nicely but denies people any interest earnings. (Checking accounts did not earn interest before 1980.)
Over the last few decades, especially as a result of high interest rates and high inflation in the late 1970s, people sought and found ways of holding their financial assets in ways that earn interest and that can easily be converted to money. For example, it is now possible to transfer money from your savings account to your checking account using an automated teller machine (ATM), and then to withdraw cash from your checking account. Thus, many types of savings accounts are easily converted into currency.
Economists refer to the ease with which an asset can be converted into currency as the asset’s liquidity. Currency itself is perfectly liquid; you can always change two \$5 bills for a \$10 bill. Checkable deposits are almost perfectly liquid; you can easily cash a check or visit an ATM. An office building, however, is highly illiquid. It can be converted to money only by selling it, a time-consuming and costly process.
As financial assets other than checkable deposits have become more liquid, economists have had to develop broader measures of money that would correspond to economic activity. In the United States, the final arbiter of what is and what is not measured as money is the Federal Reserve System. Because it is difficult to determine what (and what not) to measure as money, the Fed reports several different measures of money, including M1 and M2.
M1 is the narrowest of the Fed’s money supply definitions. It includes currency in circulation, checkable deposits, and traveler’s checks. M2 is a broader measure of the money supply than M1. It includes M1 and other deposits such as small savings accounts (less than \$100,000), as well as accounts such as money market mutual funds (MMMFs) that place limits on the number or the amounts of the checks that can be written in a certain period.
M2 is sometimes called the broadly defined money supply, while M1 is the narrowly defined money supply. The assets in M1 may be regarded as perfectly liquid; the assets in M2 are highly liquid, but somewhat less liquid than the assets in M1. Even broader measures of the money supply include large time-deposits, money market mutual funds held by institutions, and other assets that are somewhat less liquid than those in M2. Figure 24.1 shows the composition of M1 and M2 in October 2010.
Heads Up!
Credit cards are not money. A credit card identifies you as a person who has a special arrangement with the card issuer in which the issuer will lend you money and transfer the proceeds to another party whenever you want. Thus, if you present a MasterCard to a jeweler as payment for a \$500 ring, the firm that issued you the card will lend you the \$500 and send that money, less a service charge, to the jeweler. You, of course, will be required to repay the loan later. But a card that says you have such a relationship is not money, just as your debit card is not money.
With all the operational definitions of money available, which one should we use? Economists generally answer that question by asking another: Which measure of money is most closely related to real GDP and the price level? As that changes, so must the definition of money.
In 1980, the Fed decided that changes in the ways people were managing their money made M1 useless for policy choices. Indeed, the Fed now pays little attention to M2 either. It has largely given up tracking a particular measure of the money supply. The choice of what to measure as money remains the subject of continuing research and considerable debate.
Key Takeaways
• Money is anything that serves as a medium of exchange. Other functions of money are to serve as a unit of account and as a store of value.
• Money may or may not have intrinsic value. Commodity money has intrinsic value because it has other uses besides being a medium of exchange. Fiat money serves only as a medium of exchange, because its use as such is authorized by the government; it has no intrinsic value.
• The Fed reports several different measures of money, including M1 and M2.
Try It!
Which of the following are money in the United States today and which are not? Explain your reasoning in terms of the functions of money.
1. Gold
2. A Van Gogh painting
3. A dime
Case in Point: Fiat-less Money
Figure 24.2
Michael Mandiberg – 1 million iraqi dinar – CC BY-SA 2.0.
“We don’t have a currency of our own,” proclaimed Nerchivan Barzani, the Kurdish regional government’s prime minister in a news interview in 2003. But, even without official recognition by the government, the so-called “Swiss” dinar certainly seemed to function as a fiat money. Here is how the Kurdish area of northern Iraq, during the period between the Gulf War in 1991 and the fall of Saddam Hussein in 2003, came to have its own currency, despite the pronouncement of its prime minister to the contrary.
After the Gulf War, the northern, mostly Kurdish area of Iraq was separated from the rest of Iraq though the enforcement of the no-fly-zone. Because of United Nations sanctions that barred the Saddam Hussein regime in the south from continuing to import currency from Switzerland, the central bank of Iraq announced it would replace the “Swiss” dinars, so named because they had been printed in Switzerland, with locally printed currency, which became known as “Saddam” dinars. Iraqi citizens in southern Iraq were given three weeks to exchange their old dinars for the new ones. In the northern part of Iraq, citizens could not exchange their notes and so they simply continued to use the old ones.
And so it was that the “Swiss” dinar for a period of about 10 years, even without government backing or any law establishing it as legal tender, served as northern Iraq’s fiat money. Economists use the word “fiat,” which in Latin means “let it be done,” to describe money that has no intrinsic value. Such forms of money usually get their value because a government or authority has declared them to be legal tender, but, as this story shows, it does not really require much “fiat” for a convenient, in-and-of-itself worthless, medium of exchange to evolve.
What happened to both the “Swiss” and “Saddam” dinars? After the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) assumed control of all of Iraq, Paul Bremer, then head of the CPA, announced that a new Iraqi dinar would be exchanged for both of the existing currencies over a three-month period ending in January 2004 at a rate that implied that one “Swiss” dinar was valued at 150 “Saddam” dinars. Because Saddam Hussein’s regime had printed many more “Saddam” dinars over the 10-year period, while no “Swiss” dinars had been printed, and because the cheap printing of the “Saddam” dinars made them easy to counterfeit, over the decade the “Swiss” dinars became relatively more valuable and the exchange rate that Bremer offered about equalized the purchasing power of the two currencies. For example, it took about 133 times as many “Saddam” dinars as “Swiss” dinars to buy a man’s suit in Iraq at the time. The new notes, sometimes called “Bremer” dinars, were printed in Britain and elsewhere and flown into Iraq on 22 flights using Boeing 747s and other large aircraft. In both the northern and southern parts of Iraq, citizens turned in their old dinars for the new ones, suggesting at least more confidence at that moment in the “Bremer” dinar than in either the “Saddam” or “Swiss” dinars.
Answer to Try It! Problem
1. Gold is not money because it is not used as a medium of exchange. In addition, it does not serve as a unit of account. It may, however, serve as a store of value.
2. A Van Gogh painting is not money. It serves as a store of value. It is highly illiquid but could eventually be converted to money. It is neither a medium of exchange nor a unit of account.
3. A dime is money and serves all three functions of money. It is, of course, perfectly liquid. | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_(LibreTexts)/09%3A_The_Nature_and_Creation_of_Money/9.1%3A_What_Is_Money%3F.txt |
Learning Objective
1. Explain what banks are, what their balance sheets look like, and what is meant by a fractional reserve banking system.
2. Describe the process of money creation (destruction), using the concept of the deposit multiplier.
3. Describe how and why banks are regulated and insured.
Where does money come from? How is its quantity increased or decreased? The answer to these questions suggests that money has an almost magical quality: money is created by banks when they issue loans. In effect, money is created by the stroke of a pen or the click of a computer key.
We will begin by examining the operation of banks and the banking system. We will find that, like money itself, the nature of banking is experiencing rapid change.
Banks and Other Financial Intermediaries
An institution that amasses funds from one group and makes them available to another is called a financial intermediary. A pension fund is an example of a financial intermediary. Workers and firms place earnings in the fund for their retirement; the fund earns income by lending money to firms or by purchasing their stock. The fund thus makes retirement saving available for other spending. Insurance companies are also financial intermediaries, because they lend some of the premiums paid by their customers to firms for investment. Mutual funds make money available to firms and other institutions by purchasing their initial offerings of stocks or bonds.
Banks play a particularly important role as financial intermediaries. Banks accept depositors’ money and lend it to borrowers. With the interest they earn on their loans, banks are able to pay interest to their depositors, cover their own operating costs, and earn a profit, all the while maintaining the ability of the original depositors to spend the funds when they desire to do so. One key characteristic of banks is that they offer their customers the opportunity to open checking accounts, thus creating checkable deposits. These functions define a bank, which is a financial intermediary that accepts deposits, makes loans, and offers checking accounts.
Over time, some nonbank financial intermediaries have become more and more like banks. For example, some brokerage firms offer customers interest-earning accounts and make loans. They now allow their customers to write checks on their accounts.
As nonbank financial intermediaries have grown, banks’ share of the nation’s credit market financial assets has diminished. In 1972, banks accounted for nearly 30% of U.S. credit market financial assets. In 2007, that share had dropped to about 15%.
The fact that banks account for a declining share of U.S. financial assets alarms some observers. We will see that banks are more tightly regulated than are other financial institutions; one reason for that regulation is to maintain control over the money supply. Other financial intermediaries do not face the same regulatory restrictions as banks. Indeed, their freedom from regulation is one reason they have grown so rapidly. As other financial intermediaries become more important, central authorities begin to lose control over the money supply.
The declining share of financial assets controlled by “banks” began to change in 2008. Many of the nation’s largest investment banks—financial institutions that provided services to firms but were not regulated as commercial banks—began having serious financial difficulties as a result of their investments tied to home mortgage loans. As home prices in the United States began falling, many of those mortgage loans went into default. Investment banks that had made substantial purchases of securities whose value was ultimately based on those mortgage loans themselves began failing. Bear Stearns, one of the largest investment banks in the United States, required federal funds to remain solvent. Another large investment bank, Lehman Brothers, failed. In an effort to avoid a similar fate, several other investment banks applied for status as ordinary commercial banks subject to the stringent regulation those institutions face. One result of the terrible financial crisis that crippled the U.S. and other economies in 2008 may be greater control of the money supply by the Fed.
Bank Finance and a Fractional Reserve System
Bank finance lies at the heart of the process through which money is created. To understand money creation, we need to understand some of the basics of bank finance.
Banks accept deposits and issue checks to the owners of those deposits. Banks use the money collected from depositors to make loans. The bank’s financial picture at a given time can be depicted using a simplified balance sheet, which is a financial statement showing assets, liabilities, and net worth. Assets are anything of value. Liabilities are obligations to other parties. Net worth equals assets less liabilities. All these are given dollar values in a firm’s balance sheet. The sum of liabilities plus net worth therefore must equal the sum of all assets. On a balance sheet, assets are listed on the left, liabilities and net worth on the right.
The main way that banks earn profits is through issuing loans. Because their depositors do not typically all ask for the entire amount of their deposits back at the same time, banks lend out most of the deposits they have collected—to companies seeking to expand their operations, to people buying cars or homes, and so on. Banks keep only a fraction of their deposits as cash in their vaults and in deposits with the Fed. These assets are called reserves. Banks lend out the rest of their deposits. A system in which banks hold reserves whose value is less than the sum of claims outstanding on those reserves is called a fractional reserve banking system.
Table 24.1 “The Consolidated Balance Sheet for U.S. Commercial Banks, October 2010” shows a consolidated balance sheet for commercial banks in the United States for October 2010. Banks hold reserves against the liabilities represented by their checkable deposits. Notice that these reserves were a small fraction of total deposit liabilities of that month. Most bank assets are in the form of loans.
Table 24.1 The Consolidated Balance Sheet for U.S. Commercial Banks, October 2010
Assets Liabilities and Net Worth
Reserves \$1,040.2 Checkable deposits \$1,792.0
Other assets 1,743.7 Other deposits 6,103.6
Loans 6,788.7 Borrowings 1,927.5
Securities 2,452.6 Other liabilities 855.8
Total assets \$12,025.2 Total liabilities 10,678.9
Net worth 1,346.4
This balance sheet for all commercial banks in the United States shows their financial situation in billions of dollars, seasonally adjusted, on October 2010.
In the next section, we will learn that money is created when banks issue loans.
Money Creation
To understand the process of money creation today, let us create a hypothetical system of banks. We will focus on three banks in this system: Acme Bank, Bellville Bank, and Clarkston Bank. Assume that all banks are required to hold reserves equal to 10% of their checkable deposits. The quantity of reserves banks are required to hold is called required reserves. The reserve requirement is expressed as a required reserve ratio; it specifies the ratio of reserves to checkable deposits a bank must maintain. Banks may hold reserves in excess of the required level; such reserves are called excess reserves. Excess reserves plus required reserves equal total reserves.
Because banks earn relatively little interest on their reserves held on deposit with the Federal Reserve, we shall assume that they seek to hold no excess reserves. When a bank’s excess reserves equal zero, it is loaned up. Finally, we shall ignore assets other than reserves and loans and deposits other than checkable deposits. To simplify the analysis further, we shall suppose that banks have no net worth; their assets are equal to their liabilities.
Let us suppose that every bank in our imaginary system begins with \$1,000 in reserves, \$9,000 in loans outstanding, and \$10,000 in checkable deposit balances held by customers. The balance sheet for one of these banks, Acme Bank, is shown in Table 24.2 “A Balance Sheet for Acme Bank”. The required reserve ratio is 0.1: Each bank must have reserves equal to 10% of its checkable deposits. Because reserves equal required reserves, excess reserves equal zero. Each bank is loaned up.
Table 24.2 A Balance Sheet for Acme Bank
Acme Bank
Assets Liabilities
Reserves \$1,000 Deposits \$10,000
Loans \$9,000
We assume that all banks in a hypothetical system of banks have \$1,000 in reserves, \$10,000 in checkable deposits, and \$9,000 in loans. With a 10% reserve requirement, each bank is loaned up; it has zero excess reserves.
Acme Bank, like every other bank in our hypothetical system, initially holds reserves equal to the level of required reserves. Now suppose one of Acme Bank’s customers deposits \$1,000 in cash in a checking account. The money goes into the bank’s vault and thus adds to reserves. The customer now has an additional \$1,000 in his or her account. Two versions of Acme’s balance sheet are given here. The first shows the changes brought by the customer’s deposit: reserves and checkable deposits rise by \$1,000. The second shows how these changes affect Acme’s balances. Reserves now equal \$2,000 and checkable deposits equal \$11,000. With checkable deposits of \$11,000 and a 10% reserve requirement, Acme is required to hold reserves of \$1,100. With reserves equaling \$2,000, Acme has \$900 in excess reserves.
At this stage, there has been no change in the money supply. When the customer brought in the \$1,000 and Acme put the money in the vault, currency in circulation fell by \$1,000. At the same time, the \$1,000 was added to the customer’s checking account balance, so the money supply did not change.
Figure 24.3
Because Acme earns only a low interest rate on its excess reserves, we assume it will try to loan them out. Suppose Acme lends the \$900 to one of its customers. It will make the loan by crediting the customer’s checking account with \$900. Acme’s outstanding loans and checkable deposits rise by \$900. The \$900 in checkable deposits is new money; Acme created it when it issued the \$900 loan. Now you know where money comes from—it is created when a bank issues a loan.
Figure 24.4
Presumably, the customer who borrowed the \$900 did so in order to spend it. That customer will write a check to someone else, who is likely to bank at some other bank. Suppose that Acme’s borrower writes a check to a firm with an account at Bellville Bank. In this set of transactions, Acme’s checkable deposits fall by \$900. The firm that receives the check deposits it in its account at Bellville Bank, increasing that bank’s checkable deposits by \$900. Bellville Bank now has a check written on an Acme account. Bellville will submit the check to the Fed, which will reduce Acme’s deposits with the Fed—its reserves—by \$900 and increase Bellville’s reserves by \$900.
Figure 24.5
Notice that Acme Bank emerges from this round of transactions with \$11,000 in checkable deposits and \$1,100 in reserves. It has eliminated its excess reserves by issuing the loan for \$900; Acme is now loaned up. Notice also that from Acme’s point of view, it has not created any money! It merely took in a \$1,000 deposit and emerged from the process with \$1,000 in additional checkable deposits.
The \$900 in new money Acme created when it issued a loan has not vanished—it is now in an account in Bellville Bank. Like the magician who shows the audience that the hat from which the rabbit appeared was empty, Acme can report that it has not created any money. There is a wonderful irony in the magic of money creation: banks create money when they issue loans, but no one bank ever seems to keep the money it creates. That is because money is created within the banking system, not by a single bank.
The process of money creation will not end there. Let us go back to Bellville Bank. Its deposits and reserves rose by \$900 when the Acme check was deposited in a Bellville account. The \$900 deposit required an increase in required reserves of \$90. Because Bellville’s reserves rose by \$900, it now has \$810 in excess reserves. Just as Acme lent the amount of its excess reserves, we can expect Bellville to lend this \$810. The next set of balance sheets shows this transaction. Bellville’s loans and checkable deposits rise by \$810.
Figure 24.6
The \$810 that Bellville lent will be spent. Let us suppose it ends up with a customer who banks at Clarkston Bank. Bellville’s checkable deposits fall by \$810; Clarkston’s rise by the same amount. Clarkston submits the check to the Fed, which transfers the money from Bellville’s reserve account to Clarkston’s. Notice that Clarkston’s deposits rise by \$810; Clarkston must increase its reserves by \$81. But its reserves have risen by \$810, so it has excess reserves of \$729.
Figure 24.7
Notice that Bellville is now loaned up. And notice that it can report that it has not created any money either! It took in a \$900 deposit, and its checkable deposits have risen by that same \$900. The \$810 it created when it issued a loan is now at Clarkston Bank.
The process will not end there. Clarkston will lend the \$729 it now has in excess reserves, and the money that has been created will end up at some other bank, which will then have excess reserves—and create still more money. And that process will just keep going as long as there are excess reserves to pass through the banking system in the form of loans. How much will ultimately be created by the system as a whole? With a 10% reserve requirement, each dollar in reserves backs up \$10 in checkable deposits. The \$1,000 in cash that Acme’s customer brought in adds \$1,000 in reserves to the banking system. It can therefore back up an additional \$10,000! In just the three banks we have shown, checkable deposits have risen by \$2,710 (\$1,000 at Acme, \$900 at Bellville, and \$810 at Clarkston). Additional banks in the system will continue to create money, up to a maximum of \$7,290 among them. Subtracting the original \$1,000 that had been a part of currency in circulation, we see that the money supply could rise by as much as \$9,000.
Heads Up!
Notice that when the banks received new deposits, they could make new loans only up to the amount of their excess reserves, not up to the amount of their deposits and total reserve increases. For example, with the new deposit of \$1,000, Acme Bank was able to make additional loans of \$900. If instead it made new loans equal to its increase in total reserves, then after the customers who received new loans wrote checks to others, its reserves would be less than the required amount. In the case of Acme, had it lent out an additional \$1,000, after checks were written against the new loans, it would have been left with only \$1,000 in reserves against \$11,000 in deposits, for a reserve ratio of only 0.09, which is less than the required reserve ratio of 0.1 in the example.
The Deposit Multiplier
We can relate the potential increase in the money supply to the change in reserves that created it using the deposit multiplier (md), which equals the ratio of the maximum possible change in checkable deposits (∆D) to the change in reserves (∆R). In our example, the deposit multiplier was 10:
Equation 24.1
To see how the deposit multiplier md is related to the required reserve ratio, we use the fact that if banks in the economy are loaned up, then reserves, R, equal the required reserve ratio (rrr) times checkable deposits, D:
Equation 24.2
A change in reserves produces a change in loans and a change in checkable deposits. Once banks are fully loaned up, the change in reserves, ∆R, will equal the required reserve ratio times the change in deposits, ∆D:
Equation 24.3
Solving for ∆D, we have
Equation 24.4
Dividing both sides by ∆R, we see that the deposit multiplier, md, is 1/rrr:
Equation 24.5
The deposit multiplier is thus given by the reciprocal of the required reserve ratio. With a required reserve ratio of 0.1, the deposit multiplier is 10. A required reserve ratio of 0.2 would produce a deposit multiplier of 5. The higher the required reserve ratio, the lower the deposit multiplier.
Actual increases in checkable deposits will not be nearly as great as suggested by the deposit multiplier. That is because the artificial conditions of our example are not met in the real world. Some banks hold excess reserves, customers withdraw cash, and some loan proceeds are not spent. Each of these factors reduces the degree to which checkable deposits are affected by an increase in reserves. The basic mechanism, however, is the one described in our example, and it remains the case that checkable deposits increase by a multiple of an increase in reserves.
The entire process of money creation can work in reverse. When you withdraw cash from your bank, you reduce the bank’s reserves. Just as a deposit at Acme Bank increases the money supply by a multiple of the original deposit, your withdrawal reduces the money supply by a multiple of the amount you withdraw. And just as money is created when banks issue loans, it is destroyed as the loans are repaid. A loan payment reduces checkable deposits; it thus reduces the money supply.
Suppose, for example, that the Acme Bank customer who borrowed the \$900 makes a \$100 payment on the loan. Only part of the payment will reduce the loan balance; part will be interest. Suppose \$30 of the payment is for interest, while the remaining \$70 reduces the loan balance. The effect of the payment on Acme’s balance sheet is shown below. Checkable deposits fall by \$100, loans fall by \$70, and net worth rises by the amount of the interest payment, \$30.
Similar to the process of money creation, the money reduction process decreases checkable deposits by, at most, the amount of the reduction in deposits times the deposit multiplier.
Figure 24.8
The Regulation of Banks
Banks are among the most heavily regulated of financial institutions. They are regulated in part to protect individual depositors against corrupt business practices. Banks are also susceptible to crises of confidence. Because their reserves equal only a fraction of their deposit liabilities, an effort by customers to get all their cash out of a bank could force it to fail. A few poorly managed banks could create such a crisis, leading people to try to withdraw their funds from well-managed banks. Another reason for the high degree of regulation is that variations in the quantity of money have important effects on the economy as a whole, and banks are the institutions through which money is created.
Deposit Insurance
From a customer’s point of view, the most important form of regulation comes in the form of deposit insurance. For commercial banks, this insurance is provided by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC). Insurance funds are maintained through a premium assessed on banks for every \$100 of bank deposits.
If a commercial bank fails, the FDIC guarantees to reimburse depositors up to \$250,000 (raised from \$100,000 during the financial crisis of 2008) per insured bank, for each account ownership category. From a depositor’s point of view, therefore, it is not necessary to worry about a bank’s safety.
One difficulty this insurance creates, however, is that it may induce the officers of a bank to take more risks. With a federal agency on hand to bail them out if they fail, the costs of failure are reduced. Bank officers can thus be expected to take more risks than they would otherwise, which, in turn, makes failure more likely. In addition, depositors, knowing that their deposits are insured, may not scrutinize the banks’ lending activities as carefully as they would if they felt that unwise loans could result in the loss of their deposits.
Thus, banks present us with a fundamental dilemma. A fractional reserve system means that banks can operate only if their customers maintain their confidence in them. If bank customers lose confidence, they are likely to try to withdraw their funds. But with a fractional reserve system, a bank actually holds funds in reserve equal to only a small fraction of its deposit liabilities. If its customers think a bank will fail and try to withdraw their cash, the bank is likely to fail. Bank panics, in which frightened customers rush to withdraw their deposits, contributed to the failure of one-third of the nation’s banks between 1929 and 1933. Deposit insurance was introduced in large part to give people confidence in their banks and to prevent failure. But the deposit insurance that seeks to prevent bank failures may lead to less careful management—and thus encourage bank failure.
Regulation to Prevent Bank Failure
To reduce the number of bank failures, banks are severely limited in what they can do. They are barred from certain types of financial investments and from activities viewed as too risky. Banks are required to maintain a minimum level of net worth as a fraction of total assets. Regulators from the FDIC regularly perform audits and other checks of individual banks to ensure they are operating safely.
The FDIC has the power to close a bank whose net worth has fallen below the required level. In practice, it typically acts to close a bank when it becomes insolvent, that is, when its net worth becomes negative. Negative net worth implies that the bank’s liabilities exceed its assets.
When the FDIC closes a bank, it arranges for depositors to receive their funds. When the bank’s funds are insufficient to return customers’ deposits, the FDIC uses money from the insurance fund for this purpose. Alternatively, the FDIC may arrange for another bank to purchase the failed bank. The FDIC, however, continues to guarantee that depositors will not lose any money.
Key Takeaways
• Banks are financial intermediaries that accept deposits, make loans, and provide checking accounts for their customers.
• Money is created within the banking system when banks issue loans; it is destroyed when the loans are repaid.
• An increase (decrease) in reserves in the banking system can increase (decrease) the money supply. The maximum amount of the increase (decrease) is equal to the deposit multiplier times the change in reserves; the deposit multiplier equals the reciprocal of the required reserve ratio.
• Bank deposits are insured and banks are heavily regulated.
Try It!
1. Suppose Acme Bank initially has \$10,000 in deposits, reserves of \$2,000, and loans of \$8,000. At a required reserve ratio of 0.2, is Acme loaned up? Show the balance sheet of Acme Bank at present.
2. Now suppose that an Acme Bank customer, planning to take cash on an extended college graduation trip to India, withdraws \$1,000 from her account. Show the changes to Acme Bank’s balance sheet and Acme’s balance sheet after the withdrawal. By how much are its reserves now deficient?
3. Acme would probably replenish its reserves by reducing loans. This action would cause a multiplied contraction of checkable deposits as other banks lose deposits because their customers would be paying off loans to Acme. How large would the contraction be?
Case in Point: A Big Bank Goes Under
Figure 24.9
Wikimedia Commons – CC BY-SA 3.0.
It was the darling of Wall Street—it showed rapid growth and made big profits. Washington Mutual, a savings and loan based in the state of Washington, was a relatively small institution whose CEO, Kerry K. Killinger, had big plans. He wanted to transform his little Seattle S&L into the Wal-Mart of banks.
Mr. Killinger began pursuing a relatively straightforward strategy. He acquired banks in large cities such as Chicago and Los Angeles. He acquired banks up and down the east and west coasts. He aggressively extended credit to low-income individuals and families—credit cards, car loans, and mortgages. In making mortgage loans to low-income families, WaMu, as the bank was known, quickly became very profitable. But it was exposing itself to greater and greater risk, according to the New York Times.
Housing prices in the United States more than doubled between 1997 and 2007. During that time, loans to even low-income households were profitable. But, as housing prices began falling in 2007, banks such as WaMu began to experience losses as homeowners began to walk away from houses whose values suddenly fell below their outstanding mortgages. WaMu began losing money in 2007 as housing prices began falling. The company had earned \$3.6 billion in 2006, and swung to a loss of \$67 million in 2007, according to the Puget Sound Business Journal. Mr. Killinger was ousted by the board early in September of 2008. The bank failed later that month. It was the biggest bank failure in the history of the United States.
The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) had just rescued another bank, IndyMac, which was only a tenth the size of WaMu, and would have done the same for WaMu if it had not been able to find a company to purchase it. But in this case, JPMorgan Chase agreed to take it over—its deposits, bank branches, and its troubled asset portfolio. The government and the Fed even negotiated the deal behind WaMu’s back! The then chief executive officer of the company, Alan H. Fishman, was reportedly flying from New York to Seattle when the deal was finalized.
The government was anxious to broker a deal that did not require use of the FDIC’s depleted funds following IndyMac’s collapse. But it would have done so if a buyer had not been found. As the FDIC reports on its Web site: “Since the FDIC’s creation in 1933, no depositor has ever lost even one penny of FDIC-insured funds.”
Answer to Try It! Problem
1. Acme Bank is loaned up, since \$2,000/\$10,000 = 0.2, which is the required reserve ratio. Acme’s balance sheet is:
Figure 24.10 | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_(LibreTexts)/09%3A_The_Nature_and_Creation_of_Money/9.2%3A_The_Banking_System_and_Money_Creation.txt |
Learning Objective
1. Explain the primary functions of central banks.
2. Describe how the Federal Reserve System is structured and governed.
3. Identify and explain the tools of monetary policy.
4. Describe how the Fed creates and destroys money when it buys and sells federal government bonds.
The Federal Reserve System of the United States, or Fed, is the U.S. central bank. Japan’s central bank is the Bank of Japan; the European Union has established the European Central Bank. Most countries have a central bank. A central bank performs five primary functions: (1) it acts as a banker to the central government, (2) it acts as a banker to banks, (3) it acts as a regulator of banks, (4) it conducts monetary policy, and (5) it supports the stability of the financial system.
For the first 137 years of its history, the United States did not have a true central bank. While a central bank was often proposed, there was resistance to creating an institution with such enormous power. A series of bank panics slowly increased support for the creation of a central bank. The bank panic of 1907 proved to be the final straw. Bank failures were so widespread, and depositor losses so heavy, that concerns about centralization of power gave way to a desire for an institution that would provide a stabilizing force in the banking industry. Congress passed the Federal Reserve Act in 1913, creating the Fed and giving it all the powers of a central bank.
Structure of the Fed
In creating the Fed, Congress determined that a central bank should be as independent of the government as possible. It also sought to avoid too much centralization of power in a single institution. These potentially contradictory goals of independence and decentralized power are evident in the Fed’s structure and in the continuing struggles between Congress and the Fed over possible changes in that structure.
In an effort to decentralize power, Congress designed the Fed as a system of 12 regional banks, as shown in Figure 24.12. Each of these banks operates as a kind of bankers’ cooperative; the regional banks are owned by the commercial banks in their districts that have chosen to be members of the Fed. The owners of each Federal Reserve bank select the board of directors of that bank; the board selects the bank’s president.
Figure 24.12 The 12 Federal Reserve Districts and the Cities Where Each Bank Is Located
Several provisions of the Federal Reserve Act seek to maintain the Fed’s independence. The board of directors for the entire Federal Reserve System is called the Board of Governors. The seven members of the board are appointed by the president of the United States and confirmed by the Senate. To ensure a large measure of independence from any one president, the members of the Board of Governors have 14-year terms. One member of the board is selected by the president of the United States to serve as chairman for a four-year term.
As a further means of ensuring the independence of the Fed, Congress authorized it to buy and sell federal government bonds. This activity is a profitable one that allows the Fed to pay its own bills. The Fed is thus not dependent on a Congress that might otherwise be tempted to force a particular set of policies on it. The Fed is limited in the profits it is allowed to earn; its “excess” profits are returned to the Treasury.
It is important to recognize that the Fed is technically not part of the federal government. Members of the Board of Governors do not legally have to answer to Congress, the president, or anyone else. The president and members of Congress can certainly try to influence the Fed, but they cannot order it to do anything. Congress, however, created the Fed. It could, by passing another law, abolish the Fed’s independence. The Fed can maintain its independence only by keeping the support of Congress—and that sometimes requires being responsive to the wishes of Congress.
In recent years, Congress has sought to increase its oversight of the Fed. The chairman of the Federal Reserve Board is required to report to Congress twice each year on its monetary policy, the set of policies that the central bank can use to influence economic activity.
Powers of the Fed
The Fed’s principal powers stem from its authority to conduct monetary policy. It has three main policy tools: setting reserve requirements, operating the discount window and other credit facilities, and conducting open-market operations.
Reserve Requirements
The Fed sets the required ratio of reserves that banks must hold relative to their deposit liabilities. In theory, the Fed could use this power as an instrument of monetary policy. It could lower reserve requirements when it wanted to increase the money supply and raise them when it wanted to reduce the money supply. In practice, however, the Fed does not use its power to set reserve requirements in this way. The reason is that frequent manipulation of reserve requirements would make life difficult for bankers, who would have to adjust their lending policies to changing requirements.
The Fed’s power to set reserve requirements was expanded by the Monetary Control Act of 1980. Before that, the Fed set reserve requirements only for commercial banks that were members of the Federal Reserve System. Most banks are not members of the Fed; the Fed’s control of reserve requirements thus extended to only a minority of banks. The 1980 act required virtually all banks to satisfy the Fed’s reserve requirements.
The Discount Window and Other Credit Facilities
A major responsibility of the Fed is to act as a lender of last resort to banks. When banks fall short on reserves, they can borrow reserves from the Fed through its discount window. The discount rate is the interest rate charged by the Fed when it lends reserves to banks. The Board of Governors sets the discount rate.
Lowering the discount rate makes funds cheaper to banks. A lower discount rate could place downward pressure on interest rates in the economy. However, when financial markets are operating normally, banks rarely borrow from the Fed, reserving use of the discount window for emergencies. A typical bank borrows from the Fed only about once or twice per year.
Instead of borrowing from the Fed when they need reserves, banks typically rely on the federal funds market to obtain reserves. The federal funds market is a market in which banks lend reserves to one another. The federal funds rate is the interest rate charged for such loans; it is determined by banks’ demand for and supply of these reserves. The ability to set the discount rate is no longer an important tool of Federal Reserve policy.
To deal with the recent financial and economic conditions, the Fed greatly expanded its lending beyond its traditional discount window lending. As falling house prices led to foreclosures, private investment banks and other financial institutions came under increasing pressure. The Fed made credit available to a wide range of institutions in an effort to stem the crisis. In 2008, the Fed bailed out two major housing finance firms that had been established by the government to prop up the housing industry—Fannie Mae (the Federal National Mortgage Association) and Freddie Mac (the Federal Home Mortgage Corporation). Together, the two institutions backed the mortgages of half of the nation’s mortgage loans (Zuckerman, 2008). It also agreed to provide \$85 billion to AIG, the huge insurance firm. AIG had a subsidiary that was heavily exposed to mortgage loan losses, and that crippled the firm. The Fed determined that AIG was simply too big to be allowed to fail. Many banks had ties to the giant institution, and its failure would have been a blow to those banks. As the United States faced the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression, the Fed took center stage. Whatever its role in the financial crisis of 2007–2008, the Fed remains an important backstop for banks and other financial institutions needing liquidity. And for that, it uses the traditional discount window, supplemented with a wide range of other credit facilities. The Case in Point in this section discusses these new credit facilities.
Open-Market Operations
The Fed’s ability to buy and sell federal government bonds has proved to be its most potent policy tool. A bond is a promise by the issuer of the bond (in this case the federal government) to pay the owner of the bond a payment or a series of payments on a specific date or dates. The buying and selling of federal government bonds by the Fed are called open-market operations. When the Fed buys or sells government bonds, it adds or subtracts reserves from the banking system. Such changes affect the money supply.
Suppose the Fed buys a government bond in the open market. It writes a check on its own account to the seller of the bond. When the seller deposits the check at a bank, the bank submits the check to the Fed for payment. The Fed “pays” the check by crediting the bank’s account at the Fed, so the bank has more reserves.
The Fed’s purchase of a bond can be illustrated using a balance sheet. Suppose the Fed buys a bond for \$1,000 from one of Acme Bank’s customers. When that customer deposits the check at Acme, checkable deposits will rise by \$1,000. The check is written on the Federal Reserve System; the Fed will credit Acme’s account. Acme’s reserves thus rise by \$1,000. With a 10% reserve requirement, that will create \$900 in excess reserves and set off the same process of money expansion as did the cash deposit we have already examined. The difference is that the Fed’s purchase of a bond created new reserves with the stroke of a pen, where the cash deposit created them by removing \$1,000 from currency in circulation. The purchase of the \$1,000 bond by the Fed could thus increase the money supply by as much as \$10,000, the maximum expansion suggested by the deposit multiplier.
Figure 24.13
Where does the Fed get \$1,000 to purchase the bond? It simply creates the money when it writes the check to purchase the bond. On the Fed’s balance sheet, assets increase by \$1,000 because the Fed now has the bond; bank deposits with the Fed, which represent a liability to the Fed, rise by \$1,000 as well.
When the Fed sells a bond, it gives the buyer a federal government bond that it had previously purchased and accepts a check in exchange. The bank on which the check was written will find its deposit with the Fed reduced by the amount of the check. That bank’s reserves and checkable deposits will fall by equal amounts; the reserves, in effect, disappear. The result is a reduction in the money supply. The Fed thus increases the money supply by buying bonds; it reduces the money supply by selling them.
Figure 24.14 shows how the Fed influences the flow of money in the economy. Funds flow from the public—individuals and firms—to banks as deposits. Banks use those funds to make loans to the public—to individuals and firms. The Fed can influence the volume of bank lending by buying bonds and thus injecting reserves into the system. With new reserves, banks will increase their lending, which creates still more deposits and still more lending as the deposit multiplier goes to work. Alternatively, the Fed can sell bonds. When it does, reserves flow out of the system, reducing bank lending and reducing deposits.
The Fed’s purchase or sale of bonds is conducted by the Open Market Desk at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, one of the 12 district banks. Traders at the Open Market Desk are guided by policy directives issued by the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC). The FOMC consists of the seven members of the Board of Governors plus five regional bank presidents. The president of the New York Federal Reserve Bank serves as a member of the FOMC; the other 11 bank presidents take turns filling the remaining four seats.
The FOMC meets eight times per year to chart the Fed’s monetary policies. In the past, FOMC meetings were closed, with no report of the committee’s action until the release of the minutes six weeks after the meeting. Faced with pressure to open its proceedings, the Fed began in 1994 issuing a report of the decisions of the FOMC immediately after each meeting.
In practice, the Fed sets targets for the federal funds rate. To achieve a lower federal funds rate, the Fed goes into the open market buying securities and thus increasing the money supply. When the Fed raises its target rate for the federal funds rate, it sells securities and thus reduces the money supply.
Traditionally, the Fed has bought and sold short-term government securities; however, in dealing with the condition of the economy in 2009, wherein the Fed has already set the target for the federal funds rate at near zero, the Fed has announced that it will also be buying longer term government securities. In so doing, it hopes to influence longer term interest rates, such as those related to mortgages.
Key Takeaways
• The Fed, the central bank of the United States, acts as a bank for other banks and for the federal government. It also regulates banks, sets monetary policy, and maintains the stability of the financial system.
• The Fed sets reserve requirements and the discount rate and conducts open-market operations. Of these tools of monetary policy, open-market operations are the most important.
• Starting in 2007, the Fed began creating additional credit facilities to help to stabilize the financial system.
• The Fed creates new reserves and new money when it purchases bonds. It destroys reserves and thus reduces the money supply when it sells bonds.
Try It!
Suppose the Fed sells \$8 million worth of bonds.
1. How do bank reserves change?
2. Will the money supply increase or decrease?
3. What is the maximum possible change in the money supply if the required reserve ratio is 0.2?
Case in Point: Fed Supports the Financial System by Creating New Credit Facilities
Figure 24.15
Shalbs – Department of Treasury – CC BY 2.0.
Well before most of the public became aware of the precarious state of the U.S. financial system, the Fed began to see signs of growing financial strains and to act on reducing them. In particular, the Fed saw that short-term interest rates that are often quite close to the federal funds rate began to rise markedly above it. The widening spread was alarming, because it suggested that lender confidence was declining, even for what are generally considered low-risk loans. Commercial paper, in which large companies borrow funds for a period of about a month to manage their cash flow, is an example. Even companies with high credit ratings were having to pay unusually high interest rate premiums in order to get funding, or in some cases could not get funding at all.
To deal with the drying up of credit markets, beginning in late 2007 and accelerating ever since, the Fed has created an alphabet soup of new credit facilities. Some of these are offered in conjunction with the Department of the Treasury, which has more latitude in terms of accepting some credit risk. The facilities differ in terms of collateral used, the duration of the loan, which institutions are eligible to borrow, and the cost to the borrower. For example, the Primary Dealer Credit Facility (PDCF) allows primary dealers (i.e., those financial institutions that normally handle the Fed’s open market operations) to obtain overnight loans. The Term Asset-Backed Securities Loan Facility (TALF) allows a wide range of companies to borrow, using the primary dealers as conduits, based on qualified asset-backed securities related to student, auto, credit card, and small business debt, for a three-year period. Most of these new facilities are designed to be temporary, with expirations some time in 2009, but they can be extended.
What they have in common, though, is increasing liquidity that will hopefully stimulate private spending. For example, these credit facilities may encourage banks to pare down their excess reserves (which grew enormously as the financial crisis unfolded and the economy deteriorated) and to make more loans. In the words of Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke:
“Liquidity provision by the central bank reduces systemic risk by assuring market participants that, should short-term investors begin to lose confidence, financial institutions will be able to meet the resulting demands for cash without resorting to potentially destabilizing fire sales of assets. Moreover, backstopping the liquidity needs of financial institutions reduces funding stresses and, all else equal, should increase the willingness of those institutions to lend and make markets.”
The legal authority for most of these new credit facilities comes from a particular section of the Federal Reserve Act that allows the Board of Governors “in unusual and exigent circumstances” to extend credit to a wide range of market players.
Answer to Try It! Problem
1. Bank reserves fall by \$8 million.
2. The money supply decreases.
3. The maximum possible decrease is \$40 million, since ∆D = (1/0.2) × (−\$8 million) = −\$40 million. | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_(LibreTexts)/09%3A_The_Nature_and_Creation_of_Money/9.3%3A_The_Federal_Reserve_System.txt |
Summary
In this chapter we investigated the money supply and looked at how it is determined. Money is anything that serves as a medium of exchange. Whatever serves as money also functions as a unit of account and as a store of value. Money may or may not have intrinsic value. In the United States, the total of currency in circulation, traveler’s checks, and checkable deposits equals M1. A broader measure of the money supply is M2, which includes M1 plus assets that are highly liquid, but less liquid than those in M1.
Banks create money when they issue loans. The ability of banks to issue loans is controlled by their reserves. Reserves consist of cash in bank vaults and bank deposits with the Fed. Banks operate in a fractional reserve system; that is, they maintain reserves equal to only a small fraction of their deposit liabilities. Banks are heavily regulated to protect individual depositors and to prevent crises of confidence. Deposit insurance protects individual depositors.
A central bank serves as a bank for banks, a regulator of banks, a manager of the money supply, a bank for a nation’s government, and a supporter of financial markets generally. In the financial crisis that rocked the United States and much of the world in 2008, the Fed played a central role in keeping bank and nonbank institutions afloat and in keeping credit available. The Federal Reserve System (Fed) is the central bank for the United States. The Fed is governed by a Board of Governors whose members are appointed by the president of the United States, subject to confirmation by the Senate.
The Fed can lend to banks and other institutions through the discount window and other credit facilities, change reserve requirements, and engage in purchases and sales of federal government bonds in the open market. Decisions to buy or sell bonds are made by the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC); the Fed’s open-market operations represent its primary tool for influencing the money supply. Purchases of bonds by the Fed initially increase the reserves of banks. With excess reserves on hand, banks will attempt to increase their loans, and in the process the money supply will change by an amount less than or equal to the deposit multiplier times the change in reserves. Similarly, the Fed can reduce the money supply by selling bonds.
Concept Problems
1. Airlines have “frequent flier” clubs in which customers accumulate miles according to the number of miles they have flown with the airline. Frequent flier miles can then be used to purchase other flights, to rent cars, or to stay in some hotels. Are frequent flier miles money?
2. Debit cards allow an individual to transfer funds directly in a checkable account to a merchant without writing a check. How is this different from the way credit cards work? Are either credit cards or debit cards money? Explain.
3. Many colleges sell special cards that students can use to purchase everything from textbooks or meals in the cafeteria to use of washing machines in the dorm. Students deposit money in their cards; as they use their cards for purchases, electronic scanners remove money from the cards. To replenish a card’s money, a student makes a cash deposit that is credited to the card. Would these cards count as part of the money supply?
4. A smart card, also known as an electronic purse, is a plastic card that can be loaded with a monetary value. Its developers argue that, once widely accepted, it could replace the use of currency in vending machines, parking meters, and elsewhere. Suppose smart cards came into widespread use. Present your views on the following issues:
1. Would you count balances in the purses as part of the money supply? If so, would they be part of M1? M2?
2. Should any institution be permitted to issue them, or should they be restricted to banks?
3. Should the issuers be subject to reserve requirements?
4. Suppose they were issued by banks. How do you think the use of such purses would affect the money supply? Explain your answer carefully.
5. Which of the following items is part of M1? M2?
1. \$0.27 cents that has accumulated under a couch cushion.
2. Your \$2,000 line of credit with your Visa account.
3. The \$210 balance in your checking account.
4. \$417 in your savings account.
5. 10 shares of stock your uncle gave you on your 18th birthday, which are now worth \$520.
6. \$200 in traveler’s checks you have purchased for your spring-break trip.
6. In the Middle Ages, goldsmiths took in customers’ deposits (gold coins) and issued receipts that functioned much like checks do today. People used the receipts as a medium of exchange. Goldsmiths also issued loans by writing additional receipts against which they were holding no gold to borrowers. Were goldsmiths engaging in fractional reserve banking? Why do you think that customers turned their gold over to goldsmiths? Who benefited from the goldsmiths’ action? Why did such a system generally work? When would it have been likely to fail?
7. A \$1,000 deposit in Acme Bank has increased reserves by \$1,000. A loan officer at Acme reasons as follows: “The reserve requirement is 10%. That means that the \$1,000 in new reserves can back \$10,000 in checkable deposits. Therefore I’ll loan an additional \$10,000.” Is there any problem with the loan officer’s reasoning? Explain.
8. When the Fed buys and sells bonds through open-market operations, the money supply changes, but there is no effect on the money supply when individuals buy and sell bonds. Explain.
Numerical Problems
1. Consider the following example of bartering:
1 10-ounce T-bone steak can be traded for 5 soft drinks.
1 soft drink can be traded for 10 apples.
100 apples can be traded for a T-shirt.
5 T-shirts can be exchanged for 1 textbook.
It takes 4 textbooks to get 1 VCR.
1. How many 10-ounce T-bone steaks could you exchange for 1 textbook? How many soft drinks? How many apples?
2. State the price of T-shirts in terms of apples, textbooks, and soft drinks.
3. Why do you think we use money as a unit of account?
2. Assume that the banking system is loaned up and that any open-market purchase by the Fed directly increases reserves in the banks. If the required reserve ratio is 0.2, by how much could the money supply expand if the Fed purchased \$2 billion worth of bonds?
3. Suppose the Fed sells \$5 million worth of bonds to Econobank.
1. What happens to the reserves of the bank?
2. What happens to the money supply in the economy as a whole if the reserve requirement is 10%, all payments are made by check, and there is no net drain into currency?
3. How would your answer in part b be affected if you knew that some people involved in the money creation process kept some of their funds as cash?
4. If half the banks in the nation borrow additional reserves totaling \$10 million at the Fed discount window, and at the same time the other half of the banks reduce their excess reserves by a total of \$10 million, what is likely to happen to the money supply? Explain.
5. Suppose a bank with a 10% reserve requirement has \$10 million in reserves and \$100 million in checkable deposits, and a major corporation makes a deposit of \$1 million.
1. Explain how the deposit affects the bank’s reserves and checkable deposits.
2. By how much can the bank increase its lending?
6. Suppose a bank with a 25% reserve requirement has \$50 million in reserves and \$200 million in checkable deposits, and one of the bank’s depositors, a major corporation, writes a check to another corporation for \$5 million. The check is deposited in another bank.
1. Explain how the withdrawal affects the bank’s reserves and checkable deposits.
2. By how much will the bank have to reduce its lending?
7. Suppose the bank in problem 6 faces a 20% reserve requirement. The customer writes the same check. How will this affect your answers?
8. Now consider an economy in which the central bank has just purchased \$8 billion worth of government bonds from banks in the economy. What would be the effect of this purchase on the money supply in the country, assuming reserve requirements of:
1. 10%.
2. 15%.
3. 20%.
4. 25%.
9. Now consider the same economy, and the central bank sells \$8 billion worth of government bonds to local banks. State the likely effects on the money supply under reserve requirements of:
1. 10%.
2. 15%.
3. 20%.
4. 25%.
10. How would the purchase of \$8 billion of bonds by the central bank from local banks be likely to affect interest rates? How about the effect on interest rates of the sale of \$8 billion worth of bonds? Explain your answers carefully. | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_(LibreTexts)/09%3A_The_Nature_and_Creation_of_Money/9.4%3A_Review_and_Practice.txt |
Thumbnail: https://www.pexels.com/photo/man-people-woman-business-5849592/
10: Financial Markets and the Economy
Learning Objective
1. Explain and illustrate how the bond market works and discuss the relationship between the price of a bond and that bond’s interest rate.
2. Explain and illustrate the relationship between a change in demand for or supply of bonds and macroeconomic activity.
3. Explain and illustrate how the foreign exchange market works and how a change in demand for a country’s currency or a change in its supply affects macroeconomic activity.
In this section, we will look at the bond market and at the market for foreign exchange. Events in these markets can affect the price level and output for the entire economy.
The Bond Market
In their daily operations and in pursuit of new projects, institutions such as firms and governments often borrow. They may seek funds from a bank. Many institutions, however, obtain credit by selling bonds. The federal government is one institution that issues bonds. A local school district might sell bonds to finance the construction of a new school. Your college or university has probably sold bonds to finance new buildings on campus. Firms often sell bonds to finance expansion. The market for bonds is an enormously important one.
When an institution sells a bond, it obtains the price paid for the bond as a kind of loan. The institution that issues the bond is obligated to make payments on the bond in the future. The interest rate is determined by the price of the bond. To understand these relationships, let us look more closely at bond prices and interest rates.
Bond Prices and Interest Rates
Suppose the manager of a manufacturing company needs to borrow some money to expand the factory. The manager could do so in the following way: he or she prints, say, 500 pieces of paper, each bearing the company’s promise to pay the bearer \$1,000 in a year. These pieces of paper are bonds, and the company, as the issuer, promises to make a single payment. The manager then offers these bonds for sale, announcing that they will be sold to the buyers who offer the highest prices. Suppose the highest price offered is \$950, and all the bonds are sold at that price. Each bond is, in effect, an obligation to repay buyers \$1,000. The buyers of the bonds are being paid \$50 for the service of lending \$950 for a year.
The \$1,000 printed on each bond is the face value of the bond; it is the amount the issuer will have to pay on the maturity date of the bond—the date when the loan matures, or comes due. The \$950 at which they were sold is their price. The difference between the face value and the price is the amount paid for the use of the money obtained from selling the bond.
An interest rate is the payment made for the use of money, expressed as a percentage of the amount borrowed. Bonds you sold command an interest rate equal to the difference between the face value and the bond price, divided by the bond price, and then multiplied by 100 to form a percentage:
Equation 25.1
At a price of \$950, the interest rate is 5.3%
The interest rate on any bond is determined by its price. As the price falls, the interest rate rises. Suppose, for example, that the best price the manager can get for the bonds is \$900. Now the interest rate is 11.1%. A price of \$800 would mean an interest rate of 25%; \$750 would mean an interest rate of 33.3%; a price of \$500 translates into an interest rate of 100%. The lower the price of a bond relative to its face value, the higher the interest rate.
Bonds in the real world are more complicated than the piece of paper in our example, but their structure is basically the same. They have a face value (usually an amount between \$1,000 and \$100,000) and a maturity date. The maturity date might be three months from the date of issue; it might be 30 years.
Whatever the period until it matures, and whatever the face value of the bond may be, its issuer will attempt to sell the bond at the highest possible price. Buyers of bonds will seek the lowest prices they can obtain. Newly issued bonds are generally sold in auctions. Potential buyers bid for the bonds, which are sold to the highest bidders. The lower the price of the bond relative to its face value, the higher the interest rate.
Both private firms and government entities issue bonds as a way of raising funds. The original buyer need not hold the bond until maturity. Bonds can be resold at any time, but the price the bond will fetch at the time of resale will vary depending on conditions in the economy and the financial markets.
Figure 25.1 illustrates the market for bonds. Their price is determined by demand and supply. Buyers of newly issued bonds are, in effect, lenders. Sellers of newly issued bonds are borrowers—recall that corporations, the federal government, and other institutions sell bonds when they want to borrow money. Once a newly issued bond has been sold, its owner can resell it; a bond may change hands several times before it matures.
Bonds are not exactly the same sort of product as, say, broccoli or some other good or service. Can we expect bonds to have the same kind of downward-sloping demand curves and upward-sloping supply curves we encounter for ordinary goods and services? Yes. Consider demand. At lower prices, bonds pay higher interest. That makes them more attractive to buyers of bonds and thus increases the quantity demanded. On the other hand, lower prices mean higher costs to borrowers—suppliers of bonds—and should reduce the quantity supplied. Thus, the negative relationship between price and quantity demanded and the positive relationship between price and quantity supplied suggested by conventional demand and supply curves holds true in the market for bonds.
If the quantity of bonds demanded is not equal to the quantity of bonds supplied, the price will adjust almost instantaneously to balance the two. Bond prices are perfectly flexible in that they change immediately to balance demand and supply. Suppose, for example, that the initial price of bonds is \$950, as shown by the intersection of the demand and supply curves in Figure 25.1. We will assume that all bonds have equal risk and a face value of \$1,000 and that they mature in one year. Now suppose that borrowers increase their borrowing by offering to sell more bonds at every interest rate. This increases the supply of bonds: the supply curve shifts to the right from S1 to S2. That, in turn, lowers the equilibrium price of bonds—to \$900 in Figure 25.1. The lower price for bonds means a higher interest rate.
The Bond Market and Macroeconomic Performance
The connection between the bond market and the economy derives from the way interest rates affect aggregate demand. For example, investment is one component of aggregate demand, and interest rates affect investment. Firms are less likely to acquire new capital (that is, plant and equipment) if interest rates are high; they’re more likely to add capital if interest rates are low1.
If bond prices fall, interest rates go up. Higher interest rates tend to discourage investment, so aggregate demand will fall. A fall in aggregate demand, other things unchanged, will mean fewer jobs and less total output than would have been the case with lower rates of interest. In contrast, an increase in the price of bonds lowers interest rates and makes investment in new capital more attractive. That change may boost investment and thus boost aggregate demand.
Figure 25.2 shows how an event in the bond market can stimulate changes in the economy’s output and price level. In Panel (a), an increase in demand for bonds raises bond prices. Interest rates thus fall. Lower interest rates increase the quantity of investment demanded, shifting the aggregate demand curve to the right, from AD1 to AD2 in Panel (b). Real GDP rises from Y1 to Y2; the price level rises from P1 to P2. In Panel (c), an increase in the supply of bonds pushes bond prices down. Interest rates rise. The quantity of investment is likely to fall, shifting aggregate demand to the left, from AD1 to AD2 in Panel (d). Output and the price level fall from Y1 to Y2 and from P1 to P2, respectively. Assuming other determinants of aggregate demand remain unchanged, higher interest rates will tend to reduce aggregate demand and lower interest rates will tend to increase aggregate demand.
An increase in the supply of bonds to S2 lowers bond prices to Pb2 in Panel (c) and raises interest rates. The higher interest rate, taken by itself, is likely to cause a reduction in investment and aggregate demand. AD1 falls to AD2, real GDP falls to Y2, and the price level falls to P2 in Panel (d).
In thinking about the impact of changes in interest rates on aggregate demand, we must remember that some events that change aggregate demand can affect interest rates. We will examine those events in subsequent chapters. Our focus in this chapter is on the way in which events that originate in financial markets affect aggregate demand.
Foreign Exchange Markets
Another financial market that influences macroeconomic variables is the foreign exchange market, a market in which currencies of different countries are traded for one another. Since changes in exports and imports affect aggregate demand and thus real GDP and the price level, the market in which currencies are traded has tremendous importance in the economy.
Foreigners who want to purchase goods and services or assets in the United States must typically pay for them with dollars. United States purchasers of foreign goods must generally make the purchase in a foreign currency. An Egyptian family, for example, exchanges Egyptian pounds for dollars in order to pay for admission to Disney World. A German financial investor purchases dollars to buy U.S. government bonds. A family from the United States visiting India, on the other hand, needs to obtain Indian rupees in order to make purchases there. A U.S. bank wanting to purchase assets in Mexico City first purchases pesos. These transactions are accomplished in the foreign exchange market.
The foreign exchange market is not a single location in which currencies are traded. The term refers instead to the entire array of institutions through which people buy and sell currencies. It includes a hotel desk clerk who provides currency exchange as a service to hotel guests, brokers who arrange currency exchanges worth billions of dollars, and governments and central banks that exchange currencies. Major currency dealers are linked by computers so that they can track currency exchanges all over the world.
The Exchange Rate
A country’s exchange rate is the price of its currency in terms of another currency or currencies. On December 12, 2008, for example, the dollar traded for 91.13 Japanese yen, 0.75 euros, 10.11 South African rands, and 13.51 Mexican pesos. There are as many exchange rates for the dollar as there are countries whose currencies exchange for the dollar—roughly 200 of them.
Economists summarize the movement of exchange rates with a trade-weighted exchange rate, which is an index of exchange rates. To calculate a trade-weighted exchange rate index for the U.S. dollar, we select a group of countries, weight the price of the dollar in each country’s currency by the amount of trade between that country and the United States, and then report the price of the dollar based on that trade-weighted average. Because trade-weighted exchange rates are so widely used in reporting currency values, they are often referred to as exchange rates themselves. We will follow that convention in this text.
Determining Exchange Rates
The rates at which most currencies exchange for one another are determined by demand and supply. How does the model of demand and supply operate in the foreign exchange market?
The demand curve for dollars relates the number of dollars buyers want to buy in any period to the exchange rate. An increase in the exchange rate means it takes more foreign currency to buy a dollar. A higher exchange rate, in turn, makes U.S. goods and services more expensive for foreign buyers and reduces the quantity they will demand. That is likely to reduce the quantity of dollars they demand. Foreigners thus will demand fewer dollars as the price of the dollar—the exchange rate—rises. Consequently, the demand curve for dollars is downward sloping, as in Figure 25.3.
The supply curve for dollars emerges from a similar process. When people and firms in the United States purchase goods, services, or assets in foreign countries, they must purchase the currency of those countries first. They supply dollars in exchange for foreign currency. The supply of dollars on the foreign exchange market thus reflects the degree to which people in the United States are buying foreign money at various exchange rates. A higher exchange rate means that a dollar trades for more foreign currency. In effect, the higher rate makes foreign goods and services cheaper to U.S. buyers, so U.S. consumers will purchase more foreign goods and services. People will thus supply more dollars at a higher exchange rate; we expect the supply curve for dollars to be upward sloping, as suggested in Figure 25.3.
In addition to private individuals and firms that participate in the foreign exchange market, most governments participate as well. A government might seek to lower its exchange rate by selling its currency; it might seek to raise the rate by buying its currency. Although governments often participate in foreign exchange markets, they generally represent a very small share of these markets. The most important traders are private buyers and sellers of currencies.
Exchange Rates and Macroeconomic Performance
People purchase a country’s currency for two quite different reasons: to purchase goods or services in that country, or to purchase the assets of that country—its money, its capital, its stocks, its bonds, or its real estate. Both of these motives must be considered to understand why demand and supply in the foreign exchange market may change.
One thing that can cause the price of the dollar to rise, for example, is a reduction in bond prices in American markets. Figure 25.4 illustrates the effect of this change. Suppose the supply of bonds in the U.S. bond market increases from S1 to S2 in Panel (a). Bond prices will drop. Lower bond prices mean higher interest rates. Foreign financial investors, attracted by the opportunity to earn higher returns in the United States, will increase their demand for dollars on the foreign exchange market in order to purchase U.S. bonds. Panel (b) shows that the demand curve for dollars shifts from D1 to D2. Simultaneously, U.S. financial investors, attracted by the higher interest rates at home, become less likely to make financial investments abroad and thus supply fewer dollars to exchange markets. The fall in the price of U.S. bonds shifts the supply curve for dollars on the foreign exchange market from S1 to S2, and the exchange rate rises from E1 to E2.
The higher exchange rate makes U.S. goods and services more expensive to foreigners, so it reduces exports. It makes foreign goods cheaper for U.S. buyers, so it increases imports. Net exports thus fall, reducing aggregate demand. Panel (c) shows that output falls from Y1 to Y2; the price level falls from P1 to P2. This development in the foreign exchange market reinforces the impact of higher interest rates we observed in Figure 25.2, Panels (c) and (d). They not only reduce investment—they reduce net exports as well.
Key Takeaways
• A bond represents a borrower’s debt; bond prices are determined by demand and supply.
• The interest rate on a bond is negatively related to the price of the bond. As the price of a bond increases, the interest rate falls.
• An increase in the interest rate tends to decrease the quantity of investment demanded and, hence, to decrease aggregate demand. A decrease in the interest rate increases the quantity of investment demanded and aggregate demand.
• The demand for dollars on foreign exchange markets represents foreign demand for U.S. goods, services, and assets. The supply of dollars on foreign exchange markets represents U.S. demand for foreign goods, services, and assets. The demand for and the supply of dollars determine the exchange rate.
• A rise in U.S. interest rates will increase the demand for dollars and decrease the supply of dollars on foreign exchange markets. As a result, the exchange rate will increase and aggregate demand will decrease. A fall in U.S. interest rates will have the opposite effect.
Try It!
Suppose the supply of bonds in the U.S. market decreases. Show and explain the effects on the bond and foreign exchange markets. Use the aggregate demand/aggregate supply framework to show and explain the effects on investment, net exports, real GDP, and the price level.
Case in Point: Betting on a Plunge
Figure 25.5
DonkeyHotey – US Treasury Bond – 3D Illustration – CC BY 2.0.
In 2004, a certain Thomas J. from Florida had a plan. He understood clearly the inverse relationship between bond prices and interest rates. What he did not understand was how expensive guessing incorrectly the direction of interest rates would be when he decided to buy into an “inverse bond” fund.
An “inverse bond” fund is one that performs well when bond prices fall. The fund Thomas bought into happened to trade in 30-year U.S. Treasury bonds, and Thomas guessed that interest rates on them would rise.
The only problem with the plan was that the interest rate on 30-year bonds actually fell over the next year. So, the fund Thomas bought into lost value when the prices of these bonds rose. Expenses associated with this type of fund exacerbated Thomas’s loss. If only Thomas had known both the relationship between bond prices and interest rates and the direction of interest rates!
Perhaps another thing he did not understand was that when he heard that the Federal Reserve was raising rates in 2004 that this referred to the federal funds rates, a very short-term interest rate. While other short-term interest rates moved with the federal funds rate in 2004, long-term rates did not even blink.
Answer to Try It! Problem
If the supply of bonds decreases from S1 to S2, bond prices will rise from Pb1 to Pb2, as shown in Panel (a). Higher bond prices mean lower interest rates. Lower interest rates in the United States will make financial investments in the United States less attractive to foreigners. As a result, their demand for dollars will decrease from D1 to D2, as shown in Panel (b). Similarly, U.S. financial investors will look abroad for higher returns and thus supply more dollars to foreign exchange markets, shifting the supply curve from S1 to S2. Thus, the exchange rate will decrease. The quantity of investment rises due to the lower interest rates. Net exports rise because the lower exchange rate makes U.S. goods and services more attractive to foreigners, thus increasing exports, and makes foreign goods less attractive to U.S. buyers, thus reducing imports. Increases in investment and net exports imply a rightward shift in the aggregate demand curve from AD1 to AD2. Real GDP and the price level increase.
Figure 25.6
1Consumption may also be affected by changes in interest rates. For example, if interest rates fall, consumers can more easily obtain credit and thus are more likely to purchase cars and other durable goods. To simplify, we ignore this effect. | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_(LibreTexts)/10%3A_Financial_Markets_and_the_Economy/10.1%3A_The_Bond_and_Foreign_Exchange_Markets.txt |
Learning Objective
1. Explain the motives for holding money and relate them to the interest rate that could be earned from holding alternative assets, such as bonds.
2. Draw a money demand curve and explain how changes in other variables may lead to shifts in the money demand curve.
3. Illustrate and explain the notion of equilibrium in the money market.
4. Use graphs to explain how changes in money demand or money supply are related to changes in the bond market, in interest rates, in aggregate demand, and in real GDP and the price level.
In this section we will explore the link between money markets, bond markets, and interest rates. We first look at the demand for money. The demand curve for money is derived like any other demand curve, by examining the relationship between the “price” of money (which, we will see, is the interest rate) and the quantity demanded, holding all other determinants unchanged. We then link the demand for money to the concept of money supply developed in the last chapter, to determine the equilibrium rate of interest. In turn, we show how changes in interest rates affect the macroeconomy.
The Demand for Money
In deciding how much money to hold, people make a choice about how to hold their wealth. How much wealth shall be held as money and how much as other assets? For a given amount of wealth, the answer to this question will depend on the relative costs and benefits of holding money versus other assets. The demand for money is the relationship between the quantity of money people want to hold and the factors that determine that quantity.
To simplify our analysis, we will assume there are only two ways to hold wealth: as money in a checking account, or as funds in a bond market mutual fund that purchases long-term bonds on behalf of its subscribers. A bond fund is not money. Some money deposits earn interest, but the return on these accounts is generally lower than what could be obtained in a bond fund. The advantage of checking accounts is that they are highly liquid and can thus be spent easily. We will think of the demand for money as a curve that represents the outcomes of choices between the greater liquidity of money deposits and the higher interest rates that can be earned by holding a bond fund. The difference between the interest rates paid on money deposits and the interest return available from bonds is the cost of holding money.
Motives for Holding Money
One reason people hold their assets as money is so that they can purchase goods and services. The money held for the purchase of goods and services may be for everyday transactions such as buying groceries or paying the rent, or it may be kept on hand for contingencies such as having the funds available to pay to have the car fixed or to pay for a trip to the doctor.
The transactions demand for money is money people hold to pay for goods and services they anticipate buying. When you carry money in your purse or wallet to buy a movie ticket or maintain a checking account balance so you can purchase groceries later in the month, you are holding the money as part of your transactions demand for money.
The money people hold for contingencies represents their precautionary demand for money. Money held for precautionary purposes may include checking account balances kept for possible home repairs or health-care needs. People do not know precisely when the need for such expenditures will occur, but they can prepare for them by holding money so that they’ll have it available when the need arises.
People also hold money for speculative purposes. Bond prices fluctuate constantly. As a result, holders of bonds not only earn interest but experience gains or losses in the value of their assets. Bondholders enjoy gains when bond prices rise and suffer losses when bond prices fall. Because of this, expectations play an important role as a determinant of the demand for bonds. Holding bonds is one alternative to holding money, so these same expectations can affect the demand for money.
John Maynard Keynes, who was an enormously successful speculator in bond markets himself, suggested that bondholders who anticipate a drop in bond prices will try to sell their bonds ahead of the price drop in order to avoid this loss in asset value. Selling a bond means converting it to money. Keynes referred to the speculative demand for money as the money held in response to concern that bond prices and the prices of other financial assets might change.
Of course, money is money. One cannot sort through someone’s checking account and locate which funds are held for transactions and which funds are there because the owner of the account is worried about a drop in bond prices or is taking a precaution. We distinguish money held for different motives in order to understand how the quantity of money demanded will be affected by a key determinant of the demand for money: the interest rate.
Interest Rates and the Demand for Money
The quantity of money people hold to pay for transactions and to satisfy precautionary and speculative demand is likely to vary with the interest rates they can earn from alternative assets such as bonds. When interest rates rise relative to the rates that can be earned on money deposits, people hold less money. When interest rates fall, people hold more money. The logic of these conclusions about the money people hold and interest rates depends on the people’s motives for holding money.
The quantity of money households want to hold varies according to their income and the interest rate; different average quantities of money held can satisfy their transactions and precautionary demands for money. To see why, suppose a household earns and spends \$3,000 per month. It spends an equal amount of money each day. For a month with 30 days, that is \$100 per day. One way the household could manage this spending would be to leave the money in a checking account, which we will assume pays zero interest. The household would thus have \$3,000 in the checking account when the month begins, \$2,900 at the end of the first day, \$1,500 halfway through the month, and zero at the end of the last day of the month. Averaging the daily balances, we find that the quantity of money the household demands equals \$1,500. This approach to money management, which we will call the “cash approach,” has the virtue of simplicity, but the household will earn no interest on its funds.
Consider an alternative money management approach that permits the same pattern of spending. At the beginning of the month, the household deposits \$1,000 in its checking account and the other \$2,000 in a bond fund. Assume the bond fund pays 1% interest per month, or an annual interest rate of 12.7%. After 10 days, the money in the checking account is exhausted, and the household withdraws another \$1,000 from the bond fund for the next 10 days. On the 20th day, the final \$1,000 from the bond fund goes into the checking account. With this strategy, the household has an average daily balance of \$500, which is the quantity of money it demands. Let us call this money management strategy the “bond fund approach.”
Remember that both approaches allow the household to spend \$3,000 per month, \$100 per day. The cash approach requires a quantity of money demanded of \$1,500, while the bond fund approach lowers this quantity to \$500.
The bond fund approach generates some interest income. The household has \$1,000 in the fund for 10 days (1/3 of a month) and \$1,000 for 20 days (2/3 of a month). With an interest rate of 1% per month, the household earns \$10 in interest each month ([\$1,000 × 0.01 × 1/3] + [\$1,000 × 0.01 × 2/3]). The disadvantage of the bond fund, of course, is that it requires more attention—\$1,000 must be transferred from the fund twice each month. There may also be fees associated with the transfers.
Of course, the bond fund strategy we have examined here is just one of many. The household could begin each month with \$1,500 in the checking account and \$1,500 in the bond fund, transferring \$1,500 to the checking account midway through the month. This strategy requires one less transfer, but it also generates less interest—\$7.50 (= \$1,500 × 0.01 × 1/2). With this strategy, the household demands a quantity of money of \$750. The household could also maintain a much smaller average quantity of money in its checking account and keep more in its bond fund. For simplicity, we can think of any strategy that involves transferring money in and out of a bond fund or another interest-earning asset as a bond fund strategy.
Which approach should the household use? That is a choice each household must make—it is a question of weighing the interest a bond fund strategy creates against the hassle and possible fees associated with the transfers it requires. Our example does not yield a clear-cut choice for any one household, but we can make some generalizations about its implications.
First, a household is more likely to adopt a bond fund strategy when the interest rate is higher. At low interest rates, a household does not sacrifice much income by pursuing the simpler cash strategy. As the interest rate rises, a bond fund strategy becomes more attractive. That means that the higher the interest rate, the lower the quantity of money demanded.
Second, people are more likely to use a bond fund strategy when the cost of transferring funds is lower. The creation of savings plans, which began in the 1970s and 1980s, that allowed easy transfer of funds between interest-earning assets and checkable deposits tended to reduce the demand for money.
Some money deposits, such as savings accounts and money market deposit accounts, pay interest. In evaluating the choice between holding assets as some form of money or in other forms such as bonds, households will look at the differential between what those funds pay and what they could earn in the bond market. A higher interest rate in the bond market is likely to increase this differential; a lower interest rate will reduce it. An increase in the spread between rates on money deposits and the interest rate in the bond market reduces the quantity of money demanded; a reduction in the spread increases the quantity of money demanded.
Firms, too, must determine how to manage their earnings and expenditures. However, instead of worrying about \$3,000 per month, even a relatively small firm may be concerned about \$3,000,000 per month. Rather than facing the difference of \$10 versus \$7.50 in interest earnings used in our household example, this small firm would face a difference of \$2,500 per month (\$10,000 versus \$7,500). For very large firms such as Toyota or AT&T, interest rate differentials among various forms of holding their financial assets translate into millions of dollars per day.
How is the speculative demand for money related to interest rates? When financial investors believe that the prices of bonds and other assets will fall, their speculative demand for money goes up. The speculative demand for money thus depends on expectations about future changes in asset prices. Will this demand also be affected by present interest rates?
If interest rates are low, bond prices are high. It seems likely that if bond prices are high, financial investors will become concerned that bond prices might fall. That suggests that high bond prices—low interest rates—would increase the quantity of money held for speculative purposes. Conversely, if bond prices are already relatively low, it is likely that fewer financial investors will expect them to fall still further. They will hold smaller speculative balances. Economists thus expect that the quantity of money demanded for speculative reasons will vary negatively with the interest rate.
The Demand Curve for Money
We have seen that the transactions, precautionary, and speculative demands for money vary negatively with the interest rate. Putting those three sources of demand together, we can draw a demand curve for money to show how the interest rate affects the total quantity of money people hold. The demand curve for money shows the quantity of money demanded at each interest rate, all other things unchanged. Such a curve is shown in Figure 25.7. An increase in the interest rate reduces the quantity of money demanded. A reduction in the interest rate increases the quantity of money demanded.
The relationship between interest rates and the quantity of money demanded is an application of the law of demand. If we think of the alternative to holding money as holding bonds, then the interest rate—or the differential between the interest rate in the bond market and the interest paid on money deposits—represents the price of holding money. As is the case with all goods and services, an increase in price reduces the quantity demanded.
Other Determinants of the Demand for Money
We draw the demand curve for money to show the quantity of money people will hold at each interest rate, all other determinants of money demand unchanged. A change in those “other determinants” will shift the demand for money. Among the most important variables that can shift the demand for money are the level of income and real GDP, the price level, expectations, transfer costs, and preferences.
Real GDP
A household with an income of \$10,000 per month is likely to demand a larger quantity of money than a household with an income of \$1,000 per month. That relationship suggests that money is a normal good: as income increases, people demand more money at each interest rate, and as income falls, they demand less.
An increase in real GDP increases incomes throughout the economy. The demand for money in the economy is therefore likely to be greater when real GDP is greater.
The Price Level
The higher the price level, the more money is required to purchase a given quantity of goods and services. All other things unchanged, the higher the price level, the greater the demand for money.
Expectations
The speculative demand for money is based on expectations about bond prices. All other things unchanged, if people expect bond prices to fall, they will increase their demand for money. If they expect bond prices to rise, they will reduce their demand for money.
The expectation that bond prices are about to change actually causes bond prices to change. If people expect bond prices to fall, for example, they will sell their bonds, exchanging them for money. That will shift the supply curve for bonds to the right, thus lowering their price. The importance of expectations in moving markets can lead to a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Expectations about future price levels also affect the demand for money. The expectation of a higher price level means that people expect the money they are holding to fall in value. Given that expectation, they are likely to hold less of it in anticipation of a jump in prices.
Expectations about future price levels play a particularly important role during periods of hyperinflation. If prices rise very rapidly and people expect them to continue rising, people are likely to try to reduce the amount of money they hold, knowing that it will fall in value as it sits in their wallets or their bank accounts. Toward the end of the great German hyperinflation of the early 1920s, prices were doubling as often as three times a day. Under those circumstances, people tried not to hold money even for a few minutes—within the space of eight hours money would lose half its value!
Transfer Costs
For a given level of expenditures, reducing the quantity of money demanded requires more frequent transfers between nonmoney and money deposits. As the cost of such transfers rises, some consumers will choose to make fewer of them. They will therefore increase the quantity of money they demand. In general, the demand for money will increase as it becomes more expensive to transfer between money and nonmoney accounts. The demand for money will fall if transfer costs decline. In recent years, transfer costs have fallen, leading to a decrease in money demand.
Preferences
Preferences also play a role in determining the demand for money. Some people place a high value on having a considerable amount of money on hand. For others, this may not be important.
Household attitudes toward risk are another aspect of preferences that affect money demand. As we have seen, bonds pay higher interest rates than money deposits, but holding bonds entails a risk that bond prices might fall. There is also a chance that the issuer of a bond will default, that is, will not pay the amount specified on the bond to bondholders; indeed, bond issuers may end up paying nothing at all. A money deposit, such as a savings deposit, might earn a lower yield, but it is a safe yield. People’s attitudes about the trade-off between risk and yields affect the degree to which they hold their wealth as money. Heightened concerns about risk in the last half of 2008 led many households to increase their demand for money.
Figure 25.8 shows an increase in the demand for money. Such an increase could result from a higher real GDP, a higher price level, a change in expectations, an increase in transfer costs, or a change in preferences.
The Supply of Money
The supply curve of money shows the relationship between the quantity of money supplied and the market interest rate, all other determinants of supply unchanged. We have learned that the Fed, through its open-market operations, determines the total quantity of reserves in the banking system. We shall assume that banks increase the money supply in fixed proportion to their reserves. Because the quantity of reserves is determined by Federal Reserve policy, we draw the supply curve of money in Figure 25.9 as a vertical line, determined by the Fed’s monetary policies. In drawing the supply curve of money as a vertical line, we are assuming the money supply does not depend on the interest rate. Changing the quantity of reserves and hence the money supply is an example of monetary policy.
Equilibrium in the Market for Money
The money market is the interaction among institutions through which money is supplied to individuals, firms, and other institutions that demand money. Money market equilibrium occurs at the interest rate at which the quantity of money demanded is equal to the quantity of money supplied. Figure 25.10 combines demand and supply curves for money to illustrate equilibrium in the market for money. With a stock of money (M), the equilibrium interest rate is r.
Effects of Changes in the Money Market
A shift in money demand or supply will lead to a change in the equilibrium interest rate. Let’s look at the effects of such changes on the economy.
Changes in Money Demand
Suppose that the money market is initially in equilibrium at r1 with supply curve S and a demand curve D1 as shown in Panel (a) of Figure 25.11. Now suppose that there is a decrease in money demand, all other things unchanged. A decrease in money demand could result from a decrease in the cost of transferring between money and nonmoney deposits, from a change in expectations, or from a change in preferences1. Panel (a) shows that the money demand curve shifts to the left to D2. We can see that the interest rate will fall to r2. To see why the interest rate falls, we recall that if people want to hold less money, then they will want to hold more bonds. Thus, Panel (b) shows that the demand for bonds increases. The higher price of bonds means lower interest rates; lower interest rates restore equilibrium in the money market.
Lower interest rates in turn increase the quantity of investment. They also stimulate net exports, as lower interest rates lead to a lower exchange rate. The aggregate demand curve shifts to the right as shown in Panel (c) from AD1 to AD2. Given the short-run aggregate supply curve SRAS, the economy moves to a higher real GDP and a higher price level.
An increase in money demand due to a change in expectations, preferences, or transactions costs that make people want to hold more money at each interest rate will have the opposite effect. The money demand curve will shift to the right and the demand for bonds will shift to the left. The resulting higher interest rate will lead to a lower quantity of investment. Also, higher interest rates will lead to a higher exchange rate and depress net exports. Thus, the aggregate demand curve will shift to the left. All other things unchanged, real GDP and the price level will fall.
Changes in the Money Supply
Now suppose the market for money is in equilibrium and the Fed changes the money supply. All other things unchanged, how will this change in the money supply affect the equilibrium interest rate and aggregate demand, real GDP, and the price level?
Suppose the Fed conducts open-market operations in which it buys bonds. This is an example of expansionary monetary policy. The impact of Fed bond purchases is illustrated in Panel (a) of Figure 25.12. The Fed’s purchase of bonds shifts the demand curve for bonds to the right, raising bond prices to Pb2. As we learned, when the Fed buys bonds, the supply of money increases. Panel (b) of Figure 25.12 shows an economy with a money supply of M, which is in equilibrium at an interest rate of r1. Now suppose the bond purchases by the Fed as shown in Panel (a) result in an increase in the money supply to M′; that policy change shifts the supply curve for money to the right to S2. At the original interest rate r1, people do not wish to hold the newly supplied money; they would prefer to hold nonmoney assets. To reestablish equilibrium in the money market, the interest rate must fall to increase the quantity of money demanded. In the economy shown, the interest rate must fall to r2 to increase the quantity of money demanded to M′.
The reduction in interest rates required to restore equilibrium to the market for money after an increase in the money supply is achieved in the bond market. The increase in bond prices lowers interest rates, which will increase the quantity of money people demand. Lower interest rates will stimulate investment and net exports, via changes in the foreign exchange market, and cause the aggregate demand curve to shift to the right, as shown in Panel (c), from AD1 to AD2. Given the short-run aggregate supply curve SRAS, the economy moves to a higher real GDP and a higher price level.
Open-market operations in which the Fed sells bonds—that is, a contractionary monetary policy—will have the opposite effect. When the Fed sells bonds, the supply curve of bonds shifts to the right and the price of bonds falls. The bond sales lead to a reduction in the money supply, causing the money supply curve to shift to the left and raising the equilibrium interest rate. Higher interest rates lead to a shift in the aggregate demand curve to the left.
As we have seen in looking at both changes in demand for and in supply of money, the process of achieving equilibrium in the money market works in tandem with the achievement of equilibrium in the bond market. The interest rate determined by money market equilibrium is consistent with the interest rate achieved in the bond market.
Key Takeaways
• People hold money in order to buy goods and services (transactions demand), to have it available for contingencies (precautionary demand), and in order to avoid possible drops in the value of other assets such as bonds (speculative demand).
• The higher the interest rate, the lower the quantities of money demanded for transactions, for precautionary, and for speculative purposes. The lower the interest rate, the higher the quantities of money demanded for these purposes.
• The demand for money will change as a result of a change in real GDP, the price level, transfer costs, expectations, or preferences.
• We assume that the supply of money is determined by the Fed. The supply curve for money is thus a vertical line. Money market equilibrium occurs at the interest rate at which the quantity of money demanded equals the quantity of money supplied.
• All other things unchanged, a shift in money demand or supply will lead to a change in the equilibrium interest rate and therefore to changes in the level of real GDP and the price level.
Try It!
In 2005 the Fed was concerned about the possibility that the United States was moving into an inflationary gap, and it adopted a contractionary monetary policy as a result. Draw a four-panel graph showing this policy and its expected results. In Panel (a), use the model of aggregate demand and aggregate supply to illustrate an economy with an inflationary gap. In Panel (b), show how the Fed’s policy will affect the market for bonds. In Panel (c), show how it will affect the demand for and supply of money. In Panel (d), show how it will affect the exchange rate. Finally, return to Panel (a) and incorporate these developments into your analysis of aggregate demand and aggregate supply, and show how the Fed’s policy will affect real GDP and the price level in the short run.
Case in Point: Money in Today’s World
Figure 25.13
Can Pac Swire – Hong Kong/ Travel Wallet – CC BY-NC 2.0.
The models of the money and bond markets presented in this chapter suggest that the Fed can control the interest rate by deciding on a money supply that would lead to the desired equilibrium interest rate in the money market. Yet, Fed policy announcements typically focus on what it wants the federal funds rate to be with scant attention to the money supply. Whereas throughout the 1990s, the Fed would announce a target federal funds rate and also indicate an expected change in the money supply, in 2000, when legislation requiring it to do so expired, it abandoned the practice of setting money supply targets.
Why the shift? The factors that have made focusing on the money supply as a policy target difficult for the past 25 years are first banking deregulation in the 1980s followed by financial innovations associated with technological changes—in particular the maturation of electronic payment and transfer mechanisms—thereafter.
Before the 1980s, M1 was a fairly reliable measure of the money people held, primarily for transactions. To buy things, one used cash, checks written on demand deposits, or traveler’s checks. The Fed could thus use reliable estimates of the money demand curve to predict what the money supply would need to be in order to bring about a certain interest rate in the money market.
Legislation in the early 1980s allowed for money market deposit accounts (MMDAs), which are essentially interest-bearing savings accounts on which checks can be written. MMDAs are part of M2. Shortly after, other forms of payments for transactions developed or became more common. For example, credit and debit card use has mushroomed (from \$10.8 billion in 1990 to \$30 billion in 2000), and people can pay their credit card bills, electronically or with paper checks, from accounts that are part of either M1 or M2. Another innovation of the last 20 years is the automatic transfer service (ATS) that allows consumers to move money between checking and savings accounts at an ATM machine, or online, or through prearranged agreements with their financial institutions. While we take these methods of payment for granted today, they did not exist before 1980 because of restrictive banking legislation and the lack of technological know-how. Indeed, before 1980, being able to pay bills from accounts that earned interest was unheard of.
Further blurring the lines between M1 and M2 has been the development and growing popularity of what are called retail sweep programs. Since 1994, banks have been using retail-sweeping software to dynamically reclassify balances as either checking account balances (part of M1) or MMDAs (part of M2). They do this to avoid reserve requirements on checking accounts. The software not only moves the funds but also ensures that the bank does not exceed the legal limit of six reclassifications in any month. In the last 10 years these retail sweeps rose from zero to nearly the size of M1 itself!
Such changes in the ways people pay for transactions and banks do their business have led economists to think about new definitions of money that would better track what is actually used for the purposes behind the money demand curve. One notion is called MZM, which stands for “money zero maturity.” The idea behind MZM is that people can easily use any deposits that do not have specified maturity terms to pay for transactions, as these accounts are quite liquid, regardless of what classification of money they fall into. Some research shows that using MZM allows for a stable picture of the money market. Until more agreement has been reached, though, we should expect the Fed to continue to downplay the role of the money supply in its policy deliberations and to continue to announce its intentions in terms of the federal funds rate.
Answer to Try It! Problem
In Panel (a), with the aggregate demand curve AD1, short-run aggregate supply curve SRAS, and long-run aggregate supply curve LRAS, the economy has an inflationary gap of Y1YP. The contractionary monetary policy means that the Fed sells bonds—a rightward shift of the bond supply curve in Panel (b), which decreases the money supply—as shown by a leftward shift in the money supply curve in Panel (c). In Panel (b), we see that the price of bonds falls, and in Panel (c) that the interest rate rises. A higher interest rate will reduce the quantity of investment demanded. The higher interest rate also leads to a higher exchange rate, as shown in Panel (d), as the demand for dollars increases and the supply decreases. The higher exchange rate will lead to a decrease in net exports. As a result of these changes in financial markets, the aggregate demand curve shifts to the left to AD2 in Panel (a). If all goes according to plan (and we will learn in the next chapter that it may not!), the new aggregate demand curve will intersect SRAS and LRAS at YP.
Figure 25.14
1In this chapter we are looking only at changes that originate in financial markets to see their impact on aggregate demand and aggregate supply. Changes in the price level and in real GDP also shift the money demand curve, but these changes are the result of changes in aggregate demand or aggregate supply and are considered in more advanced courses in macroeconomics. | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_(LibreTexts)/10%3A_Financial_Markets_and_the_Economy/10.2%3A_Demand%2C_Supply%2C_and_Equilibrium_in_the_Money_Market.txt |
Summary
We began this chapter by looking at bond and foreign exchange markets and showing how each is related to the level of real GDP and the price level. Bonds represent the obligation of the seller to repay the buyer the face value by the maturity date; their interest rate is determined by the demand and supply for bonds. An increase in bond prices means a drop in interest rates. A reduction in bond prices means interest rates have risen. The price of the dollar is determined in foreign exchange markets by the demand and supply for dollars.
We then saw how the money market works. The quantity of money demanded varies negatively with the interest rate. Factors that cause the demand curve for money to shift include changes in real GDP, the price level, expectations, the cost of transferring funds between money and nonmoney accounts, and preferences, especially preferences concerning risk. Equilibrium in the market for money is achieved at the interest rate at which the quantity of money demanded equals the quantity of money supplied. We assumed that the supply of money is determined by the Fed. An increase in money demand raises the equilibrium interest rate, and a decrease in money demand lowers the equilibrium interest rate. An increase in the money supply lowers the equilibrium interest rate; a reduction in the money supply raises the equilibrium interest rate.
Concept Problems
1. What factors might increase the demand for bonds? The supply?
2. What would happen to the market for bonds if a law were passed that set a minimum price on bonds that was above the equilibrium price?
3. When the price of bonds decreases, the interest rate rises. Explain.
4. One journalist writing about the complex interactions between various markets in the economy stated: “When the government spends more than it takes in taxes it must sell bonds to finance its excess expenditures. But selling bonds drives interest rates down and thus stimulates the economy by encouraging more investment and decreasing the foreign exchange rate, which helps our export industries.” Carefully analyze the statement. Do you agree? Why or why not?
5. What do you predict will happen to the foreign exchange rate if interest rates in the United States increase dramatically over the next year? Explain, using a graph of the foreign exchange market. How would such a change affect real GDP and the price level?
6. Suppose the government were to increase its purchases, issuing bonds to finance these purchases. Use your knowledge of the bond and foreign exchange markets to explain how this would affect investment and net exports.
7. How would each of the following affect the demand for money?
1. A tax on bonds held by individuals
2. A forecast by the Fed that interest rates will rise sharply in the next quarter
3. A wave of muggings
4. An announcement of an agreement between Congress and the president that, beginning in the next fiscal year, government spending will be reduced by an amount sufficient to eliminate all future borrowing
8. Some low-income countries do not have a bond market. In such countries, what substitutes for money do you think people would hold?
9. Explain what is meant by the statement that people are holding more money than they want to hold.
10. Explain how the Fed’s sale of government bonds shifts the supply curve for money.
11. Trace the impact of a sale of government bonds by the Fed on bond prices, interest rates, investment, net exports, aggregate demand, real GDP, and the price level.
Numerical Problems
1. Compute the rate of interest associated with each of these bonds that matures in one year:
Face Value Selling Price
a.
\$100
\$80
b.
\$100
\$90
c.
\$100
\$95
d.
\$200
\$180
e.
\$200
\$190
f.
\$200
\$195
g.
Describe the relationship between the selling price of a bond and the interest rate.
2. Suppose that the demand and supply schedules for bonds that have a face value of \$100 and a maturity date one year hence are as follows:
Price Quantity Demanded Quantity Supplied
\$100 0 600
95 100 500
90 200 400
85 300 300
80 400 200
75 500 100
70 600 0
1. Draw the demand and supply curves for these bonds, find the equilibrium price, and determine the interest rate.
2. Now suppose the quantity demanded increases by 200 bonds at each price. Draw the new demand curve and find the new equilibrium price. What has happened to the interest rate?
3. Compute the dollar price of a German car that sells for 40,000 euros at each of the following exchange rates:
1. \$1 = 1 euro
2. \$1 = 0.8 euro
3. \$1 = 0.75 euro
4. Consider the euro-zone of the European Union and Japan. The demand and supply curves for euros are given by the following table (prices for the euro are given in Japanese yen; quantities of euros are in millions):
Price (in euros) Euros Demanded Euros Supplied
¥75 0 600
70 100 500
65 200 400
60 300 300
55 400 200
50 500 100
45 600 0
1. Draw the demand and supply curves for euros and state the equilibrium exchange rate (in yen) for the euro. How many euros are required to purchase one yen?
2. Suppose an increase in interest rates in the European Union increases the demand for euros by 100 million at each price. At the same time, it reduces the supply by 100 million at each price. Draw the new demand and supply curves and state the new equilibrium exchange rate for the euro. How many euros are now required to purchase one yen?
3. How will the event in (b) affect net exports in the European Union?
4. How will the event in (b) affect aggregate demand in the European Union?
5. How will the event in (b) affect net exports in Japan?
6. How will the event in (b) affect aggregate demand in Japan?
5. Suppose you earn \$6,000 per month and spend \$200 in each of the month’s 30 days. Compute your average quantity of money demanded if:
1. You deposit your entire earnings in your checking account at the beginning of the month.
2. You deposit \$2,000 into your checking account on the 1st, 11th, and 21st days of the month.
3. You deposit \$1,000 into your checking account on the 1st, 6th, 11th, 16th, 21st, and 26th days of the month.
4. How would you expect the interest rate to affect your decision to opt for strategy (a), (b), or (c)?
6. Suppose the quantity demanded of money at an interest rate of 5% is \$2 billion per day, at an interest rate of 3% is \$3 billion per day, and at an interest rate of 1% is \$4 billion per day. Suppose the money supply is \$3 billion per day.
1. Draw a graph of the money market and find the equilibrium interest rate.
2. Suppose the quantity of money demanded decreases by \$1 billion per day at each interest rate. Graph this situation and find the new equilibrium interest rate. Explain the process of achieving the new equilibrium in the money market.
3. Suppose instead that the money supply decreases by \$1 billion per day. Explain the process of achieving the new equilibrium in the money market.
7. We know that the U.S. economy faced a recessionary gap in 2008 and that the Fed responded with an expansionary monetary policy. Present the results of the Fed’s action in a four-panel graph. In Panel (a), show the initial situation, using the model of aggregate demand and aggregate supply. In Panel (b), show how the Fed’s policy affects the bond market and bond prices. In Panel (c), show how the market for U.S. dollars and the exchange rate will be affected. In Panel (d), incorporate these developments into your analysis of aggregate demand and aggregate supply, and show how the Fed’s policy will affect real GDP and the price level in the short run. | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_(LibreTexts)/10%3A_Financial_Markets_and_the_Economy/10.3%3A_Review_and_Practice.txt |
Thumbnail: https://www.pexels.com/photo/symbol-of-eagle-with-shield-on-dollar-banknote-4386226/
11: Monetary Policy and the Fed
Learning Objective
1. Discuss the Fed’s primary and secondary goals and relate these goals to the legislation that created the Fed as well as to subsequent legislation that affects the Fed.
2. State and show graphically how expansionary and contractionary monetary policy can be used to close gaps.
In many respects, the Fed is the most powerful maker of economic policy in the United States. Congress can pass laws, but the president must execute them; the president can propose laws, but only Congress can pass them. The Fed, however, both sets and carries out monetary policy. Deliberations about fiscal policy can drag on for months, even years, but the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) can, behind closed doors, set monetary policy in a day—and see that policy implemented within hours. The Board of Governors can change the discount rate or reserve requirements at any time. The impact of the Fed’s policies on the economy can be quite dramatic. The Fed can push interest rates up or down. It can promote a recession or an expansion. It can cause the inflation rate to rise or fall. The Fed wields enormous power.
But to what ends should all this power be directed? With what tools are the Fed’s policies carried out? And what problems exist in trying to achieve the Fed’s goals? This section reviews the goals of monetary policy, the tools available to the Fed in pursuing those goals, and the way in which monetary policy affects macroeconomic variables.
Goals of Monetary Policy
When we think of the goals of monetary policy, we naturally think of standards of macroeconomic performance that seem desirable—a low unemployment rate, a stable price level, and economic growth. It thus seems reasonable to conclude that the goals of monetary policy should include the maintenance of full employment, the avoidance of inflation or deflation, and the promotion of economic growth.
But these goals, each of which is desirable in itself, may conflict with one another. A monetary policy that helps to close a recessionary gap and thus promotes full employment may accelerate inflation. A monetary policy that seeks to reduce inflation may increase unemployment and weaken economic growth. You might expect that in such cases, monetary authorities would receive guidance from legislation spelling out goals for the Fed to pursue and specifying what to do when achieving one goal means not achieving another. But as we shall see, that kind of guidance does not exist.
The Federal Reserve Act
When Congress established the Federal Reserve System in 1913, it said little about the policy goals the Fed should seek. The closest it came to spelling out the goals of monetary policy was in the first paragraph of the Federal Reserve Act, the legislation that created the Fed:
“An Act to provide for the establishment of Federal reserve banks, to furnish an elastic currency, [to make loans to banks], to establish a more effective supervision of banking in the United States, and for other purposes.”
In short, nothing in the legislation creating the Fed anticipates that the institution will act to close recessionary or inflationary gaps, that it will seek to spur economic growth, or that it will strive to keep the price level steady. There is no guidance as to what the Fed should do when these goals conflict with one another.
The Employment Act of 1946
The first U.S. effort to specify macroeconomic goals came after World War II. The Great Depression of the 1930s had instilled in people a deep desire to prevent similar calamities in the future. That desire, coupled with the 1936 publication of John Maynard Keynes’s prescription for avoiding such problems through government policy (The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money), led to the passage of the Employment Act of 1946, which declared that the federal government should “use all practical means . . . to promote maximum employment, production and purchasing power.” The act also created the Council of Economic Advisers (CEA) to advise the president on economic matters.
The Fed might be expected to be influenced by this specification of federal goals, but because it is an independent agency, it is not required to follow any particular path. Furthermore, the legislation does not suggest what should be done if the goals of achieving full employment and maximum purchasing power conflict.
The Full Employment and Balanced Growth Act of 1978
The clearest, and most specific, statement of federal economic goals came in the Full Employment and Balanced Growth Act of 1978. This act, generally known as the Humphrey–Hawkins Act, specified that by 1983 the federal government should achieve an unemployment rate among adults of 3% or less, a civilian unemployment rate of 4% or less, and an inflation rate of 3% or less. Although these goals have the virtue of specificity, they offer little in terms of practical policy guidance. The last time the civilian unemployment rate in the United States fell below 4% was 1969, and the inflation rate that year was 6.2%. In 2000, the unemployment rate touched 4%, and the inflation rate that year was 3.4%, so the goals were close to being met. Except for 2007 when inflation hit 4.1%, inflation has hovered between 1.6% and 3.4% in all the other years between 1991 and 2008, so the inflation goal was met or nearly met, but unemployment fluctuated between 4.0% and 7.5% during those years.
The Humphrey-Hawkins Act requires that the chairman of the Fed’s Board of Governors report twice each year to Congress about the Fed’s monetary policy. These sessions provide an opportunity for members of the House and Senate to express their views on monetary policy.
Federal Reserve Policy and Goals
Perhaps the clearest way to see the Fed’s goals is to observe the policy choices it makes. Since 1979, following a bout of double-digit inflation, its actions have suggested that the Fed’s primary goal is to keep inflation under control. Provided that the inflation rate falls within acceptable limits, however, the Fed will also use stimulative measures to close recessionary gaps.
In 1979, the Fed, then led by Paul Volcker, launched a deliberate program of reducing the inflation rate. It stuck to that effort through the early 1980s, even in the face of a major recession. That effort achieved its goal: the annual inflation rate fell from 13.3% in 1979 to 3.8% in 1982. The cost, however, was great. Unemployment soared past 9% during the recession. With the inflation rate below 4%, the Fed shifted to a stimulative policy early in 1983.
In 1990, when the economy slipped into a recession, the Fed, with Alan Greenspan at the helm, engaged in aggressive open-market operations to stimulate the economy, despite the fact that the inflation rate had jumped to 6.1%. Much of that increase in the inflation rate, however, resulted from an oil-price boost that came in the wake of Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait that year. A jump in prices that occurs at the same time as real GDP is slumping suggests a leftward shift in short-run aggregate supply, a shift that creates a recessionary gap. Fed officials concluded that the upturn in inflation in 1990 was a temporary phenomenon and that an expansionary policy was an appropriate response to a weak economy. Once the recovery was clearly under way, the Fed shifted to a neutral policy, seeking neither to boost nor to reduce aggregate demand. Early in 1994, the Fed shifted to a contractionary policy, selling bonds to reduce the money supply and raise interest rates. Then Fed Chairman Greenspan indicated that the move was intended to head off any possible increase in inflation from its 1993 rate of 2.7%. Although the economy was still in a recessionary gap when the Fed acted, Greenspan indicated that any acceleration of the inflation rate would be unacceptable.
By March 1997 the inflation rate had fallen to 2.4%. The Fed became concerned that inflationary pressures were increasing and tightened monetary policy, raising the goal for the federal funds interest rate to 5.5%. Inflation remained well below 2.0% throughout the rest of 1997 and 1998. In the fall of 1998, with inflation low, the Fed was concerned that the economic recession in much of Asia and slow growth in Europe would reduce growth in the United States. In quarter-point steps it reduced the goal for the federal funds rate to 4.75%. With real GDP growing briskly in the first half of 1999, the Fed became concerned that inflation would increase, even though the inflation rate at the time was about 2%, and in June 1999, it raised its goal for the federal funds rate to 5% and continued raising the rate until it reached 6.5% in May 2000.
With inflation under control, it then began lowering the federal funds rate to stimulate the economy. It continued lowering through the brief recession of 2001 and beyond. There were 11 rate cuts in 2001, with the rate at the end of that year at 1.75%; in late 2002 the rate was cut to 1.25%, and in mid-2003 it was cut to 1.0%.
Then, with growth picking up and inflation again a concern, the Fed began again in the middle of 2004 to increase rates. By the end of 2006, the rate stood at 5.25% as a result of 17 quarter-point rate increases.
Starting in September 2007, the Fed, since 2006 led by Ben Bernanke, shifted gears and began lowering the federal funds rate, mostly in larger steps or 0.5 to 0.75 percentage points. Though initially somewhat concerned with inflation, it sensed that the economy was beginning to slow down. It moved aggressively to lower rates over the course of the next 15 months, and by the end of 2008, the rate was targeted at between 0% and 0.25%. In late 2008 and for at least the following two years, with inflation running quite low and deflation threatening, the Fed seemed quite willing to use all of its options to try to keep financial markets running smoothly and to moderate the recession.
What can we infer from these episodes in the 1980s, 1990s, and the first years of this century? It seems clear that the Fed is determined not to allow the high inflation rates of the 1970s to occur again. When the inflation rate is within acceptable limits, the Fed will undertake stimulative measures in response to a recessionary gap or even in response to the possibility of a growth slowdown. Those limits seem to have tightened over time. In the late 1990s and early 2000s, it appeared that an inflation rate above 3%—or any indication that inflation might rise above 3%—would lead the Fed to adopt a contractionary policy. While on the Federal Reserve Board in the early 2000s, Ben Bernanke had been an advocate of inflation targeting. Under that system, the central bank announces its inflation target and then adjusts the federal funds rate if the inflation rate moves above or below the central bank’s target. Mr. Bernanke indicated his preferred target to be an expected increase in the price level, as measured by the price index for consumer goods and services excluding food and energy, of between 1% and 2%. Thus, the inflation goal appears to have tightened even more—to a rate of 2% or less. If inflation were expected to remain below 2%, however, the Fed would undertake stimulative measures to close a recessionary gap. Whether the Fed will hold to that goal will not really be tested until further macroeconomic experiences unfold.
Monetary Policy and Macroeconomic Variables
We saw in an earlier chapter that the Fed has three tools at its command to try to change aggregate demand and thus to influence the level of economic activity. It can buy or sell federal government bonds through open-market operations, it can change the discount rate, or it can change reserve requirements. It can also use these tools in combination. In the next section of this chapter, where we discuss the notion of a liquidity trap, we will also introduce more extraordinary measures that the Fed has at its disposal.
Most economists agree that these tools of monetary policy affect the economy, but they sometimes disagree on the precise mechanisms through which this occurs, on the strength of those mechanisms, and on the ways in which monetary policy should be used. Before we address some of these issues, we shall review the ways in which monetary policy affects the economy in the context of the model of aggregate demand and aggregate supply. Our focus will be on open-market operations, the purchase or sale by the Fed of federal bonds.
Expansionary Monetary Policy
The Fed might pursue an expansionary monetary policy in response to the initial situation shown in Panel (a) of Figure 26.1. An economy with a potential output of YP is operating at Y1; there is a recessionary gap. One possible policy response is to allow the economy to correct this gap on its own, waiting for reductions in nominal wages and other prices to shift the short-run aggregate supply curve SRAS1 to the right until it intersects the aggregate demand curve AD1 at YP. An alternative is a stabilization policy that seeks to increase aggregate demand to AD2 to close the gap. An expansionary monetary policy is one way to achieve such a shift.
To carry out an expansionary monetary policy, the Fed will buy bonds, thereby increasing the money supply. That shifts the demand curve for bonds to D2, as illustrated in Panel (b). Bond prices rise to Pb2. The higher price for bonds reduces the interest rate. These changes in the bond market are consistent with the changes in the money market, shown in Panel (c), in which the greater money supply leads to a fall in the interest rate to r2. The lower interest rate stimulates investment. In addition, the lower interest rate reduces the demand for and increases the supply of dollars in the currency market, reducing the exchange rate to E2 in Panel (d). The lower exchange rate will stimulate net exports. The combined impact of greater investment and net exports will shift the aggregate demand curve to the right. The curve shifts by an amount equal to the multiplier times the sum of the initial changes in investment and net exports. In Panel (a), this is shown as a shift to AD2, and the recessionary gap is closed.
Contractionary Monetary Policy
The Fed will generally pursue a contractionary monetary policy when it considers inflation a threat. Suppose, for example, that the economy faces an inflationary gap; the aggregate demand and short-run aggregate supply curves intersect to the right of the long-run aggregate supply curve, as shown in Panel (a) of Figure 26.2.
To carry out a contractionary policy, the Fed sells bonds. In the bond market, shown in Panel (b) of Figure 26.2, the supply curve shifts to the right, lowering the price of bonds and increasing the interest rate. In the money market, shown in Panel (c), the Fed’s bond sales reduce the money supply and raise the interest rate. The higher interest rate reduces investment. The higher interest rate also induces a greater demand for dollars as foreigners seek to take advantage of higher interest rates in the United States. The supply of dollars falls; people in the United States are less likely to purchase foreign interest-earning assets now that U.S. assets are paying a higher rate. These changes boost the exchange rate, as shown in Panel (d), which reduces exports and increases imports and thus causes net exports to fall. The contractionary monetary policy thus shifts aggregate demand to the left, by an amount equal to the multiplier times the combined initial changes in investment and net exports, as shown in Panel (a).
Key Takeaways
• The Federal Reserve Board and the Federal Open Market Committee are among the most powerful institutions in the United States.
• The Fed’s primary goal appears to be the control of inflation. Providing that inflation is under control, the Fed will act to close recessionary gaps.
• Expansionary policy, such as a purchase of government securities by the Fed, tends to push bond prices up and interest rates down, increasing investment and aggregate demand. Contractionary policy, such as a sale of government securities by the Fed, pushes bond prices down, interest rates up, investment down, and aggregate demand shifts to the left.
Try It!
The figure shows an economy operating at a real GDP of Y1 and a price level of P1, at the intersection of AD1 and SRAS1.
Figure 26.3
1. What kind of gap is the economy experiencing?
2. What type of monetary policy (expansionary or contractionary) would be appropriate for closing the gap?
3. If the Fed decided to pursue this policy, what type of open-market operations would it conduct?
4. How would bond prices, interest rates, and the exchange rate change?
5. How would investment and net exports change?
6. How would the aggregate demand curve shift?
Case in Point: A Brief History of the Greenspan Fed
Figure 26.4
Javier – Alan Greenspan – CC BY-NC-ND 2.0.
With the passage of time and the fact that the fallout on the economy turned out to be relatively minor, it is hard in retrospect to realize how scary a situation Alan Greenspan and the Fed faced just two months after his appointment as Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board. On October 12, 1987, the stock market had its worst day ever. The Dow Jones Industrial Average plunged 508 points, wiping out more than \$500 billion in a few hours of feverish trading on Wall Street. That drop represented a loss in value of over 22%. In comparison, the largest daily drop in 2008 of 778 points on September 29, 2008, represented a loss in value of about 7%.
When the Fed faced another huge plunge in stock prices in 1929—also in October—members of the Board of Governors met and decided that no action was necessary. Determined not to repeat the terrible mistake of 1929, one that helped to usher in the Great Depression, Alan Greenspan immediately reassured the country, saying that the Fed would provide adequate liquidity, by buying federal securities, to assure that economic activity would not fall. As it turned out, the damage to the economy was minor and the stock market quickly regained value.
In the fall of 1990, the economy began to slip into recession. The Fed responded with expansionary monetary policy—cutting reserve requirements, lowering the discount rate, and buying Treasury bonds.
Interest rates fell quite quickly in response to the Fed’s actions, but, as is often the case, changes to the components of aggregate demand were slower in coming. Consumption and investment began to rise in 1991, but their growth was weak, and unemployment continued to rise because growth in output was too slow to keep up with growth in the labor force. It was not until the fall of 1992 that the economy started to pick up steam. This episode demonstrates an important difficulty with stabilization policy: attempts to manipulate aggregate demand achieve shifts in the curve, but with a lag.
Throughout the rest of the 1990s, with some tightening when the economy seemed to be moving into an inflationary gap and some loosening when the economy seemed to be possibly moving toward a recessionary gap—especially in 1998 and 1999 when parts of Asia experienced financial turmoil and recession and European growth had slowed down—the Fed helped steer what is now referred to as the Goldilocks (not too hot, not too cold, just right) economy.
The U.S. economy again experienced a mild recession in 2001 under Greenspan. At that time, the Fed systematically conducted expansionary policy. Similar to its response to the 1987 stock market crash, the Fed has been credited with maintaining liquidity following the dot-com stock market crash in early 2001 and the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon in September 2001.
When Greenspan retired in January 2006, many hailed him as the greatest central banker ever. As the economy faltered in 2008 and as the financial crisis unfolded throughout the year, however, the question of how the policies of Greenspan’s Fed played into the current difficulties took center stage. Testifying before Congress in October 2008, he said that the country faces a “once-in-a-century credit tsunami,” and he admitted, “I made a mistake in presuming that the self-interests of organizations, specifically banks and others, were such as that they were best capable of protecting their own shareholders and their equity in their firms.” The criticisms he has faced are twofold: that the very low interest rates used to fight the 2001 recession and maintained for too long fueled the real estate bubble and that he did not promote appropriate regulations to deal with the new financial instruments that were created in the early 2000s. While supporting some additional regulations when he testified before Congress, he also warned that overreacting could be dangerous: “We have to recognize that this is almost surely a once-in-a-century phenomenon, and, in that regard, to realize the types of regulation that would prevent this from happening in the future are so onerous as to basically suppress the growth rate in the economy and . . . the standards of living of the American people.”
Answers to Try It! Problems
1. Inflationary gap
2. Contractionary
3. Open-market sales of bonds
4. The price of bonds would fall. The interest rate and the exchange rate would rise.
5. Investment and net exports would fall.
6. The aggregate demand curve would shift to the left. | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_(LibreTexts)/11%3A_Monetary_Policy_and_the_Fed/11.1%3A_Monetary_Policy_in_the_United_States.txt |
Learning Objective
1. Explain the three kinds of lags that can influence the effectiveness of monetary policy.
2. Identify the macroeconomic targets at which the Fed can aim in managing the economy, and discuss the difficulties inherent in using each of them as a target.
3. Discuss how each of the following influences a central bank’s ability to achieve its desired macroeconomic outcomes: political pressures, the degree of impact on the economy (including the situation of a liquidity trap), and the rational expectations hypothesis.
The Fed has some obvious advantages in its conduct of monetary policy. The two policy-making bodies, the Board of Governors and the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC), are small and largely independent from other political institutions. These bodies can thus reach decisions quickly and implement them immediately. Their relative independence from the political process, together with the fact that they meet in secret, allows them to operate outside the glare of publicity that might otherwise be focused on bodies that wield such enormous power.
Despite the apparent ease with which the Fed can conduct monetary policy, it still faces difficulties in its efforts to stabilize the economy. We examine some of the problems and uncertainties associated with monetary policy in this section.
Lags
Perhaps the greatest obstacle facing the Fed, or any other central bank, is the problem of lags. It is easy enough to show a recessionary gap on a graph and then to show how monetary policy can shift aggregate demand and close the gap. In the real world, however, it may take several months before anyone even realizes that a particular macroeconomic problem is occurring. When monetary authorities become aware of a problem, they can act quickly to inject reserves into the system or to withdraw reserves from it. Once that is done, however, it may be a year or more before the action affects aggregate demand.
The delay between the time a macroeconomic problem arises and the time at which policy makers become aware of it is called a recognition lag. The 1990–1991 recession, for example, began in July 1990. It was not until late October that members of the FOMC noticed a slowing in economic activity, which prompted a stimulative monetary policy. In contrast, the most recent recession began in December 2007, and Fed easing began in September 2007.
Recognition lags stem largely from problems in collecting economic data. First, data are available only after the conclusion of a particular period. Preliminary estimates of real GDP, for example, are released about a month after the end of a quarter. Thus, a change that occurs early in a quarter will not be reflected in the data until several months later. Second, estimates of economic indicators are subject to revision. The first estimates of real GDP in the third quarter of 1990, for example, showed it increasing. Not until several months had passed did revised estimates show that a recession had begun. And finally, different indicators can lead to different interpretations. Data on employment and retail sales might be pointing in one direction while data on housing starts and industrial production might be pointing in another. It is one thing to look back after a few years have elapsed and determine whether the economy was expanding or contracting. It is quite another to decipher changes in real GDP when one is right in the middle of events. Even in a world brimming with computer-generated data on the economy, recognition lags can be substantial.
Only after policy makers recognize there is a problem can they take action to deal with it. The delay between the time at which a problem is recognized and the time at which a policy to deal with it is enacted is called the implementation lag. For monetary policy changes, the implementation lag is quite short. The FOMC meets eight times per year, and its members may confer between meetings through conference calls. Once the FOMC determines that a policy change is in order, the required open-market operations to buy or sell federal bonds can be put into effect immediately.
Policy makers at the Fed still have to contend with the impact lag, the delay between the time a policy is enacted and the time that policy has its impact on the economy.
The impact lag for monetary policy occurs for several reasons. First, it takes some time for the deposit multiplier process to work itself out. The Fed can inject new reserves into the economy immediately, but the deposit expansion process of bank lending will need time to have its full effect on the money supply. Interest rates are affected immediately, but the money supply grows more slowly. Second, firms need some time to respond to the monetary policy with new investment spending—if they respond at all. Third, a monetary change is likely to affect the exchange rate, but that translates into a change in net exports only after some delay. Thus, the shift in the aggregate demand curve due to initial changes in investment and in net exports occurs after some delay. Finally, the multiplier process of an expenditure change takes time to unfold. It is only as incomes start to rise that consumption spending picks up.
The problem of lags suggests that monetary policy should respond not to statistical reports of economic conditions in the recent past but to conditions expected to exist in the future. In justifying the imposition of a contractionary monetary policy early in 1994, when the economy still had a recessionary gap, Greenspan indicated that the Fed expected a one-year impact lag. The policy initiated in 1994 was a response not to the economic conditions thought to exist at the time but to conditions expected to exist in 1995. When the Fed used contractionary policy in the middle of 1999, it argued that it was doing so to forestall a possible increase in inflation. When the Fed began easing in September 2007, it argued that it was doing so to forestall adverse effects to the economy of falling housing prices. In these examples, the Fed appeared to be looking forward. It must do so with information and forecasts that are far from perfect.
Estimates of the length of time required for the impact lag to work itself out range from six months to two years. Worse, the length of the lag can vary—when they take action, policy makers cannot know whether their choices will affect the economy within a few months or within a few years. Because of the uncertain length of the impact lag, efforts to stabilize the economy through monetary policy could be destabilizing. Suppose, for example, that the Fed responds to a recessionary gap with an expansionary policy but that by the time the policy begins to affect aggregate demand, the economy has already returned to potential GDP. The policy designed to correct a recessionary gap could create an inflationary gap. Similarly, a shift to a contractionary policy in response to an inflationary gap might not affect aggregate demand until after a self-correction process had already closed the gap. In that case, the policy could plunge the economy into a recession.
Choosing Targets
In attempting to manage the economy, on what macroeconomic variables should the Fed base its policies? It must have some target, or set of targets, that it wants to achieve. The failure of the economy to achieve one of the Fed’s targets would then trigger a shift in monetary policy. The choice of a target, or set of targets, is a crucial one for monetary policy. Possible targets include interest rates, money growth rates, and the price level or expected changes in the price level.
Interest Rates
Interest rates, particularly the federal funds rate, played a key role in recent Fed policy. The FOMC does not decide to increase or decrease the money supply. Rather, it engages in operations to nudge the federal funds rate up or down.
Up until August 1997, it had instructed the trading desk at the New York Federal Reserve Bank to conduct open-market operations in a way that would either maintain, increase, or ease the current “degree of pressure” on the reserve positions of banks. That degree of pressure was reflected by the federal funds rate; if existing reserves were less than the amount banks wanted to hold, then the bidding for the available supply would send the federal funds rate up. If reserves were plentiful, then the federal funds rate would tend to decline. When the Fed increased the degree of pressure on reserves, it sold bonds, thus reducing the supply of reserves and increasing the federal funds rate. The Fed decreased the degree of pressure on reserves by buying bonds, thus injecting new reserves into the system and reducing the federal funds rate.
The current operating procedures of the Fed focus explicitly on interest rates. At each of its eight meetings during the year, the FOMC sets a specific target or target range for the federal funds rate. When the Fed lowers the target for the federal funds rate, it buys bonds. When it raises the target for the federal funds rate, it sells bonds.
Money Growth Rates
Until 2000, the Fed was required to announce to Congress at the beginning of each year its target for money growth that year and each report dutifully did so. At the same time, the Fed report would mention that its money growth targets were benchmarks based on historical relationships rather than guides for policy. As soon as the legal requirement to report targets for money growth ended, the Fed stopped doing so. Since in recent years the Fed has placed more importance on the federal funds rate, it must adjust the money supply in order to move the federal funds rate to the level it desires. As a result, the money growth targets tended to fall by the wayside, even over the last decade in which they were being reported. Instead, as data on economic conditions unfolded, the Fed made, and continues to make, adjustments in order to affect the federal funds interest rate.
Price Level or Expected Changes in the Price Level
Some economists argue that the Fed’s primary goal should be price stability. If so, an obvious possible target is the price level itself. The Fed could target a particular price level or a particular rate of change in the price level and adjust its policies accordingly. If, for example, the Fed sought an inflation rate of 2%, then it could shift to a contractionary policy whenever the rate rose above 2%. One difficulty with such a policy, of course, is that the Fed would be responding to past economic conditions with policies that are not likely to affect the economy for a year or more. Another difficulty is that inflation could be rising when the economy is experiencing a recessionary gap. An example of this, mentioned earlier, occurred in 1990 when inflation increased due to the seemingly temporary increase in oil prices following Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait. The Fed was faced with a similar situation in the first half of 2008 when oil prices were again rising. If the Fed undertakes contractionary monetary policy at such times, then its efforts to reduce the inflation rate could worsen the recessionary gap.
The solution proposed by Chairman Bernanke, who is an advocate of inflation rate targeting, is to focus not on the past rate of inflation or even the current rate of inflation, but on the expected rate of inflation, as revealed by various indicators, over the next year. This concept is discussed in the Case in Point essay that follows this section.
Political Pressures
The institutional relationship between the leaders of the Fed and the executive and legislative branches of the federal government is structured to provide for the Fed’s independence. Members of the Board of Governors are appointed by the president, with confirmation by the Senate, but the 14-year terms of office provide a considerable degree of insulation from political pressure. A president exercises greater influence in the choice of the chairman of the Board of Governors; that appointment carries a four-year term. Neither the president nor Congress has any direct say over the selection of the presidents of Federal Reserve district banks. They are chosen by their individual boards of directors with the approval of the Board of Governors.
The degree of independence that central banks around the world have varies. A central bank is considered to be more independent if it is insulated from the government by such factors as longer term appointments of its governors and fewer requirements to finance government budget deficits. Studies in the 1980s and early 1990s showed that, in general, greater central bank independence was associated with lower average inflation and that there was no systematic relationship between central bank independence and other indicators of economic performance, such as real GDP growth or unemployment1. By the rankings used in those studies, the Fed was considered quite independent, second only to Switzerland and the German Bundesbank at the time. Perhaps as a result of such findings, a number of countries have granted greater independence to their central banks in the last decade. The charter for the European Central Bank, which began operations in 1998, was modeled on that of the German Bundesbank. Its charter states explicitly that its primary objective is to maintain price stability. Also, since 1998, central bank independence has increased in the United Kingdom, Canada, Japan, and New Zealand.
While the Fed is formally insulated from the political process, the men and women who serve on the Board of Governors and the FOMC are human beings. They are not immune to the pressures that can be placed on them by members of Congress and by the president. The chairman of the Board of Governors meets regularly with the president and the executive staff and also reports to and meets with congressional committees that deal with economic matters.
The Fed was created by the Congress; its charter could be altered—or even revoked—by that same body. The Fed is in the somewhat paradoxical situation of having to cooperate with the legislative and executive branches in order to preserve its independence.
The Degree of Impact on the Economy
The problem of lags suggests that the Fed does not know with certainty when its policies will work their way through the financial system to have an impact on macroeconomic performance. The Fed also does not know with certainty towhat extent its policy decisions will affect the macroeconomy.
For example, investment can be particularly volatile. An effort by the Fed to reduce aggregate demand in the face of an inflationary gap could be partially offset by rising investment demand. But, generally, contractionary policies do tend to slow down the economy as if the Fed were “pulling on a rope.” That may not be the case with expansionary policies. Since investment depends crucially on expectations about the future, business leaders must be optimistic about economic conditions in order to expand production facilities and buy new equipment. That optimism might not exist in a recession. Instead, the pessimism that might prevail during an economic slump could prevent lower interest rates from stimulating investment. An effort to stimulate the economy through monetary policy could be like “pushing on a string.” The central bank could push with great force by buying bonds and engaging in quantitative easing, but little might happen to the economy at the other end of the string.
What if the Fed cannot bring about a change in interest rates? A liquidity trap is said to exist when a change in monetary policy has no effect on interest rates. This would be the case if the money demand curve were horizontal at some interest rate, as shown in Figure 26.5. If a change in the money supply from M to M′ cannot change interest rates, then, unless there is some other change in the economy, there is no reason for investment or any other component of aggregate demand to change. Hence, traditional monetary policy is rendered totally ineffective; its degree of impact on the economy is nil. At an interest rate of zero, since bonds cease to be an attractive alternative to money, which is at least useful for transactions purposes, there would be a liquidity trap.
With the federal funds rate in the United States close to zero at the end of 2008, the possibility that the country is in or nearly in a liquidity trap cannot be dismissed. As discussed in the introduction to the chapter, at the same time the Fed lowered the federal funds rate to close to zero, it mentioned that it intended to pursue additional, nontraditional measures. What the Fed seeks to do is to make firms and consumers want to spend now by using a tool not aimed at reducing the interest rate, since it cannot reduce the interest rate below zero. It thus shifts its focus to the price level and to avoiding expected deflation. For example, if the public expects the price level to fall by 2% and the interest rate is zero, by holding money, the money is actually earning a positive real interest rate of 2%—the difference between the nominal interest rate and the expected deflation rate. Since the nominal rate of interest cannot fall below zero (Who would, for example, want to lend at an interest rate below zero when lending is risky whereas cash is not? In short, it does not make sense to lend \$10 and get less than \$10 back.), expected deflation makes holding cash very attractive and discourages spending since people will put off purchases because goods and services are expected to get cheaper.
To combat this “wait-and-see” mentality, the Fed or other central bank, using a strategy referred to as quantitative easing, must convince the public that it will keep interest rates very low by providing substantial reserves for as long as is necessary to avoid deflation. In other words, it is aimed at creating expected inflation. For example, at the Fed’s October 2003 meeting, it announced that it would keep the federal funds rate at 1% for “a considerable period.” When the Fed lowered the rate to between 0% and 0.25% in December 2008, it added that “the Committee anticipates that weak economic conditions are likely to warrant exceptionally low levels of the federal funds rate for some time.” After working so hard to convince economic players that it will not tolerate inflation above 2%, the Fed must now convince the public that it will, but of course not too much! If it is successful, this extraordinary form of expansionary monetary policy will lead to increased purchases of goods and services, compared to what they would have been with expected deflation. Also, by providing banks with lots of liquidity, it is hoping to encourage them to lend.
The Japanese economy provides an interesting modern example of a country that attempted quantitative easing. With a recessionary gap starting in the early 1990s and deflation in most years from 1995 on, Japan’s central bank, the Bank of Japan, began to lower the call money rate (equivalent to the federal funds rate in the United States), reaching near zero by the late 1990s. With growth still languishing, Japan appeared to be in a traditional liquidity trap. In late 1999, the Bank of Japan announced that it would maintain a zero interest rate policy for the foreseeable future, and in March 2001 it officially began a policy of quantitative easing. In 2006, with the price level rising modestly, Japan ended quantitative easing and began increasing the call rate again. It should be noted that the government simultaneously engaged in expansionary fiscal policy.
How well did these policies work? The economy began to grow modestly in 2003, though deflation between 1% and 2% remained. Some researchers feel that the Bank of Japan ended quantitative easing too early. Also, delays in implementing the policy, as well as delays in restructuring the banking sector, exacerbated Japan’s problems (OECD Economic Surveys, 2008; Spiegel, 2006).
Fed Chairman Bernanke and other Fed officials have argued that the Fed is also engaged in credit easing (Bernanke, 2009; Yellen, 2009). Credit easing is a strategy that involves the extension of central bank lending to influence more broadly the proper functioning of credit markets and to improve liquidity. The specific new credit facilities that the Fed has created were discussed in the Case in Point in the chapter on the nature and creation of money. In general, the Fed is hoping that these new credit facilities will improve liquidity in a variety of credit markets, ranging from those used by money market mutual funds to those involved in student and car loans.
Rational Expectations
One hypothesis suggests that monetary policy may affect the price level but not real GDP. The rational expectations hypothesis states that people use all available information to make forecasts about future economic activity and the price level, and they adjust their behavior to these forecasts.
Figure 26.6 uses the model of aggregate demand and aggregate supply to show the implications of the rational expectations argument for monetary policy. Suppose the economy is operating at YP, as illustrated by point A. An increase in the money supply boosts aggregate demand to AD2. In the analysis we have explored thus far, the shift in aggregate demand would move the economy to a higher level of real GDP and create an inflationary gap. That, in turn, would put upward pressure on wages and other prices, shifting the short-run aggregate supply curve to SRAS2 and moving the economy to point B, closing the inflationary gap in the long run. The rational expectations hypothesis, however, suggests a quite different interpretation.
Suppose people observe the initial monetary policy change undertaken when the economy is at point A and calculate that the increase in the money supply will ultimately drive the price level up to point B. Anticipating this change in prices, people adjust their behavior. For example, if the increase in the price level from P1 to P2 is a 10% change, workers will anticipate that the prices they pay will rise 10%, and they will demand 10% higher wages. Their employers, anticipating that the prices they will receive will also rise, will agree to pay those higher wages. As nominal wages increase, the short-run aggregate supply curve immediately shifts to SRAS2. The result is an upward movement along the long-run aggregate supply curve, LRAS. There is no change in real GDP. The monetary policy has no effect, other than its impact on the price level. This rational expectations argument relies on wages and prices being sufficiently flexible—not sticky, as described in an earlier chapter—so that the change in expectations will allow the short-run aggregate supply curve to shift quickly to SRAS2.
One important implication of the rational expectations argument is that a contractionary monetary policy could be painless. Suppose the economy is at point B in Figure 26.6, and the Fed reduces the money supply in order to shift the aggregate demand curve back to AD1. In the model of aggregate demand and aggregate supply, the result would be a recession. But in a rational expectations world, people’s expectations change, the short-run aggregate supply immediately shifts to the right, and the economy moves painlessly down its long-run aggregate supply curve LRAS to point A. Those who support the rational expectations hypothesis, however, also tend to argue that monetary policy should not be used as a tool of stabilization policy.
For some, the events of the early 1980s weakened support for the rational expectations hypothesis; for others, those same events strengthened support for this hypothesis. As we saw in the introduction to an earlier chapter, in 1979 President Jimmy Carter appointed Paul Volcker as Chairman of the Federal Reserve and pledged his full support for whatever the Fed might do to contain inflation. Mr. Volcker made it clear that the Fed was going to slow money growth and boost interest rates. He acknowledged that this policy would have costs but said that the Fed would stick to it as long as necessary to control inflation. Here was a monetary policy that was clearly announced and carried out as advertised. But the policy brought on the most severe recession since the Great Depression—a result that seems inconsistent with the rational expectations argument that changing expectations would prevent such a policy from having a substantial effect on real GDP.
Others, however, argue that people were aware of the Fed’s pronouncements but were skeptical about whether the anti-inflation effort would persist, since the Fed had not vigorously fought inflation in the late 1960s and the 1970s. Against this history, people adjusted their estimates of inflation downward slowly. In essence, the recession occurred because people were surprised that the Fed was serious about fighting inflation.
Regardless of where one stands on this debate, one message does seem clear: once the Fed has proved it is serious about maintaining price stability, doing so in the future gets easier. To put this in concrete terms, Volcker’s fight made Greenspan’s work easier, and Greenspan’s legacy of low inflation should make Bernanke’s easier.
Key Takeaways
• Macroeconomic policy makers must contend with recognition, implementation, and impact lags.
• Potential targets for macroeconomic policy include interest rates, money growth rates, and the price level or expected rates of change in the price level.
• Even if a central bank is structured to be independent of political pressure, its officers are likely to be affected by such pressure.
• To counteract liquidity traps, central banks have used quantitative-easing and credit-easing strategies.
• No central bank can know in advance how its policies will affect the economy; the rational expectations hypothesis predicts that central bank actions will affect the money supply and the price level but not the real level of economic activity.
Try It!
The scenarios below describe the U.S. recession and recovery in the early 1990s. Identify the lag that may have contributed to the difficulty in using monetary policy as a tool of economic stabilization.
1. The U.S. economy entered into a recession in July 1990. The Fed countered with expansionary monetary policy in October 1990, ultimately lowering the federal funds rate from 8% to 3% in 1992.
2. Investment began to increase, although slowly, in early 1992, and surged in 1993.
Case in Point: Targeting Monetary Policy
Figure 26.7
Medill DC – Bernanke – CC BY 2.0.
Ben Bernanke, the chairman of the Federal Reserve Board, is among a growing group of economists who (at least under normal macroeconomic circumstances!) advocate targeting as an approach to monetary policy. The idea, first proposed in 1993 by Stanford University economist John Taylor, calls for the central bank to set an inflation target and, if the actual rate is above or below it, raise or lower the federal funds rate.
The approach would be a change from the policy carried out under Alan Greenspan, who chaired the board from 1987 to 2006. Mr. Greenspan, who opposed targeting, favors a discretionary approach, one that some critics (and admirers) have called a “seat-of-the-pants” approach to monetary policy.
Targeting would not, according to Mr. Bernanke, be entirely formulaic, replacing the judgment of the Open Market Committee with a rigid rule. Mr. Bernanke has noted, for example, that if the inflation were to increase as a result of a supply side shock (such as an increase in oil prices), then an automatic increase in the federal funds rate would not be appropriate.
One danger of using the current inflation rate as a target is that it might be destabilizing. After all, the current rate is actually the rate for the past month or past several months. Adjusting the federal funds rate to past inflation could, given the inherent recognition and impact lags of monetary policy, easily lead to a worsening of the business cycle. Imagine that past inflation has increased as a result of a much earlier increase in the money supply. That inflation might already be correcting itself by the time a tightening effort takes hold in the economy. It thus could cause a contraction.
Bernanke has said that his preferred target is the expected rate of increase for the next year in the price index for consumer goods and services, excluding food and energy prices. That would avoid the danger of relying on previous inflation rates. He has said that his “comfort zone” for expected inflation is between 1% and 2%.
The central banks of Australia, Brazil, Canada, Great Britain, New Zealand, South Korea, and Sweden adopted targeting. Japan and the United States did not. A study by Goldman Sachs, the investment consulting and management firm, examined the performance of countries that did and did not engage in targeting. It found that countries that used targeting had more stable interest rates and sustained steady growth. Japan and the United States had much more volatile stock and bond markets. In short, the results of the study tended to support the practice of targeting inflation.
Answers to Try It! Problems
1. The recognition lag: the Fed did not seem to “recognize” that the economy was in a recession until several months after the recession began.
2. The impact lag: investment did not pick up quickly after interest rates were reduced. Alternatively, it could be attributed to the expansionary monetary policy’s not having its desired effect, at least initially, on investment.
1See, for example, Alberto Alesina and Lawrence H. Summers, “Central Bank Independence and Macroeconomic Performance: Some Comparative Evidence,” Journal of Money, Credit, and Banking 25, no. 2 (May 1993): 151–62. | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_(LibreTexts)/11%3A_Monetary_Policy_and_the_Fed/11.2%3A_Problems_and_Controversies_of_Monetary_Policy.txt |
Learning Objective
1. Explain the meaning of the equation of exchange, MV = PY, and tell why it must hold true.
2. Discuss the usefulness of the quantity theory of money in explaining the behavior of nominal GDP and inflation in the long run.
3. Discuss why the quantity theory of money is less useful in analyzing the short run.
So far we have focused on how monetary policy affects real GDP and the price level in the short run. That is, we have examined how it can be used—however imprecisely—to close recessionary or inflationary gaps and to stabilize the price level. In this section, we will explore the relationship between money and the economy in the context of an equation that relates the money supply directly to nominal GDP. As we shall see, it also identifies circumstances in which changes in the price level are directly related to changes in the money supply.
The Equation of Exchange
We can relate the money supply to the aggregate economy by using the equation of exchange:
Equation 26.1
The equation of exchange shows that the money supply M times its velocity V equals nominal GDP. Velocity is the number of times the money supply is spent to obtain the goods and services that make up GDP during a particular time period.
To see that nominal GDP is the price level multiplied by real GDP, recall from an earlier chapter that the implicit price deflator P equals nominal GDP divided by real GDP:
Equation 26.2
Multiplying both sides by real GDP, we have
Equation 26.3
Letting Y equal real GDP, we can rewrite the equation of exchange as
Equation 26.4
We shall use the equation of exchange to see how it represents spending in a hypothetical economy that consists of 50 people, each of whom has a car. Each person has \$10 in cash and no other money. The money supply of this economy is thus \$500. Now suppose that the sole economic activity in this economy is car washing. Each person in the economy washes one other person’s car once a month, and the price of a car wash is \$10. In one month, then, a total of 50 car washes are produced at a price of \$10 each. During that month, the money supply is spent once.
Applying the equation of exchange to this economy, we have a money supply M of \$500 and a velocity V of 1. Because the only good or service produced is car washing, we can measure real GDP as the number of car washes. Thus Y equals 50 car washes. The price level P is the price of a car wash: \$10. The equation of exchange for a period of 1 month is
Now suppose that in the second month everyone washes someone else’s car again. Over the full two-month period, the money supply has been spent twice—the velocity over a period of two months is 2. The total output in the economy is \$1,000—100 car washes have been produced over a two-month period at a price of \$10 each. Inserting these values into the equation of exchange, we have
Suppose this process continues for one more month. For the three-month period, the money supply of \$500 has been spent three times, for a velocity of 3. We have
The essential thing to note about the equation of exchange is that it always holds. That should come as no surprise. The left side, MV, gives the money supply times the number of times that money is spent on goods and services during a period. It thus measures total spending. The right side is nominal GDP. But that is a measure of total spending on goods and services as well. Nominal GDP is the value of all final goods and services produced during a particular period. Those goods and services are either sold or added to inventory. If they are sold, then they must be part of total spending. If they are added to inventory, then some firm must have either purchased them or paid for their production; they thus represent a portion of total spending. In effect, the equation of exchange says simply that total spending on goods and services, measured as MV, equals total spending on goods and services, measured as PY (or nominal GDP). The equation of exchange is thus an identity, a mathematical expression that is true by definition.
To apply the equation of exchange to a real economy, we need measures of each of the variables in it. Three of these variables are readily available. The Department of Commerce reports the price level (that is, the implicit price deflator) and real GDP. The Federal Reserve Board reports M2, a measure of the money supply. For the second quarter of 2008, the values of these variables at an annual rate were
M = \$7,635.4 billion
P = 1.22
Y = 11,727.4 billion
To solve for the velocity of money, V, we divide both sides of Equation 26.4 by M:
Equation 26.5
Using the data for the second quarter of 2008 to compute velocity, we find that V then was equal to 1.87. A velocity of 1.87 means that the money supply was spent 1.87 times in the purchase of goods and services in the second quarter of 2008.
Money, Nominal GDP, and Price-Level Changes
Assume for the moment that velocity is constant, expressed as . Our equation of exchange is now written as
Equation 26.6
A constant value for velocity would have two important implications:
1. Nominal GDP could change only if there were a change in the money supply. Other kinds of changes, such as a change in government purchases or a change in investment, could have no effect on nominal GDP.
2. A change in the money supply would always change nominal GDP, and by an equal percentage.
In short, if velocity were constant, a course in macroeconomics would be quite simple. The quantity of money would determine nominal GDP; nothing else would matter.
Indeed, when we look at the behavior of economies over long periods of time, the prediction that the quantity of money determines nominal output holds rather well. Figure 26.8 compares long-term averages in the growth rates of M2 and nominal GNP in the United States for more than a century. The lines representing the two variables do seem to move together most of the time, suggesting that velocity is constant when viewed over the long run.
Moreover, price-level changes also follow the same pattern that changes in M2 and nominal GNP do. Why is this?
We can rewrite the equation of exchange, M = PY, in terms of percentage rates of change. When two products, such as M and PY, are equal, and the variables themselves are changing, then the sums of the percentage rates of change are approximately equal:
Equation 26.7
The Greek letter Δ (delta) means “change in.” Assume that velocity is constant in the long run, so that %ΔV = 0. We also assume that real GDP moves to its potential level, YP, in the long run. With these assumptions, we can rewrite Equation 26.7 as follows:
Equation 26.8
Subtracting %ΔYP from both sides of Equation 26.8, we have the following:
Equation 26.9
Equation 26.9 has enormously important implications for monetary policy. It tells us that, in the long run, the rate of inflation, %ΔP, equals the difference between the rate of money growth and the rate of increase in potential output, %ΔYP, given our assumption of constant velocity. Because potential output is likely to rise by at most a few percentage points per year, the rate of money growth will be close to the rate of inflation in the long run.
Several recent studies that looked at all the countries on which they could get data on inflation and money growth over long periods found a very high correlation between growth rates of the money supply and of the price level for countries with high inflation rates, but the relationship was much weaker for countries with inflation rates of less than 10%1. These findings support the quantity theory of money, which holds that in the long run the price level moves in proportion with changes in the money supply, at least for high-inflation countries.
Why the Quantity Theory of Money Is Less Useful in Analyzing the Short Run
The stability of velocity in the long run underlies the close relationship we have seen between changes in the money supply and changes in the price level. But velocity is not stable in the short run; it varies significantly from one period to the next. Figure 26.9 shows annual values of the velocity of M2 from 1970 through 2009. Velocity is quite variable, so other factors must affect economic activity. Any change in velocity implies a change in the demand for money. For analyzing the effects of monetary policy from one period to the next, we apply the framework that emphasizes the impact of changes in the money market on aggregate demand.
The factors that cause velocity to fluctuate are those that influence the demand for money, such as the interest rate and expectations about bond prices and future price levels. We can gain some insight about the demand for money and its significance by rearranging terms in the equation of exchange so that we turn the equation of exchange into an equation for the demand for money. If we multiply both sides of Equation 26.1 by the reciprocal of velocity, 1/V, we have this equation for money demand:
Equation 26.10
The equation of exchange can thus be rewritten as an equation that expresses the demand for money as a percentage, given by 1/V, of nominal GDP. With a velocity of 1.87, for example, people wish to hold a quantity of money equal to 53.4% (1/1.87) of nominal GDP. Other things unchanged, an increase in money demand reduces velocity, and a decrease in money demand increases velocity.
If people wanted to hold a quantity of money equal to a larger percentage of nominal GDP, perhaps because interest rates were low, velocity would be a smaller number. Suppose, for example, that people held a quantity of money equal to 80% of nominal GDP. That would imply a velocity of 1.25. If people held a quantity of money equal to a smaller fraction of nominal GDP, perhaps owing to high interest rates, velocity would be a larger number. If people held a quantity of money equal to 25% of nominal GDP, for example, the velocity would be 4.
As another example, in the chapter on financial markets and the economy, we learned that money demand falls when people expect inflation to increase. In essence, they do not want to hold money that they believe will only lose value, so they turn it over faster, that is, velocity rises. Expectations of deflation lower the velocity of money, as people hold onto money because they expect it will rise in value.
In our first look at the equation of exchange, we noted some remarkable conclusions that would hold if velocity were constant: a given percentage change in the money supply M would produce an equal percentage change in nominal GDP, and no change in nominal GDP could occur without an equal percentage change in M. We have learned, however, that velocity varies in the short run. Thus, the conclusions that would apply if velocity were constant must be changed.
First, we do not expect a given percentage change in the money supply to produce an equal percentage change in nominal GDP. Suppose, for example, that the money supply increases by 10%. Interest rates drop, and the quantity of money demanded goes up. Velocity is likely to decline, though not by as large a percentage as the money supply increases. The result will be a reduction in the degree to which a given percentage increase in the money supply boosts nominal GDP.
Second, nominal GDP could change even when there is no change in the money supply. Suppose government purchases increase. Such an increase shifts the aggregate demand curve to the right, increasing real GDP and the price level. That effect would be impossible if velocity were constant. The fact that velocity varies, and varies positively with the interest rate, suggests that an increase in government purchases could boost aggregate demand and nominal GDP. To finance increased spending, the government borrows money by selling bonds. An increased supply of bonds lowers their price, and that means higher interest rates. The higher interest rates produce the increase in velocity that must occur if increased government purchases are to boost the price level and real GDP.
Just as we cannot assume that velocity is constant when we look at macroeconomic behavior period to period, neither can we assume that output is at potential. With both V and Y in the equation of exchange variable, in the short run, the impact of a change in the money supply on the price level depends on the degree to which velocity and real GDP change.
In the short run, it is not reasonable to assume that velocity and output are constants. Using the model in which interest rates and other factors affect the quantity of money demanded seems more fruitful for understanding the impact of monetary policy on economic activity in that period. However, the empirical evidence on the long-run relationship between changes in money supply and changes in the price level that we presented earlier gives us reason to pause. As Federal Reserve Governor from 1996 to 2002 Laurence H. Meyer put it: “I believe monitoring money growth has value, even for central banks that follow a disciplined strategy of adjusting their policy rate to ongoing economic developments. The value may be particularly important at the extremes: during periods of very high inflation, as in the late 1970s and early 1980s in the United States … and in deflationary episodes” (Meyer, 2001).
It would be a mistake to allow short-term fluctuations in velocity and output to lead policy makers to completely ignore the relationship between money and price level changes in the long run.
Key Takeaways
• The equation of exchange can be written MV = PY.
• When M, V, P, and Y are changing, then %ΔM + %ΔV = %ΔP + %ΔY, where Δ means “change in.”
• In the long run, V is constant, so %ΔV = 0. Furthermore, in the long run Y tends toward YP, so %ΔM = %ΔP.
• In the short run, V is not constant, so changes in the money supply can affect the level of income.
Try It!
The Case in Point on velocity in the Confederacy during the Civil War shows that, assuming real GDP in the South was constant, velocity rose. What happened to money demand? Why did it change?
Case in Point: Velocity and the Confederacy
Figure 26.10
Elycefeliz – Confederate 100 Dollar Bill – CC BY-NC-ND 2.0.
The Union and the Confederacy financed their respective efforts during the Civil War largely through the issue of paper money. The Union roughly doubled its money supply through this process, and the Confederacy printed enough “Confederates” to increase the money supply in the South 20-fold from 1861 to 1865. That huge increase in the money supply boosted the price level in the Confederacy dramatically. It rose from an index of 100 in 1861 to 9,200 in 1865.
Estimates of real GDP in the South during the Civil War are unavailable, but it could hardly have increased very much. Although production undoubtedly rose early in the period, the South lost considerable capital and an appalling number of men killed in battle. Let us suppose that real GDP over the entire period remained constant. For the price level to rise 92-fold with a 20-fold increase in the money supply, there must have been a 4.6-fold increase in velocity. People in the South must have reduced their demand for Confederates.
An account of an exchange for eggs in 1864 from the diary of Mary Chestnut illustrates how eager people in the South were to part with their Confederate money. It also suggests that other commodities had assumed much greater relative value:
“She asked me 20 dollars for five dozen eggs and then said she would take it in “Confederate.” Then I would have given her 100 dollars as easily. But if she had taken my offer of yarn! I haggle in yarn for the millionth part of a thread! … When they ask for Confederate money, I never stop to chafer [bargain or argue]. I give them 20 or 50 dollars cheerfully for anything.”
Answer to Try It! Problem
People in the South must have reduced their demand for money. The fall in money demand was probably due to the expectation that the price level would continue to rise. In periods of high inflation, people try to get rid of money quickly because it loses value rapidly.
1For example, one study examined data on 81 countries using inflation rates averaged for the period 1980 to 1993 (John R. Moroney, “Money Growth, Output Growth, and Inflation: Estimation of a Modern Quantity Theory,” Southern Economic Journal 69, no. 2 [2002]: 398–413) while another examined data on 160 countries over the period 1969–1999 (Paul De Grauwe and Magdalena Polan, “Is Inflation Always and Everywhere a Monetary Phenomenon?” Scandinavian Journal of Economics 107, no. 2 [2005]: 239–59). | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_(LibreTexts)/11%3A_Monetary_Policy_and_the_Fed/11.3%3A_Monetary_Policy_and_the_Equation_of_Exchange.txt |
Summary
Part of the Fed’s power stems from the fact that it has no legislative mandate to seek particular goals. That leaves the Fed free to set its own goals. In recent years, its primary goal has seemed to be the maintenance of an inflation rate below 2% to 3%. Given success in meeting that goal, the Fed has used its tools to stimulate the economy to close recessionary gaps. Once the Fed has made a choice to undertake an expansionary or contractionary policy, we can trace the impact of that policy on the economy.
There are a number of problems in the use of monetary policy. These include various types of lags, the issue of the choice of targets in conducting monetary policy, political pressures placed on the process of policy setting, and uncertainty as to how great an impact the Fed’s policy decisions have on macroeconomic variables. We highlighted the difficulties for monetary policy if the economy is in or near a liquidity trap and discussed the use of quantitative easing and credit easing in such situations. If people have rational expectations and respond to those expectations in their wage and price choices, then changes in monetary policy may have no effect on real GDP.
We saw in this chapter that the money supply is related to the level of nominal GDP by the equation of exchange. A crucial issue in that relationship is the stability of the velocity of money and of real GDP. If the velocity of money were constant, nominal GDP could change only if the money supply changed, and a change in the money supply would produce an equal percentage change in nominal GDP. If velocity were constant and real GDP were at its potential level, then the price level would change by about the same percentage as the money supply. While these predictions seem to hold up in the long run, there is less support for them when we look at macroeconomic behavior in the short run. Nonetheless, policy makers must be mindful of these long-run relationships as they formulate policies for the short run.
Concept Problems
1. Suppose the Fed were required to conduct monetary policy so as to hold the unemployment rate below 4%, the goal specified in the Humphrey–Hawkins Act. What implications would this have for the economy?
2. The statutes of the recently established European Central Bank (ECB) state that its primary objective is to maintain price stability. How does this charter differ from that of the Fed? What significance does it have for monetary policy?
3. Do you think the Fed should be given a clearer legislative mandate concerning macroeconomic goals? If so, what should it be?
4. Referring to the Case in Point on targeting, what difference does it make whether the target is the inflation rate of the past year or the expected inflation rate over the next year?
5. In a speech in January 19951, Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan used a transportation metaphor to describe some of the difficulties of implementing monetary policy. He referred to the criticism levied against the Fed for shifting in 1994 to an anti-inflation, contractionary policy when the inflation rate was still quite low:
“To successfully navigate a bend in the river, the barge must begin the turn well before the bend is reached. Even so, currents are always changing and even an experienced crew cannot foresee all the events that might occur as the river is being navigated. A year ago, the Fed began its turn (a shift toward an expansionary monetary policy), and it was successful.”
Mr. Greenspan was referring, of course, to the problem of lags. What kind of lag do you think he had in mind? What do you suppose the reference to changing currents means?
6. In a speech in August 1999 (Greenspan, 1999), Mr. Greenspan said,
We no longer have the luxury to look primarily to the flow of goods and services, as conventionally estimated, when evaluating the macroeconomic environment in which monetary policy must function. There are important—but extremely difficult—questions surrounding the behavior of asset prices and the implications of this behavior for the decisions of households and businesses.
The asset price that Mr. Greenspan was referring to was the U.S. stock market, which had been rising sharply in the weeks and months preceding this speech. Inflation and unemployment were both low at that time. What issues concerning the conduct of monetary policy was Mr. Greenspan raising?
7. Suppose we observed an economy in which changes in the money supply produce no changes whatever in nominal GDP. What could we conclude about velocity?
8. Suppose the price level were falling 10% per day. How would this affect the demand for money? How would it affect velocity? What can you conclude about the role of velocity during periods of rapid price change?
9. Suppose investment increases and the money supply does not change. Use the model of aggregate demand and aggregate supply to predict the impact of such an increase on nominal GDP. Now what happens in terms of the variables in the equation of exchange?
10. The text notes that prior to August 1997 (when it began specifying a target value for the federal funds rate), the FOMC adopted directives calling for the trading desk at the New York Federal Reserve Bank to increase, decrease, or maintain the existing degree of pressure on reserve positions. On the meeting dates given in the first column, the FOMC voted to decrease pressure on reserve positions (that is, adopt a more expansionary policy). On the meeting dates given in the second column, it voted to increase reserve pressure:
July 5–6, 1995 February 3–4, 1994
December 19, 1995 January 31–February 1, 1995
January 30–31, 1996 March 25, 1997
Recent minutes of the FOMC can be found at the Federal Reserve Board of Governors website. Pick one of these dates on which a decrease in reserve pressure was ordered and one on which an increase was ordered and find out why that particular policy was chosen.
11. Since August 1997, the Fed has simply set a specific target for the federal funds rate. The four dates below show the first four times after August 1997 that the Fed voted to set a new target for the federal funds rate on the following dates:
September 29, 1998 November 17, 1998
June 29, 1999 August 24, 1999
Pick one of these dates and find out why it chose to change its target for the federal funds rate on that date.
12. Four recent meetings at which the Fed changed the target for the federal funds rate are shown below.
January 30, 2008 March 18, 2008
October 8, 2008 October 29, 2008
Pick one of these dates and find out why it chose to change its target for the federal funds rate on that date.
13. The text notes that a 10% increase in the money supply may not increase the price level by 10% in the short run. Explain why.
14. Trace the impact of an expansionary monetary policy on bond prices, interest rates, investment, the exchange rate, net exports, real GDP, and the price level. Illustrate your analysis graphically.
15. Trace the impact of a contractionary monetary policy on bond prices, interest rates, investment, the exchange rate, net exports, real GDP, and the price level. Illustrate your analysis graphically.
Numerical Problems
1. Here are annual values for M2 and for nominal GDP (all figures are in billions of dollars) for the mid-1990s.
Year M2 Nominal GDP
1993 3,482.0 \$6,657.4
1994 3,498.1 7,072.2
1995 3,642.1 7,397.7
1996 3,820.5 7,816.9
1997 4,034.1 8,304.3
1. Compute the velocity for each year.
2. Compute the fraction of nominal GDP that was being held as money.
3. What is your conclusion about the stability of velocity in this five-year period?
2. Here are annual values for M2 and for nominal GDP (all figures are in billions of dollars) for the mid-2000s.
Year M2 Nominal GDP
2003 6,055.5 \$10,960.8
2004 6,400.7 11,685.9
2005 6,659.7 12,421.9
2006 7,012.3 13,178.4
2007 7,404.3 13,807.5
1. Compute the velocity for each year.
2. Compute the fraction of nominal GDP that was being held as money.
3. What is your conclusion about the stability of velocity in this five-year period?
3. The following data show M1 for the years 1993 to 1997, respectively (all figures are in billions of dollars): 1,129.6; 1,150.7; 1,127.4; 1,081.3; 1,072.5.
1. Compute the M1 velocity for these years. (Nominal GDP for these years is shown in problem 1.)
2. If you were going to use a money target, would M1 or M2 have been preferable during the 1990s? Explain your reasoning.
4. The following data show M1 for the years 2003 to 2007, respectively (all figures are in billions of dollars): 1,306.1; 1,376.3; 1,374.5; 1,366.5; 1,366.5
1. Compute the M1 velocity for these years. (Nominal GDP for these years is shown in problem 2.)
2. If you were going to use a money target, would M1 or M2 have been preferable during the 2000s? Explain your reasoning.
5. Assume a hypothetical economy in which the velocity is constant at 2 and real GDP is always at a constant potential of \$4,000. Suppose the money supply is \$1,000 in the first year, \$1,100 in the second year, \$1,200 in the third year, and \$1,300 in the fourth year.
1. Using the equation of exchange, compute the price level in each year.
2. Compute the inflation rate for each year.
3. Explain why inflation varies, even though the money supply rises by \$100 each year.
4. If the central bank wanted to keep inflation at zero, what should it have done to the money supply each year?
5. If the central bank wanted to keep inflation at 10% each year, what money supply should it have targeted in each year?
6. Suppose the velocity of money is constant and potential output grows by 3% per year. By what percentage should the money supply grow in order to achieve the following inflation rate targets?
1. 0%
2. 1%
3. 2%
7. Suppose the velocity of money is constant and potential output grows by 5% per year. For each of the following money supply growth rates, what will the inflation rate be?
1. 4%
2. 5%
3. 6%
8. Suppose that a country whose money supply grew by about 20% a year over the long run had an annual inflation rate of about 20% and that a country whose money supply grew by about 50% a year had an annual inflation rate of about 50%. Explain this finding in terms of the equation of exchange.
1Speech by Alan Greenspan before the Board of Directors of the National Association of Home Builders, January 28, 1995. | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_(LibreTexts)/11%3A_Monetary_Policy_and_the_Fed/11.4%3A_Review_and_Practice.txt |
Thumbnail: https://www.pexels.com/photo/american-flag-with-rolled-dollar-bills-4386346/
12: Government and Fiscal Policy
Learning Objective
1. Understand the major components of U.S. government spending and sources of government revenues.
2. Define the terms budget surplus, budget deficit, balanced budget, and national debt, and discuss their trends over time in the United States.
We begin our analysis of fiscal policy with an examination of government purchases, transfer payments, and taxes in the U.S. economy.
Government Purchases
The government-purchases component of aggregate demand includes all purchases by government agencies of goods and services produced by firms, as well as direct production by government agencies themselves. When the federal government buys staples and staplers, the transaction is part of government purchases. The production of educational and research services by public colleges and universities is also counted in the government-purchases component of GDP.
While government spending has grown over time, government purchases as a share of GDP generally declined from over 20% until the early 1990s to under 18% in 2001. Since then, though, the percentage of government purchases in GDP began to increase back toward 20%, first as military spending picked up and then more recently to over 20% during the 2007-2009 recession.
Figure 27.1 shows federal as well as state and local government purchases as a percentage of GDP from 1960 to 2009. Notice the changes that have occurred over this period. In 1960, the federal government accounted for the majority share of total purchases. Since then, however, federal purchases have fallen by almost half relative to GDP, while state and local purchases relative to GDP have risen.
Transfer Payments
A transfer payment is the provision of aid or money to an individual who is not required to provide anything in exchange. Social Security and welfare benefits are examples of transfer payments. During the 2007-2009 recession, transfers again rose.
A number of changes have influenced transfer payments over the past several decades. First, they increased rapidly during the late 1960s and early 1970s. This was the period in which federal programs such as Medicare (health insurance for the elderly) and Medicaid (health insurance for the poor) were created and other programs were expanded.
Figure 27.2 shows that transfer payment spending by the federal government and by state and local governments has risen as a percentage of GDP. In 1960, such spending totaled about 6% of GDP; by 2009, it had risen to about 18%. The federal government accounts for the bulk of transfer payment spending in the United States.
Transfer payment spending relative to GDP tends to fluctuate with the business cycle. Transfer payments fell during the late 1970s, a period of expansion, then rose as the economy slipped into a recessionary gap during the 1979–1982 period. Transfer payments fell during the expansion that began late in 1982, then began rising in 1989 as the expansion began to slow. Transfer payments continued to rise relative to GDP during the recessions of 1990–1991 and 2001–2002 and then fell as the economy entered expansionary phases after each of those recessions. During the 2007—2009 recession, transfers again rose.
When economic activity falls, incomes fall, people lose jobs, and more people qualify for aid. People qualify to receive welfare benefits, such as cash, food stamps, or Medicaid, only if their income falls below a certain level. They qualify for unemployment compensation by losing their jobs. More people qualify for transfer payments during recessions. When the economy expands, incomes and employment rise, and fewer people qualify for welfare or unemployment benefits. Spending for those programs therefore tends to fall during an expansion.
Figure 27.3 summarizes trends in government spending since 1960. It shows three categories of government spending relative to GDP: government purchases, transfer payments, and net interest. Net interest includes payments of interest by governments at all levels on money borrowed, less interest earned on saving.
Taxes
Taxes affect the relationship between real GDP and personal disposable income; they therefore affect consumption. They also influence investment decisions. Taxes imposed on firms affect the profitability of investment decisions and therefore affect the levels of investment firms will choose. Payroll taxes imposed on firms affect the costs of hiring workers; they therefore have an impact on employment and on the real wages earned by workers.
The bulk of federal receipts come from the personal income tax and from payroll taxes. State and local tax receipts are dominated by property taxes and sales taxes. The federal government, as well as state and local governments, also collects taxes imposed on business firms, such as taxes on corporate profits. Figure 27.4 shows the composition of federal, state, and local receipts in a recent year.
The Government Budget Balance
The government’s budget balance is the difference between the government’s revenues and its expenditures. A budget surplus occurs if government revenues exceed expenditures. A budget deficit occurs if government expenditures exceed revenues. The minus sign is often omitted when reporting a deficit. If the budget surplus equals zero, we say the government has a balanced budget.
Figure 27.5 compares federal, state, and local government revenues to expenditures relative to GDP since 1960. The government’s budget was generally in surplus in the 1960s, then mostly in deficit since, except for a brief period between 1998 and 2001. Bear in mind that these data are for all levels of government.
The administration of George W. Bush saw a large increase in the federal deficit. In part, this is the result of the government’s response to the terrorist attacks in 2001. It also results, however, from large increases in federal spending at all levels together with tax cuts in 2001, 2002, and 2003. The federal deficit is projected to be even larger during the administration of Barack Obama.
The National Debt
The national debt is the sum of all past federal deficits, minus any surpluses. Figure 27.6 shows the national debt as a percentage of GDP. It suggests that, relative to the level of economic activity, the debt is well below the levels reached during World War II. The ratio of debt to GDP rose from 1981 to 1996 and fell in the last years of the 20th century; it began rising again in 2002.
Judged by international standards, the U.S. national debt relative to its GDP is somewhat above average among developed nations. Figure 27.7 shows national debt as a percentage of GDP for 26 countries in 2008. It also shows deficits or surpluses as a percentage of GDP.
Key Takeaways
• Over the last 50 years, government purchases fell from about 20% of U.S. GDP to below 20%, but have been rising over the last decade.
• Transfer payment spending has risen sharply, both in absolute terms and as a percentage of real GDP since 1960.
• The bulk of federal revenues comes from income and payroll taxes. State and local revenues consist primarily of sales and property taxes.
• The government budget balance is the difference between government revenues and government expenditures.
• The national debt is the sum of all past federal deficits minus any surpluses.
Try It!
What happens to the national debt when there is a budget surplus? What happens to it when there is a budget deficit? What happens to the national debt if there is a decrease in a surplus? What happens to it if the deficit falls?
Case in Point: Generational Accounting
Figure 27.8
Kevin Krejci – Our National Debt – CC BY 2.0.
One method of assessing the degree to which current fiscal policies affect future generations is through a device introduced in the early 1990s called generational accounting. It measures the impact of current fiscal policies on different generations in the economy, including future generations. Generational accounting is now practiced by governments in many countries, including the United States and the European Union.
As populations age, the burden of current fiscal policy is increasingly borne by younger people in the population. In most countries, economists computing generational accounts have found that people age 40 or below will pay more in taxes than they receive in transfer payments, while those age 60 or above will receive more in transfers than they pay in taxes. The differences are huge. According to a recent study by Jagadeesh Gokhale, summarized in the table below, in 2004 in the United States, a male age 30 could expect to pay \$201,300 more than he receives in government transfers during his lifetime, while another male age 75 could expect to receive \$171,100 more in transfers than he paid in taxes during his lifetime. That is a difference of \$372,400! For future generations, those born after the year 2004, the difference is even more staggering. A male born after the year 2005 can expect to pay \$332,200 more in taxes than he will receive in transfer payments. For a woman, the differences are also large but not as great. A woman age 30 in 2004 could expect to pay \$30,200 more in taxes than she will receive in transfers during her lifetime, while a woman age 75 could expect to receive transfers of \$184,100 in excess of her lifetime tax burden.
The table below gives generational accounting estimates for the United States for the year 2004 for males and females. Notice that the net burden on females is much lower than for males. That is because women live longer than men and thus receive Social Security and Medicare benefits over a longer period of time. Women also have lower labor force participation rates and earn less than men, and pay lower taxes as a result.
Table 27.1 Generational Accounts for the United States (thousands of 2004 dollars)
Year of birth Age in 2004 Male Female
2005 (future born) −1 333.2 26.0
2004 (newborn) 0 104.3 8.1
1989 15 185.7 42.0
1974 30 201.3 30.2
1959 45 67.8 −54.1
1944 60 −162.6 −189.4
1929 75 −171.1 −184.1
1914 90 −65.0 −69.2
Generational accounting has its critics—for example, the table above only measures direct taxes and transfers but omits benefits from government spending on public goods and services. In addition, government spending programs can be modified, which would alter the impact on future generations. Nonetheless, it does help to focus attention on the sustainability of current fiscal policies. Can future generations pay for Social Security, Medicare, and other retirement and health care spending as currently configured? Should they be asked to do so?
Answer to Try It! Problem
A budget surplus leads to a decline in national debt; a budget deficit causes the national debt to grow. If there is a decrease in a budget surplus, national debt still declines but by less than it would have had the surplus not gotten smaller. If there is a decrease in the budget deficit, the national debt still grows, but by less than it would have if the deficit had not gotten smaller. | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_(LibreTexts)/12%3A_Government_and_Fiscal_Policy/12.1%3A_Government_and_the_Economy.txt |
Learning Objective
1. Define automatic stabilizers and explain how they work.
2. Explain and illustrate graphically how discretionary fiscal policy works and compare the changes in aggregate demand that result from changes in government purchases, income taxes, and transfer payments.
Fiscal policy—the use of government expenditures and taxes to influence the level of economic activity—is the government counterpart to monetary policy. Like monetary policy, it can be used in an effort to close a recessionary or an inflationary gap.
Some tax and expenditure programs change automatically with the level of economic activity. We will examine these first. Then we will look at how discretionary fiscal policies work. Four examples of discretionary fiscal policy choices were the tax cuts introduced by the Kennedy, Reagan, and George W. Bush administrations and the increase in government purchases proposed by President Clinton in 1993. The 2009 fiscal stimulus bill passed in the first months of the administration of Barack Obama included both tax cuts and spending increases. All were designed to stimulate aggregate demand and close recessionary gaps.
Automatic Stabilizers
Certain government expenditure and taxation policies tend to insulate individuals from the impact of shocks to the economy. Transfer payments have this effect. Because more people become eligible for income supplements when income is falling, transfer payments reduce the effect of a change in real GDP on disposable personal income and thus help to insulate households from the impact of the change. Income taxes also have this effect. As incomes fall, people pay less in income taxes.
Any government program that tends to reduce fluctuations in GDP automatically is called an automatic stabilizer. Automatic stabilizers tend to increase GDP when it is falling and reduce GDP when it is rising.
To see how automatic stabilizers work, consider the decline in real GDP that occurred during the recession of 1990–1991. Real GDP fell 1.6% from the peak to the trough of that recession. The reduction in economic activity automatically reduced tax payments, reducing the impact of the downturn on disposable personal income. Furthermore, the reduction in incomes increased transfer payment spending, boosting disposable personal income further. Real disposable personal income thus fell by only 0.9% during the 1990—1991 recession, a much smaller percentage than the reduction in real GDP. Rising transfer payments and falling tax collections helped cushion households from the impact of the recession and kept real GDP from falling as much as it would have otherwise.
Automatic stabilizers have emerged as key elements of fiscal policy. Increases in income tax rates and unemployment benefits have enhanced their importance as automatic stabilizers. The introduction in the 1960s and 1970s of means-tested federal transfer payments, in which individuals qualify depending on their income, added to the nation’s arsenal of automatic stabilizers. The advantage of automatic stabilizers is suggested by their name. As soon as income starts to change, they go to work. Because they affect disposable personal income directly, and because changes in disposable personal income are closely linked to changes in consumption, automatic stabilizers act swiftly to reduce the degree of changes in real GDP.
It is important to note that changes in expenditures and taxes that occur through automatic stabilizers do not shift the aggregate demand curve. Because they are automatic, their operation is already incorporated in the curve itself.
Discretionary Fiscal Policy Tools
As we begin to look at deliberate government efforts to stabilize the economy through fiscal policy choices, we note that most of the government’s taxing and spending is for purposes other than economic stabilization. For example, the increase in defense spending in the early 1980s under President Ronald Reagan and in the administration of George W. Bush were undertaken primarily to promote national security. That the increased spending affected real GDP and employment was a by-product. The effect of such changes on real GDP and the price level is secondary, but it cannot be ignored. Our focus here, however, is on discretionary fiscal policy that is undertaken with the intention of stabilizing the economy. As we have seen, the tax cuts introduced by the Bush administration were justified as expansionary measures.
Discretionary government spending and tax policies can be used to shift aggregate demand. Expansionary fiscal policy might consist of an increase in government purchases or transfer payments, a reduction in taxes, or a combination of these tools to shift the aggregate demand curve to the right. A contractionary fiscal policy might involve a reduction in government purchases or transfer payments, an increase in taxes, or a mix of all three to shift the aggregate demand curve to the left.
Figure 27.9 illustrates the use of fiscal policy to shift aggregate demand in response to a recessionary gap and an inflationary gap. In Panel (a), the economy produces a real GDP of Y1, which is below its potential level of Yp. An expansionary fiscal policy seeks to shift aggregate demand to AD2 in order to close the gap. In Panel (b), the economy initially has an inflationary gap at Y1. A contractionary fiscal policy seeks to reduce aggregate demand to AD2 and close the gap. Now we shall look at how specific fiscal policy options work. In our preliminary analysis of the effects of fiscal policy on the economy, we will assume that at a given price level these policies do not affect interest rates or exchange rates. We will relax that assumption later in the chapter.
Changes in Government Purchases
One policy through which the government could seek to shift the aggregate demand curve is a change in government purchases. We learned that the aggregate demand curve shifts to the right by an amount equal to the initial change in government purchases times the multiplier. This multiplied effect of a change in government purchases occurs because the increase in government purchases increases income, which in turn increases consumption. Then, part of the impact of the increase in aggregate demand is absorbed by higher prices, preventing the full increase in real GDP that would have occurred if the price level did not rise.
Figure 27.10 shows the effect of an increase in government purchases of \$200 billion. The initial price level is P1 and the initial equilibrium real GDP is \$12,000 billion. Suppose the multiplier is 2. The \$200 billion increase in government purchases increases the total quantity of goods and services demanded, at a price level of P1, by \$400 billion (the \$200 billion increase in government purchases times the multiplier) to \$12,400 billion. The aggregate demand thus shifts to the right by that amount to AD2. The equilibrium level of real GDP rises to \$12,300 billion, and the price level rises to P2.
A reduction in government purchases would have the opposite effect. The aggregate demand curve would shift to the left by an amount equal to the initial change in government purchases times the multiplier. Real GDP and the price level would fall.
Changes in Business Taxes
One of the first fiscal policy measures undertaken by the Kennedy administration in the 1960s was an investment tax credit. An investment tax credit allows a firm to reduce its tax liability by a percentage of the investment it undertakes during a particular period. With an investment tax credit of 10%, for example, a firm that engaged in \$1 million worth of investment during a year could reduce its tax liability for that year by \$100,000. The investment tax credit introduced by the Kennedy administration was later repealed. It was reintroduced during the Reagan administration in 1981, then abolished by the Tax Reform Act of 1986. President Clinton called for a new investment tax credit in 1993 as part of his job stimulus proposal, but that proposal was rejected by Congress. The Bush administration reinstated the investment tax credit as part of its tax cut package.
An investment tax credit is intended, of course, to stimulate additional private sector investment. A reduction in the tax rate on corporate profits would be likely to have a similar effect. Conversely, an increase in the corporate income tax rate or a reduction in an investment tax credit could be expected to reduce investment.
A change in investment affects the aggregate demand curve in precisely the same manner as a change in government purchases. It shifts the aggregate demand curve by an amount equal to the initial change in investment times the multiplier.
An increase in the investment tax credit, or a reduction in corporate income tax rates, will increase investment and shift the aggregate demand curve to the right. Real GDP and the price level will rise. A reduction in the investment tax credit, or an increase in corporate income tax rates, will reduce investment and shift the aggregate demand curve to the left. Real GDP and the price level will fall1.
Changes in Income Taxes
Income taxes affect the consumption component of aggregate demand. An increase in income taxes reduces disposable personal income and thus reduces consumption (but by less than the change in disposable personal income). That shifts the aggregate demand curve leftward by an amount equal to the initial change in consumption that the change in income taxes produces times the multiplier2. A reduction in income taxes increases disposable personal income, increases consumption (but by less than the change in disposable personal income), and increases aggregate demand.
Suppose, for example, that income taxes are reduced by \$200 billion. Only some of the increase in disposable personal income will be used for consumption and the rest will be saved. Suppose the initial increase in consumption is \$180 billion. Then the shift in the aggregate demand curve will be a multiple of \$180 billion; if the multiplier is 2, aggregate demand will shift to the right by \$360 billion. Thus, as compared to the \$200-billion increase in government purchases that we saw in Figure 27.10, the shift in the aggregate demand curve due to an income tax cut is somewhat less, as is the effect on real GDP and the price level.
Changes in Transfer Payments
Changes in transfer payments, like changes in income taxes, alter the disposable personal income of households and thus affect their consumption, which is a component of aggregate demand. A change in transfer payments will thus shift the aggregate demand curve because it will affect consumption. Because consumption will change by less than the change in disposable personal income, a change in transfer payments of some amount will result in a smaller change in real GDP than would a change in government purchases of the same amount. As with income taxes, a \$200-billion increase in transfer payments will shift the aggregate demand curve to the right by less than the \$200-billion increase in government purchases that we saw in Figure 27.10.
Table 27.2 “Fiscal Policy in the United States Since 1964” summarizes U.S. fiscal policies undertaken to shift aggregate demand since the 1964 tax cuts. We see that expansionary policies have been chosen in response to recessionary gaps and that contractionary policies have been chosen in response to inflationary gaps. Changes in government purchases and in taxes have been the primary tools of fiscal policy in the United States.
Table 27.2 Fiscal Policy in the United States Since 1964
Year Situation Policy response
1968 Inflationary gap A temporary tax increase, first recommended by President Johnson’s Council of Economic Advisers in 1965, goes into effect. This one-time surcharge of 10% is added to individual income tax liabilities.
1969 Inflationary gap President Nixon, facing a continued inflationary gap, orders cuts in government purchases.
1975 Recessionary gap President Ford, facing a recession induced by an OPEC oil-price increase, proposes a temporary 10% tax cut. It is passed almost immediately and goes into effect within two months.
1981 Recessionary gap President Reagan had campaigned on a platform of increased defense spending and a sharp cut in income taxes. The tax cuts are approved in 1981 and are implemented over a period of three years. The increased defense spending begins in 1981. While the Reagan administration rejects the use of fiscal policy as a stabilization tool, its policies tend to increase aggregate demand early in the 1980s.
1992 Recessionary gap President Bush had rejected the use of expansionary fiscal policy during the recession of 1990–1991. Indeed, he agreed late in 1990 to a cut in government purchases and a tax increase. In a campaign year, however, he orders a cut in withholding rates designed to increase disposable personal income in 1992 and to boost consumption.
1993 Recessionary gap President Clinton calls for a \$16-billion jobs package consisting of increased government purchases and tax cuts aimed at stimulating investment. The president says the plan will create 500,000 new jobs. The measure is rejected by Congress.
2001 Recessionary gap President Bush campaigned to reduce taxes in order to reduce the size of government and encourage long-term growth. When he took office in 2001, the economy was weak and the \$1.35-billion tax cut was aimed at both long-term tax relief and at stimulating the economy in the short term. It included, for example, a personal income tax rebate of \$300 to \$600 per household. With unemployment still high a couple of years into the expansion, another tax cut was passed in 2003.
2008 Recessionary gap Fiscal stimulus package of \$150 billion to spur economy. It included \$100 billion in tax rebates and \$50 in tax cuts for businesses.
2009 Recessionary gap Fiscal stimulus package of \$787 billion included tax cuts and increased government spending passed in early days of President Obama’s administration.
Key Takeaways
• Discretionary fiscal policy may be either expansionary or contractionary.
• A change in government purchases shifts the aggregate demand curve at a given price level by an amount equal to the initial change in government purchases times the multiplier. The change in real GDP, however, will be reduced by the fact that the price level will change.
• A change in income taxes or government transfer payments shifts the aggregate demand curve by a multiple of the initial change in consumption (which is less than the change in personal disposable income) that the change in income taxes or transfer payments causes. Then, the change in real GDP will be reduced by the fact that the price level will change.
• A change in government purchases has a larger impact on the aggregate demand curve than does an equal change in income taxes or transfers.
• Changes in business tax rates, including an investment tax credit, can be used to influence the level of investment and thus the level of aggregate demand.
Try It!
Suppose the economy has an inflationary gap. What fiscal policies might be used to close the gap? Using the model of aggregate demand and aggregate supply, illustrate the effect of these policies.
Case in Point: Post–World War II Experiences with Fiscal Policy in the United States
Figure 27.11
Commonwealth Club – Christina Romer – CC BY 2.0.
Christina Romer, tapped by Barack Obama to head the Council of Economic Advisers, has a long history of writing on economic history. Much of her work focuses on the macroeconomic performance of the United States economy over the past 100-plus years and hence also involves painstaking work to construct historical data series.
One such study titled “Changes in Business Cycles: Evidence and Explanations” draws on a number of her research efforts to compare economic fluctuations before World War I to those after World War II in order to see if the advent of macroeconomic stabilization policy has affected macroeconomic performance. After first showing that macroeconomic performance has not improved as markedly as we might think (excluding the interwar period when “all hell broke loose in the American economy”), she does conclude that monetary and fiscal policies to influence aggregate demand since World War II have “served to dampen many recessions and counteract some shocks entirely.”
She notes that before World War I, changes in macroeconomic policy could not have affected economic performance, because the government was simply too small, with, for example, government spending as a percent of GNP averaging between 1.5% and 2.5% between 1901 and 1916. During that period, the government did operate under specified monetary standards and banking regulations, but the Federal Reserve was not created until 1914, so there was no monetary institution to respond to macroeconomic instability. Thus, macroeconomic policy can truly be seen as a post–World War II phenomenon.
Germaine to the focus on fiscal policy in this chapter, Romer found that discretionary fiscal policy after World War II contributed 0.5 percentage points to the rate of growth of real GDP in years following the troughs of recessions, while automatic stabilizers contributed 0.85 percentage points. Adding in the average contribution of monetary policy of 1.5 percentage points, macroeconomic policy in total contributed 2.85 percentage points to the average actual growth of GDP in the years following troughs of 4.6%. She also concluded that macroeconomic policies likely prevented some recessions or near-recessions. For example, automatic stabilizers muted fluctuations in years of extreme changes in GDP, up or down, by 1 to 2 percentage points in absolute value and fluctuations in years of moderate changes in GDP by about 0.5 percentage points in absolute value.
Especially in light of the active use of both monetary and fiscal policies to counter the recession that began in December 2007, she also found that there has been a rise in policy-induced recessions and that this phenomenon explains both why output and other macroeconomic variables have not been more stable in the past half-century and why post–World War II business cycles have been in the moderate range. In particular, she argues that the Fed has generally been too expansionary when the economy was growing, which has led to inflation. Then the Fed has used contractionary policy to reduce inflation. She concludes, “In essence, we have replaced the prewar boom-bust cycle driven by animal spirits and financial panics with the postwar boom-bust cycle driven by policy.”
Answer to Try It! Problem
Fiscal policies that could be used to close an inflationary gap include reductions in government purchases and transfer payments and increases in taxes. As shown in Panel (b) of Figure 27.9, the goal would be to shift the aggregate demand curve to the left so that it will intersect the short-run aggregate supply curve at YP.
1Investment also affects the long-run aggregate supply curve, since a change in the capital stock changes the potential level of real GDP. We examined this earlier in the chapter on economic growth.
2A change in tax rates will change the value of the multiplier. The reason is explained in another chapter. | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_(LibreTexts)/12%3A_Government_and_Fiscal_Policy/12.2%3A_The_Use_of_Fiscal_Policy_to_Stabilize_the_Economy.txt |
Learning Objective
1. Explain how the various kinds of lags influence the effectiveness of discretionary fiscal policy.
2. Explain and illustrate graphically how crowding out (and its reverse) influences the impact of expansionary or contractionary fiscal policy.
3. Discuss the controversy concerning which types of fiscal policies to use, including the arguments from supply-side economics.
The discussion in the previous section about the use of fiscal policy to close gaps suggests that economies can be easily stabilized by government actions to shift the aggregate demand curve. However, as we discovered with monetary policy in the previous chapter, government attempts at stabilization are fraught with difficulties.
Lags
Discretionary fiscal policy is subject to the same lags that we discussed for monetary policy. It takes some time for policy makers to realize that a recessionary or an inflationary gap exists—the recognition lag. Recognition lags stem largely from the difficulty of collecting economic data in a timely and accurate fashion. The current recession was not identified until October 2008, when the Business Cycle Dating Committee of the National Bureau of Economic Research announced that it had begun in December 2007. Then, more time elapses before a fiscal policy, such as a change in government purchases or a change in taxes, is agreed to and put into effect—the implementation lag. Finally, still more time goes by before the policy has its full effect on aggregate demand—the impact lag.
Changes in fiscal policy are likely to involve a particularly long implementation lag. A tax cut was proposed to presidential candidate John F. Kennedy in 1960 as a means of ending the recession that year. He recommended it to Congress in 1962. It was not passed until 1964, three years after the recession had ended. Some economists have concluded that the long implementation lag for discretionary fiscal policy makes this stabilization tool ineffective. Fortunately, automatic stabilizers respond automatically to changes in the economy. They thus avoid not only the implementation lag but also the recognition lag.
The implementation lag results partly from the nature of bureaucracy itself. The CBO estimate that only a portion of the spending for the stimulus plan passed in 2009 will be spent in the next two years is an example of the implementation lag. Government spending requires bureaucratic approval of that spending. For example, a portion of the stimulus plan must go through the Department of Energy. One division of the department focuses on approving loan guarantees for energy-saving industrial projects. It was created early in 2007 as part of another effort to stimulate economic activity. A Minnesota company, Sage Electrochromics, has developed a process for producing windows that can be darkened or lightened on demand to reduce energy use in buildings. Sage applied two years ago for a guarantee on a loan of \$66 million to build a plant that would employ 250 workers. Its application has not been approved. In fact, the loan approval division, which will be crucial for projects in the stimulus plan, has never approved any application made to it in its two years in existence!
Energy Secretary Steven Chu, a Nobel Prize-winning physicist, recognizes the urgency of the problem. In an interview with the Wall Street Journal, Dr. Chu said that his agency would have to do better. “Otherwise, it’s just going to be a bust,” he said (Power & King Jr., 2009).
Crowding Out
Because an expansionary fiscal policy either increases government spending or reduces revenues, it increases the government budget deficit or reduces the surplus. A contractionary policy is likely to reduce a deficit or increase a surplus. In either case, fiscal policy thus affects the bond market. Our analysis of monetary policy showed that developments in the bond market can affect investment and net exports. We shall find in this section that the same is true for fiscal policy.
Figure 27.12 shows the impact of an expansionary fiscal policy: an increase in government purchases. The increase in government purchases increases the deficit or reduces the surplus. In either case, the Treasury will sell more bonds than it would have otherwise, shifting the supply curve for bonds to the right in Panel (a). That reduces the price of bonds, raising the interest rate. The increase in the interest rate reduces the quantity of private investment demanded. The higher interest rate increases the demand for and reduces the supply of dollars in the foreign exchange market, raising the exchange rate in Panel (b). A higher exchange rate reduces net exports. Panel (c) shows the effects of all these changes on the aggregate demand curve. Before the change in government purchases, the economy is in equilibrium at a real GDP of Y1, determined by the intersection of AD1 and the short-run aggregate supply curve. The increase in government expenditures would shift the curve outward to AD2 if there were no adverse impact on investment and net exports. But the reduction in investment and net exports partially offsets this increase. Taking the reduction in investment and net exports into account means that the aggregate demand curve shifts only to AD3. The tendency for an expansionary fiscal policy to reduce other components of aggregate demand is called crowding out. In the short run, this policy leads to an increase in real GDP to Y2 and a higher price level, P2.
Crowding out reduces the effectiveness of any expansionary fiscal policy, whether it be an increase in government purchases, an increase in transfer payments, or a reduction in income taxes. Each of these policies increases the deficit and thus increases government borrowing. The supply of bonds increases, interest rates rise, investment falls, the exchange rate rises, and net exports fall.
Note, however, that it is private investment that is crowded out. The expansionary fiscal policy could take the form of an increase in the investment component of government purchases. As we have learned, some government purchases are for goods, such as office supplies, and services. But the government can also purchase investment items, such as roads and schools. In that case, government investment may be crowding out private investment.
The reverse of crowding out occurs with a contractionary fiscal policy—a cut in government purchases or transfer payments, or an increase in taxes. Such policies reduce the deficit (or increase the surplus) and thus reduce government borrowing, shifting the supply curve for bonds to the left. Interest rates drop, inducing a greater quantity of investment. Lower interest rates also reduce the demand for and increase the supply of dollars, lowering the exchange rate and boosting net exports. This phenomenon is known as “crowding in.”
Crowding out and crowding in clearly weaken the impact of fiscal policy. An expansionary fiscal policy has less punch; a contractionary policy puts less of a damper on economic activity. Some economists argue that these forces are so powerful that a change in fiscal policy will have no effect on aggregate demand. Because empirical studies have been inconclusive, the extent of crowding out (and its reverse) remains a very controversial area of study.
Also, the fact that government deficits today may reduce the capital stock that would otherwise be available to future generations does not imply that such deficits are wrong. If, for example, the deficits are used to finance public sector investment, then the reduction in private capital provided to the future is offset by the increased provision of public sector capital. Future generations may have fewer office buildings but more schools.
Choice of Policy
Suppose Congress and the president agree that something needs to be done to close a recessionary gap. We have learned that fiscal policies that increase government purchases, reduce taxes, or increase transfer payments—or do a combination of these—all have the potential, theoretically, to raise real GDP. The government must decide which kind of fiscal policy to employ. Because the decision makers who determine fiscal policy are all elected politicians, the choice among the policy options available is an intensely political matter, often reflecting the ideology of the politicians.
For example, those who believe that government is too big would argue for tax cuts to close recessionary gaps and for spending cuts to close inflationary gaps. Those who believe that the private sector has failed to provide adequately a host of services that would benefit society, such as better education or public transportation systems, tend to advocate increases in government purchases to close recessionary gaps and tax increases to close inflationary gaps.
Another area of contention comes from those who believe that fiscal policy should be constructed primarily so as to promote long-term growth. Supply-side economics is the school of thought that promotes the use of fiscal policy to stimulate long-run aggregate supply. Supply-side economists advocate reducing tax rates in order to encourage people to work more or more individuals to work and providing investment tax credits to stimulate capital formation.
While there is considerable debate over how strong the supply-side effects are in relation to the demand-side effects, such considerations may affect the choice of policies. Supply-siders tend to favor tax cuts over increases in government purchases or increases in transfer payments. President Reagan advocated tax cuts in 1981 on the basis of their supply-side effects. Coupled with increased defense spending in the early 1980s, fiscal policy under Mr. Reagan clearly stimulated aggregate demand by increasing both consumption and investment. Falling inflation and accelerated growth are signs that supply-side factors may also have been at work during that period. President George W. Bush’s chief economic adviser, N. Gregory Mankiw, argued that the Bush tax cuts would encourage economic growth, a supply-side argument. Mr. Bush’s next chief economic adviser, Ben Bernanke, who became the next chairman of the Federal Reserve Board in 2006, made a similar argument and urged that the Bush tax cuts be made permanent.
Finally, even when there is agreement to stimulate the economy, say through increasing government expenditures on highways, the how question remains. How should the expenditures be allocated? Specifically, which states should the highways run through? Each member of Congress has a political stake in the outcome. These types of considerations make the implementation lag particularly long for fiscal policy.
Key Takeaways
• Discretionary fiscal policy involves the same kind of lags as monetary policy. However, the implementation lag in fiscal policy is likely to be more pronounced, while the impact lag is likely to be less pronounced.
• Expansionary fiscal policy may result in the crowding out of private investment and net exports, reducing the impact of the policy. Similarly, contractionary policy may “crowd in” additional investment and net exports, reducing the contractionary impact of the policy.
• Supply-side economics stresses the use of fiscal policy to stimulate economic growth. Advocates of supply-side economics generally favor tax cuts to stimulate economic growth.
Try It!
Do the following hypothetical situations tend to enhance or make more difficult the use of fiscal policy as a stabilization tool?
1. Better and more speedily available data on the state of the economy
2. A finding that private sector investment spending is not much affected by interest rate changes
3. A finding that the supply-side effects of a tax cut are substantial
Case in Point: Crowding Out in Canada
Figure 27.13
Moni cah – canadian dollars – CC BY-NC-ND 2.0.
In an intriguing study, economist Baotai Wang examined the degree of crowding out of Canadian private investment as a result of government expenditures from 1961–2000. What made Professor Wang’s analysis unusual was that he divided Canadian government expenditures into five categories: expenditures for health and education, expenditures for capital and infrastructure, expenditures for the protection of persons and property (which included defense spending), expenditures for debt services, and expenditures for government and social services.
Mr. Wang found that only government expenditures for capital and infrastructure crowded out private investment. While these expenditures reduced private investment, they represented increased public sector investment for things such as highways and ports.
Expenditures for health and education actually “crowded in” private sector investment. These expenditures, Mr. Wang argued, represented increases in human capital. Such increases complement returns on private sector investment and therefore increase it.
Mr. Wang found that Canadian government expenditures for debt service, the protection of persons and property, and for government and social services had no effect on private sector investment. He argued that expenditures for protection of persons and property may involve some crowding out, but that they also stimulated private investment by firms winning government contracts for defense purchases. The same explanation could be applied to government expenditures for government and social services. These also include an element of investment in human capital.
His results suggest that crowding out depends on the nature of spending done by the government. Some kinds of spending clearly did not crowd out private sector investment in Canada.
Answers to Try It! Problems
1. Data on the economy that are more accurate and more speedily available should enhance the use of fiscal policy by reducing the length of the recognition lag.
2. If private sector investment does not respond much to interest rate changes, then there will be less crowding out when expansionary policies are undertaken. That is, the rising interest rates that accompany expansionary fiscal policy will not reduce investment spending much, making the shift in the aggregate demand curve to the right greater than it would be otherwise. Also, the use of contractionary fiscal policy would be more effective, since the fall in interest rates would “invite in” less investment spending, making the shift in the aggregate demand curve to the left greater than it would otherwise be.
3. Large supply-side effects enhance the impact of tax cuts. For a given expansionary policy, without the supply-side effects, GDP would advance only to the point where the aggregate demand curve intersects the short-run aggregate supply curve. With the supply-side effects, both the short-run and long-run aggregate supply curves shift to the right. The intersection of the AD curve with the now increased short-run aggregate supply curve will be farther to the right than it would have been in the absence of the supply-side effects. The potential level of real GDP will also increase. | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_(LibreTexts)/12%3A_Government_and_Fiscal_Policy/12.3%3A_Issues_in_Fiscal_Policy.txt |
Summary
The government sector plays a major role in the economy. The spending, tax, and transfer policies of local, state, and federal agencies affect aggregate demand and aggregate supply and thus affect the level of real GDP and the price level. An expansionary policy tends to increase real GDP. Such a policy could be used to close a recessionary gap. A contractionary fiscal policy tends to reduce real GDP. A contractionary policy could be used to close an inflationary gap.
Government purchases of goods and services have a direct impact on aggregate demand. An increase in government purchases shifts the aggregate demand curve by the amount of the initial change in government purchases times the multiplier. Changes in personal income taxes or in the level of transfer payments affect disposable personal income. They change consumption, though initially by less than the amount of the change in taxes or transfers. They thus cause somewhat smaller shifts in the aggregate demand curve than do equal changes in government purchases.
There are several issues in the use of fiscal policies for stabilization purposes. They include lags associated with fiscal policy, crowding out, the choice of which fiscal policy tool to use, and the possible burdens of accumulating national debt.
Concept Problems
1. What is the difference between government expenditures and government purchases? How do the two variables differ in terms of their effect on GDP?
2. Federally funded student aid programs generally reduce benefits by \$1 for every \$1 that recipients earn. Do such programs represent government purchases or transfer payments? Are they automatic stabilizers?
3. Crowding out reduces the degree to which a change in government purchases influences the level of economic activity. Is it a form of automatic stabilizer?
4. The Case in Point on fiscal policy before World War I and after World War II mentions the idea of policy-induced recessions. Explain how this notion relates to the difficulties discussed in the text of using discretionary policy to stabilize the economy.
5. Suppose an economy has an inflationary gap. How does the government’s actual budget deficit or surplus compare to the deficit or surplus it would have at potential output?
6. Suppose the president were given the authority to increase or decrease federal spending by as much as \$100 billion in order to stabilize economic activity. Do you think this would tend to make the economy more or less stable?
7. Suppose the government increases purchases in an economy with a recessionary gap. How would this policy affect bond prices, interest rates, investment, net exports, real GDP, and the price level? Show your results graphically.
8. Suppose the government cuts transfer payments in an economy with an inflationary gap. How would this policy affect bond prices, interest rates, investment, the exchange rate, net exports, real GDP, and the price level? Show your results graphically.
9. Suppose that at the same time the government undertakes expansionary fiscal policy, such as a cut in taxes, the Fed undertakes contractionary monetary policy. How would this policy affect bond prices, interest rates, investment, net exports, real GDP, and the price level? Show your results graphically.
10. Given the nature of the implementation lag discussed in the text, discuss possible measures that might reduce the lag.
Numerical Problems
1. Look up the table on Federal Receipts and Outlays, by Major Category, in the most recent Economic Report of the President available in your library or on the Internet.
1. Complete the following table:
Category Total outlays Percentage of total outlays
National defense
International affairs
Health
Medicare
Income security
Social Security
Net interest
Other
2. Construct a pie chart showing the percentages of spending for each category in the total.
2. Look up the table on ownership of U.S. Treasury securities in the most recent Economic Report of the President available in your library or on the Internet.
1. Make a pie chart showing the percentage owned by various groups in the earliest year shown in the table.
2. Make a pie chart showing the percentage owned by various groups in the most recent year shown in the table.
3. What are some of the major changes in ownership of U.S. government debt over the period?
3. Suppose a country has a national debt of \$5,000 billion, a GDP of \$10,000 billion, and a budget deficit of \$100 billion.
1. How much will its new national debt be?
2. Compute its debt-GDP ratio.
3. Suppose its GDP grows by 1% in the next year and the budget deficit is again \$100 billion. Compute its new level of national debt and its new debt-GDP ratio.
4. Suppose a country’s debt rises by 10% and its GDP rises by 12%.
1. What happens to the debt-GDP ratio?
2. Does the relative level of the initial values affect your answer?
5. The data below show a country’s national debt and its prime lending rate.
Year National debt (billions of \$) Lending rate (%)
1992 4,064 6.0
1993 4,411 6.0
1994 4,692 8.5
1995 4,973 8.7
1996 5,224 8.3
1997 5,413 8.5
1. Plot the relationship between national debt and the lending rate.
2. Based on your graph, does crowding out appear to be a problem?
6. Suppose a country increases government purchases by \$100 billion. Suppose the multiplier is 1.5 and the economy’s real GDP is \$5,000 billion.
1. In which direction will the aggregate demand curve shift and by how much?
2. Explain using a graph why the change in real GDP is likely to be smaller than the shift in the aggregate demand curve.
7. Suppose a country decreases government purchases by \$100 billion. Suppose the multiplier is 1.5 and the economy’s real GDP is \$5,000 billion.
1. In which direction will the aggregate demand curve shift and by how much?
2. Explain using a graph why the change in real GDP is likely to be smaller than the shift in the aggregate demand curve.
8. Suppose a country decreases income taxes by \$100 billion, and this leads to an increase in consumption spending of \$90 billion. Suppose the multiplier is 1.5 and the economy’s real GDP is \$5,000 billion.
1. In which direction will the aggregate demand curve shift and by how much?
2. Explain using a graph why the change in real GDP is likely to be smaller than the shift in the aggregate demand curve.
9. Suppose a country increases income taxes by \$100 billion, and this leads to a decrease in consumption spending of \$90 billion. Suppose the multiplier is 1.5 and the economy’s real GDP is \$5,000 billion.
1. In which direction will the aggregate demand curve shift and by how much?
2. Explain using a graph why the change in real GDP is likely to be smaller than the shift in the aggregate demand curve.
10. Suppose a country institutes an investment tax credit, and this leads to an increase in investment spending of \$100 billion. Suppose the multiplier is 1.5 and the economy’s real GDP is \$5,000 billion.
1. In which direction will the aggregate demand curve shift and by how much?
2. Explain using a graph why the change in real GDP is likely to be smaller than the shift in the aggregate demand curve.
11. Suppose a country repeals an investment tax credit, and this leads to a decrease in investment spending of \$100 billion. Suppose the multiplier is 1.5 and the economy’s real GDP is \$5,000 billion.
1. In which direction will the aggregate demand curve shift and by how much?
2. Explain using a graph why the change in real GDP is likely to be smaller than the shift in the aggregate demand curve.
12. Explain why the shifts in the aggregate demand curves in questions 7 through 11 above are the same or different in absolute value. | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_(LibreTexts)/12%3A_Government_and_Fiscal_Policy/12.4%3A_Review_and_Practice.txt |
Thumbnail: https://pixabay.com/photos/arrow-money-bank-note-bills-3078564/
13: Consumption and the Aggregate Expenditures Model
Learning Objective
1. Explain and graph the consumption function and the saving function, explain what the slopes of these curves represent, and explain how the two are related to each other.
2. Compare the current income hypothesis with the permanent income hypothesis, and use each to predict the effect that temporary versus permanent changes in income will have on consumption.
3. Discuss two factors that can cause the consumption function to shift upward or downward.
J. R. McCulloch, an economist of the early nineteenth century, wrote, “Consumption … is, in fact, the object of industry” (Mc Culloch, 1824). Goods and services are produced so that people can use them. The factors that determine consumption thus determine how successful an economy is in fulfilling its ultimate purpose: providing goods and services for people. So, consumption is not just important because it is such a large component of economic activity. It is important because, as McCulloch said, consumption is at the heart of the economy’s fundamental purpose.
Consumption and Disposable Personal Income
It seems reasonable to expect that consumption spending by households will be closely related to their disposable personal income, which equals the income households receive less the taxes they pay. Note that disposable personal income and GDP are not the same thing. GDP is a measure of total income; disposable personal income is the income households have available to spend during a specified period.
Real values of disposable personal income and consumption per year from 1960 through 2010 are plotted in Figure 28.1. The data suggest that consumption generally changes in the same direction as does disposable personal income.
The relationship between consumption and disposable personal income is called the consumption function. It can be represented algebraically as an equation, as a schedule in a table, or as a curve on a graph.
Figure 28.2 illustrates the consumption function. The relationship between consumption and disposable personal income that we encountered in Figure 28.1 is evident in the table and in the curve: consumption in any period increases as disposable personal income increases in that period. The slope of the consumption function tells us by how much. Consider points C and D. When disposable personal income (Yd) rises by \$500 billion, consumption rises by \$400 billion. More generally, the slope equals the change in consumption divided by the change in disposable personal income. The ratio of the change in consumption (ΔC) to the change in disposable personal income (ΔYd) is the marginal propensity to consume (MPC). The Greek letter delta (Δ) is used to denote “change in.”
Equation 28.1
In this case, the marginal propensity to consume equals \$400/\$500 = 0.8. It can be interpreted as the fraction of an extra \$1 of disposable personal income that people spend on consumption. Thus, if a person with an MPC of 0.8 received an extra \$1,000 of disposable personal income, that person’s consumption would rise by \$0.80 for each extra \$1 of disposable personal income, or \$800.
We can also express the consumption function as an equation
Equation 28.2
Heads Up!
It is important to note carefully the definition of the marginal propensity to consume. It is the change in consumption divided by the change in disposable personal income. It is not the level of consumption divided by the level of disposable personal income. Using Equation 28.2, at a level of disposable personal income of \$500 billion, for example, the level of consumption will be \$700 billion so that the ratio of consumption to disposable personal income will be 1.4, while the marginal propensity to consume remains 0.8. The marginal propensity to consume is, as its name implies, a marginal concept. It tells us what will happen to an additional dollar of personal disposable income.
Notice from the curve in Figure 28.2 that when disposable personal income equals 0, consumption is \$300 billion. The vertical intercept of the consumption function is thus \$300 billion. Then, for every \$500 billion increase in disposable personal income, consumption rises by \$400 billion. Because the consumption function in our example is linear, its slope is the same between any two points. In this case, the slope of the consumption function, which is the same as the marginal propensity to consume, is 0.8 all along its length.
We can use the consumption function to show the relationship between personal saving and disposable personal income. Personal saving is disposable personal income not spent on consumption during a particular period; the value of personal saving for any period is found by subtracting consumption from disposable personal income for that period:
Equation 28.3
The saving function relates personal saving in any period to disposable personal income in that period. Personal saving is not the only form of saving—firms and government agencies may save as well. In this chapter, however, our focus is on the choice households make between using disposable personal income for consumption or for personal saving.
Figure 28.3 shows how the consumption function and the saving function are related. Personal saving is calculated by subtracting values for consumption from values for disposable personal income, as shown in the table. The values for personal saving are then plotted in the graph. Notice that a 45-degree line has been added to the graph. At every point on the 45-degree line, the value on the vertical axis equals that on the horizontal axis. The consumption function intersects the 45-degree line at an income of \$1,500 billion (point D). At this point, consumption equals disposable personal income and personal saving equals 0 (point D′ on the graph of personal saving). Using the graph to find personal saving at other levels of disposable personal income, we subtract the value of consumption, given by the consumption function, from disposable personal income, given by the 45-degree line.
At a disposable personal income of \$2,000 billion, for example, consumption is \$1,900 billion (point E). Personal saving equals \$100 billion (point E′)—the vertical distance between the 45-degree line and the consumption function. At an income of \$500 billion, consumption totals \$700 billion (point B). The consumption function lies above the 45-degree line at this point; personal saving is −\$200 billion (point B′). A negative value for saving means that consumption exceeds disposable personal income; it must have come from saving accumulated in the past, from selling assets, or from borrowing.
Notice that for every \$500 billion increase in disposable personal income, personal saving rises by \$100 billion. Consider points C′ and D′ in Figure 28.3. When disposable personal income rises by \$500 billion, personal saving rises by \$100 billion. More generally, the slope of the saving function equals the change in personal saving divided by the change in disposable personal income. The ratio of the change in personal saving (ΔS) to the change in disposable personal income (ΔYd) is the marginal propensity to save (MPS).
Equation 28.4
In this case, the marginal propensity to save equals \$100/\$500 = 0.2. It can be interpreted as the fraction of an extra \$1 of disposable personal income that people save. Thus, if a person with an MPS of 0.2 received an extra \$1,000 of disposable personal income, that person’s saving would rise by \$0.20 for each extra \$1 of disposable personal income, or \$200. Since people have only two choices of what to do with additional disposable personal income—that is, they can use it either for consumption or for personal saving—the fraction of disposable personal income that people consume (MPC) plus the fraction of disposable personal income that people save (MPS) must add to 1:
Equation 28.5
Current versus Permanent Income
The discussion so far has related consumption in a particular period to income in that same period. The current income hypothesis holds that consumption in any one period depends on income during that period, or current income.
Although it seems obvious that consumption should be related to disposable personal income, it is not so obvious that consumers base their consumption in any one period on the income they receive during that period. In buying a new car, for example, consumers might base their decision not only on their current income but on the income they expect to receive during the three or four years they expect to be making payments on the car. Parents who purchase a college education for their children might base their decision on their own expected lifetime income.
Indeed, it seems likely that virtually all consumption choices could be affected by expectations of income over a very long period. One reason people save is to provide funds to live on during their retirement years. Another is to build an estate they can leave to their heirs through bequests. The amount people save for their retirement or for bequests depends on the income they expect to receive for the rest of their lives. For these and other reasons, then, personal saving (and thus consumption) in any one year is influenced by permanent income. Permanent income is the average annual income people expect to receive for the rest of their lives.
People who have the same current income but different permanent incomes might reach very different saving decisions. Someone with a relatively low current income but a high permanent income (a college student planning to go to medical school, for example) might save little or nothing now, expecting to save for retirement and for bequests later. A person with the same low income but no expectation of higher income later might try to save some money now to provide for retirement or bequests later. Because a decision to save a certain amount determines how much will be available for consumption, consumption decisions can also be affected by expected lifetime income. Thus, an alternative approach to explaining consumption behavior is the permanent income hypothesis, which assumes that consumption in any period depends on permanent income. An important implication of the permanent income hypothesis is that a change in income regarded as temporary will not affect consumption much, since it will have little effect on average lifetime income; a change regarded as permanent will have an effect. The current income hypothesis, though, predicts that it does not matter whether consumers view a change in disposable personal income as permanent or temporary; they will move along the consumption function and change consumption accordingly.
The question of whether permanent or current income is a determinant of consumption arose in 1992 when President George H. W. Bush ordered a change in the withholding rate for personal income taxes. Workers have a fraction of their paychecks withheld for taxes each pay period; Mr. Bush directed that this fraction be reduced in 1992. The change in the withholding rate did not change income tax rates; by withholding less in 1992, taxpayers would either receive smaller refund checks in 1993 or owe more taxes. The change thus left taxpayers’ permanent income unaffected.
President Bush’s measure was designed to increase aggregate demand and close the recessionary gap created by the 1990–1991 recession. Economists who subscribed to the permanent income hypothesis predicted that the change would not have any effect on consumption. Those who subscribed to the current income hypothesis predicted that the measure would boost consumption substantially in 1992. A survey of households taken during this period suggested that households planned to spend about 43% of the temporary increase in disposable personal income produced by the withholding experiment (Shapiro & Slemrod, 1995). That is considerably less than would be predicted by the current income hypothesis, but more than the zero change predicted by the permanent income hypothesis. This result, together with related evidence, suggests that temporary changes in income can affect consumption, but that changes regarded as permanent will have a much stronger impact.
Many of the tax cuts passed during the administration of President George W. Bush are set to expire in 2010. The proposal to make these tax cuts permanent is aimed toward having a stronger impact on consumption, since tax cuts regarded as permanent have larger effects than do changes regarded as temporary.
Other Determinants of Consumption
The consumption function graphed in Figure 28.2 and Figure 28.3 relates consumption spending to the level of disposable personal income. Changes in disposable personal income cause movements along this curve; they do not shift the curve. The curve shifts when other determinants of consumption change. Examples of changes that could shift the consumption function are changes in real wealth and changes in expectations. Figure 28.4 illustrates how these changes can cause shifts in the curve.
Changes in Real Wealth
An increase in stock and bond prices, for example, would make holders of these assets wealthier, and they would be likely to increase their consumption. An increase in real wealth shifts the consumption function upward, as illustrated in Panel (a) of Figure 28.4. A reduction in real wealth shifts it downward, as shown in Panel (b).
A change in the price level changes real wealth. We learned in an earlier chapter that the relationship among the price level, real wealth, and consumption is called the wealth effect. A reduction in the price level increases real wealth and shifts the consumption function upward, as shown in Panel (a). An increase in the price level shifts the curve downward, as shown in Panel (b).
Changes in Expectations
Consumers are likely to be more willing to spend money when they are optimistic about the future. Surveyors attempt to gauge this optimism using “consumer confidence” surveys that ask respondents to report whether they are optimistic or pessimistic about their own economic situation and about the prospects for the economy as a whole. An increase in consumer optimism tends to shift the consumption function upward as in Panel (a) of Figure 28.4; an increase in pessimism tends to shift it downward as in Panel (b). The sharp reduction in consumer confidence in 2008 and early in 2009 contributed to a downward shift in the consumption function and thus to the severity of the recession.
The relationship between consumption and consumer expectations concerning future economic conditions tends to be a form of self-fulfilling prophecy. If consumers expect economic conditions to worsen, they will cut their consumption—and economic conditions will worsen! Political leaders often try to persuade people that economic prospects are good. In part, such efforts are an attempt to increase economic activity by boosting consumption.
Key Takeaways
• Consumption is closely related to disposable personal income and is represented by the consumption function, which can be presented in a table, in a graph, or in an equation.
• Personal saving is disposable personal income not spent on consumption.
• The marginal propensity to consume is MPC = ΔCYd and the marginal propensity to save is MPS = ΔSYd. The sum of the MPC and MPS is 1.
• The current income hypothesis holds that consumption is a function of current disposable personal income, whereas the permanent income hypothesis holds that consumption is a function of permanent income, which is the income households expect to receive annually during their lifetime. The permanent income hypothesis predicts that a temporary change in income will have a smaller effect on consumption than is predicted by the current income hypothesis.
• Other factors that affect consumption include real wealth and expectations.
Try It!
For each of the following events, draw a curve representing the consumption function and show how the event would affect the curve.
1. A sharp increase in stock prices increases the real wealth of most households.
2. Consumers decide that a recession is ahead and that their incomes are likely to fall.
3. The price level falls.
Case in Point: Consumption and the Tax Rebate of 2001
Figure 28.5
Max Wei – Cashier – CC BY-ND 2.0.
The first round of the Bush tax cuts was passed in 2001. Democrats in Congress insisted on a rebate aimed at stimulating consumption. In the summer of 2001, rebates of \$300 per single taxpayer and of \$600 for married couples were distributed. The Department of Treasury reported that 92 million people received the rebates. While the rebates were intended to stimulate consumption, the extent to which the tax rebates stimulated consumption, especially during the recession, is an empirical question.
It is difficult to analyze the impact of a tax rebate that is a single event experienced by all households at the same time. If spending does change at that moment, is it because of the tax rebate or because of some other event that occurred at that time?
Fortunately for researchers Sumit Agarwal, Chunlin Liu, and Nicholas Souleles, using data from credit card accounts, the 2001 tax rebate checks were distributed over 10 successive weeks from July to September of 2001. The timing of receipt was random, since it was based on the next-to-last digit of one’s Social Security number, and taxpayers were informed well in advance that the checks were coming. The researchers found that consumers initially saved much of their rebates, by paying down their credit card debts, but over a nine-month period, spending increased to about 40% of the rebate. They also found that consumers who were most liquidity constrained (for example, close to their credit card debt limits) spent more than consumers who were less constrained.
The researchers thus conclude that their findings do not support the permanent income hypothesis, since consumers responded to spending based on when they received their checks and because the results indicate that consumers do respond to what they call “lumpy” changes in income, such as those generated by a tax rebate. In other words, current income does seem to matter.
Two other studies of the 2001 tax rebate reached somewhat different conclusions. Using survey data, researchers Matthew D. Shapiro and Joel Slemrod estimated an MPC of about one-third. They note that this low increased spending is particularly surprising, since the rebate was part of a general tax cut that was expected to last a long time. At the other end, David S. Johnson, Jonathan A. Parker, and Nicholas S. Souleles, using yet another data set, found that looking over a six-month period, the MPC was about two-thirds. So, while there is disagreement on the size of the MPC, all conclude that the impact was non-negligible.
Answers to Try It! Problems
1. A sharp increase in stock prices makes people wealthier and shifts the consumption function upward, as in Panel (a) of Figure 28.4.
2. This would be reported as a reduction in consumer confidence. Consumers are likely to respond by reducing their purchases, particularly of durable items such as cars and washing machines. The consumption function will shift downward, as in Panel (b) of Figure 28.4.
3. A reduction in the price level increases real wealth and thus boosts consumption. The consumption function will shift upward, as in Panel (a) of Figure 28.4. | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_(LibreTexts)/13%3A_Consumption_and_the_Aggregate_Expenditures_Model/13.1%3A_Determining_the_Level_of_Consumption.txt |
Learning Objective
1. Explain and illustrate the aggregate expenditures model and the concept of equilibrium real GDP.
2. Distinguish between autonomous and induced aggregate expenditures and explain why a change in autonomous expenditures leads to a multiplied change in equilibrium real GDP.
3. Discuss how adding taxes, government purchases, and net exports to a simplified aggregate expenditures model affects the multiplier and hence the impact on real GDP that arises from an initial change in autonomous expenditures.
The consumption function relates the level of consumption in a period to the level of disposable personal income in that period. In this section, we incorporate other components of aggregate demand: investment, government purchases, and net exports. In doing so, we shall develop a new model of the determination of equilibrium real GDP, the aggregate expenditures model. This model relates aggregate expenditures, which equal the sum of planned levels of consumption, investment, government purchases, and net exports at a given price level, to the level of real GDP. We shall see that people, firms, and government agencies may not always spend what they had planned to spend. If so, then actual real GDP will not be the same as aggregate expenditures, and the economy will not be at the equilibrium level of real GDP.
One purpose of examining the aggregate expenditures model is to gain a deeper understanding of the “ripple effects” from a change in one or more components of aggregate demand. As we saw in the chapter that introduced the aggregate demand and aggregate supply model, a change in investment, government purchases, or net exports leads to greater production; this creates additional income for households, which induces additional consumption, leading to more production, more income, more consumption, and so on. The aggregate expenditures model provides a context within which this series of ripple effects can be better understood. A second reason for introducing the model is that we can use it to derive the aggregate demand curve for the model of aggregate demand and aggregate supply.
To see how the aggregate expenditures model works, we begin with a very simplified model in which there is neither a government sector nor a foreign sector. Then we use the findings based on this simplified model to build a more realistic model. The equations for the simplified economy are easier to work with, and we can readily apply the conclusions reached from analyzing a simplified economy to draw conclusions about a more realistic one.
The Aggregate Expenditures Model: A Simplified View
To develop a simple model, we assume that there are only two components of aggregate expenditures: consumption and investment. In the chapter on measuring total output and income, we learned that real gross domestic product and real gross domestic income are the same thing. With no government or foreign sector, gross domestic income in this economy and disposable personal income would be nearly the same. To simplify further, we will assume that depreciation and undistributed corporate profits (retained earnings) are zero. Thus, for this example, we assume that disposable personal income and real GDP are identical.
Finally, we shall also assume that the only component of aggregate expenditures that may not be at the planned level is investment. Firms determine a level of investment they intend to make in each period. The level of investment firms intend to make in a period is called planned investment. Some investment is unplanned. Suppose, for example, that firms produce and expect to sell more goods during a period than they actually sell. The unsold goods will be added to the firms’ inventories, and they will thus be counted as part of investment. Unplanned investment is investment during a period that firms did not intend to make. It is also possible that firms may sell more than they had expected. In this case, inventories will fall below what firms expected, in which case, unplanned investment would be negative. Investment during a period equals the sum of planned investment (IP) and unplanned investment (IU).
Equation 28.6
We shall find that planned and unplanned investment play key roles in the aggregate expenditures model.
Autonomous and Induced Aggregate Expenditures
Economists distinguish two types of expenditures. Expenditures that do not vary with the level of real GDP are called autonomous aggregate expenditures. In our example, we assume that planned investment expenditures are autonomous. Expenditures that vary with real GDP are called induced aggregate expenditures. Consumption spending that rises with real GDP is an example of an induced aggregate expenditure. Figure 28.6 illustrates the difference between autonomous and induced aggregate expenditures. With real GDP on the horizontal axis and aggregate expenditures on the vertical axis, autonomous aggregate expenditures are shown as a horizontal line in Panel (a). A curve showing induced aggregate expenditures has a slope greater than zero; the value of an induced aggregate expenditure changes with changes in real GDP. Panel (b) shows induced aggregate expenditures that are positively related to real GDP.
Autonomous and Induced Consumption
The concept of the marginal propensity to consume suggests that consumption contains induced aggregate expenditures; an increase in real GDP raises consumption. But consumption contains an autonomous component as well. The level of consumption at the intersection of the consumption function and the vertical axis is regarded as autonomous consumption; this level of spending would occur regardless of the level of real GDP.
Consider the consumption function we used in deriving the schedule and curve illustrated in Figure 28.2:
We can omit the subscript on disposable personal income because of the simplifications we have made in this section, and the symbol Y can be thought of as representing both disposable personal income and GDP. Because we assume that the price level in the aggregate expenditures model is constant, GDP equals real GDP. At every level of real GDP, consumption includes \$300 billion in autonomous aggregate expenditures. It will also contain expenditures “induced” by the level of real GDP. At a level of real GDP of \$2,000 billion, for example, consumption equals \$1,900 billion: \$300 billion in autonomous aggregate expenditures and \$1,600 billion in consumption induced by the \$2,000 billion level of real GDP.
Figure 28.7 illustrates these two components of consumption. Autonomous consumption, Ca, which is always \$300 billion, is shown in Panel (a); its equation is
Equation 28.7
Induced consumption Ci is shown in Panel (b); its equation is
Equation 28.8
The consumption function is given by the sum of Figure 28.7. It is the same as the equation C = \$300 billion + 0.8Yd, since in this simple example, Y and Yd are the same.
Plotting the Aggregate Expenditures Curve
In this simplified economy, investment is the only other component of aggregate expenditures. We shall assume that investment is autonomous and that firms plan to invest \$1,100 billion per year.
Equation 28.9
The level of planned investment is unaffected by the level of real GDP.
Aggregate expenditures equal the sum of consumption C and planned investment IP. The aggregate expenditures function is the relationship of aggregate expenditures to the value of real GDP. It can be represented with an equation, as a table, or as a curve.
We begin with the definition of aggregate expenditures AE when there is no government or foreign sector:
Equation 28.10
Substituting the information from above on consumption and planned investment yields (throughout this discussion all values are in billions of base-year dollars)
or
Equation 28.11
Equation 28.11 is the algebraic representation of the aggregate expenditures function. We shall use this equation to determine the equilibrium level of real GDP in the aggregate expenditures model. It is important to keep in mind that aggregate expenditures measure total planned spending at each level of real GDP (for any given price level). Real GDP is total production. Aggregate expenditures and real GDP need not be equal, and indeed will not be equal except when the economy is operating at its equilibrium level, as we will see in the next section.
In Equation 28.11, the autonomous component of aggregate expenditures is \$1,400 billion, and the induced component is 0.8Y. We shall plot this aggregate expenditures function. To do so, we arbitrarily select various levels of real GDP and then use Equation 28.10 to compute aggregate expenditures at each level. At a level of real GDP of \$6,000 billion, for example, aggregate expenditures equal \$6,200 billion:
The table in Figure 28.8 shows the values of aggregate expenditures at various levels of real GDP. Based on these values, we plot the aggregate expenditures curve. To obtain each value for aggregate expenditures, we simply insert the corresponding value for real GDP into Equation 28.11. The value at which the aggregate expenditures curve intersects the vertical axis corresponds to the level of autonomous aggregate expenditures. In our example, autonomous aggregate expenditures equal \$1,400 billion. That figure includes \$1,100 billion in planned investment, which is assumed to be autonomous, and \$300 billion in autonomous consumption expenditure.
The Slope of the Aggregate Expenditures Curve
The slope of the aggregate expenditures curve, given by the change in aggregate expenditures divided by the change in real GDP between any two points, measures the additional expenditures induced by increases in real GDP. The slope for the aggregate expenditures curve in Figure 28.8 is shown for points B and C: it is 0.8.
In Figure 28.8, the slope of the aggregate expenditures curve equals the marginal propensity to consume. This is because we have assumed that the only other expenditure, planned investment, is autonomous and that real GDP and disposable personal income are identical. Changes in real GDP thus affect only consumption in this simplified economy.
Equilibrium in the Aggregate Expenditures Model
Real GDP is a measure of the total output of firms. Aggregate expenditures equal total planned spending on that output. Equilibrium in the model occurs where aggregate expenditures in some period equal real GDP in that period. One way to think about equilibrium is to recognize that firms, except for some inventory that they plan to hold, produce goods and services with the intention of selling them. Aggregate expenditures consist of what people, firms, and government agencies plan to spend. If the economy is at its equilibrium real GDP, then firms are selling what they plan to sell (that is, there are no unplanned changes in inventories).
Figure 28.9 illustrates the concept of equilibrium in the aggregate expenditures model. A 45-degree line connects all the points at which the values on the two axes, representing aggregate expenditures and real GDP, are equal. Equilibrium must occur at some point along this 45-degree line. The point at which the aggregate expenditures curve crosses the 45-degree line is the equilibrium real GDP, here achieved at a real GDP of \$7,000 billion.
Equation 28.11 tells us that at a real GDP of \$7,000 billion, the sum of consumption and planned investment is \$7,000 billion—precisely the level of output firms produced. At that level of output, firms sell what they planned to sell and keep inventories that they planned to keep. A real GDP of \$7,000 billion represents equilibrium in the sense that it generates an equal level of aggregate expenditures.
If firms were to produce a real GDP greater than \$7,000 billion per year, aggregate expenditures would fall short of real GDP. At a level of real GDP of \$9,000 billion per year, for example, aggregate expenditures equal \$8,600 billion. Firms would be left with \$400 billion worth of goods they intended to sell but did not. Their actual level of investment would be \$400 billion greater than their planned level of investment. With those unsold goods on hand (that is, with an unplanned increase in inventories), firms would be likely to cut their output, moving the economy toward its equilibrium GDP of \$7,000 billion. If firms were to produce \$5,000 billion, aggregate expenditures would be \$5,400 billion. Consumers and firms would demand more than was produced; firms would respond by reducing their inventories below the planned level (that is, there would be an unplanned decrease in inventories) and increasing their output in subsequent periods, again moving the economy toward its equilibrium real GDP of \$7,000 billion. Figure 28.10 shows possible levels of real GDP in the economy for the aggregate expenditures function illustrated in Figure 28.9. It shows the level of aggregate expenditures at various levels of real GDP and the direction in which real GDP will change whenever AE does not equal real GDP. At any level of real GDP other than the equilibrium level, there is unplanned investment.
Changes in Aggregate Expenditures: The Multiplier
In the aggregate expenditures model, equilibrium is found at the level of real GDP at which the aggregate expenditures curve crosses the 45-degree line. It follows that a shift in the curve will change equilibrium real GDP. Here we will examine the magnitude of such changes.
Figure 28.11 begins with the aggregate expenditures curve shown in Figure 28.9. Now suppose that planned investment increases from the original value of \$1,100 billion to a new value of \$1,400 billion—an increase of \$300 billion. This increase in planned investment shifts the aggregate expenditures curve upward by \$300 billion, all other things unchanged. Notice, however, that the new aggregate expenditures curve intersects the 45-degree line at a real GDP of \$8,500 billion. The \$300 billion increase in planned investment has produced an increase in equilibrium real GDP of \$1,500 billion.
How could an increase in aggregate expenditures of \$300 billion produce an increase in equilibrium real GDP of \$1,500 billion? The answer lies in the operation of the multiplier. Because firms have increased their demand for investment goods (that is, for capital) by \$300 billion, the firms that produce those goods will have \$300 billion in additional orders. They will produce \$300 billion in additional real GDP and, given our simplifying assumption, \$300 billion in additional disposable personal income. But in this economy, each \$1 of additional real GDP induces \$0.80 in additional consumption. The \$300 billion increase in autonomous aggregate expenditures initially induces \$240 billion (= 0.8 × \$300 billion) in additional consumption.
The \$240 billion in additional consumption boosts production, creating another \$240 billion in real GDP. But that second round of increase in real GDP induces \$192 billion (= 0.8 × \$240) in additional consumption, creating still more production, still more income, and still more consumption. Eventually (after many additional rounds of increases in induced consumption), the \$300 billion increase in aggregate expenditures will result in a \$1,500 billion increase in equilibrium real GDP. Table 28.1 “The Multiplied Effect of an Increase in Autonomous Aggregate Expenditures” shows the multiplied effect of a \$300 billion increase in autonomous aggregate expenditures, assuming each \$1 of additional real GDP induces \$0.80 in additional consumption.
Table 28.1 The Multiplied Effect of an Increase in Autonomous Aggregate Expenditures
Round of spending Increase in real GDP (billions of dollars)
1 \$300
2 240
3 192
4 154
5 123
6 98
7 79
8 63
9 50
10 40
11 32
12 26
Subsequent rounds +103
Total increase in real GDP \$1,500
The size of the additional rounds of expenditure is based on the slope of the aggregate expenditures function, which in this example is simply the marginal propensity to consume. Had the slope been flatter (if the marginal propensity to consume were smaller), the additional rounds of spending would have been smaller. A steeper slope would mean that the additional rounds of spending would have been larger.
This process could also work in reverse. That is, a decrease in planned investment would lead to a multiplied decrease in real GDP. A reduction in planned investment would reduce the incomes of some households. They would reduce their consumption by the MPC times the reduction in their income. That, in turn, would reduce incomes for households that would have received the spending by the first group of households. The process continues, thus multiplying the impact of the reduction in aggregate expenditures resulting from the reduction in planned investment.
Computation of the Multiplier
The multiplier is the number by which we multiply an initial change in aggregate demand to get the full amount of the shift in the aggregate demand curve. Because the multiplier shows the amount by which the aggregate demand curve shifts at a given price level, and the aggregate expenditures model assumes a given price level, we can use the aggregate expenditures model to derive the multiplier explicitly.
Let Yeq be the equilibrium level of real GDP in the aggregate expenditures model, and let A be autonomous aggregate expenditures. Then the multiplier is
Equation 28.12
In the example we have just discussed, a change in autonomous aggregate expenditures of \$300 billion produced a change in equilibrium real GDP of \$1,500 billion. The value of the multiplier is therefore \$1,500/\$300 = 5.
The multiplier effect works because a change in autonomous aggregate expenditures causes a change in real GDP and disposable personal income, inducing a further change in the level of aggregate expenditures, which creates still more GDP and thus an even higher level of aggregate expenditures. The degree to which a given change in real GDP induces a change in aggregate expenditures is given in this simplified economy by the marginal propensity to consume, which, in this case, is the slope of the aggregate expenditures curve. The slope of the aggregate expenditures curve is thus linked to the size of the multiplier. We turn now to an investigation of the relationship between the marginal propensity to consume and the multiplier.
The Marginal Propensity to Consume and the Multiplier
We can compute the multiplier for this simplified economy from the marginal propensity to consume. We know that the amount by which equilibrium real GDP will change as a result of a change in aggregate expenditures consists of two parts: the change in autonomous aggregate expenditures itself, Δ , and the induced change in spending. This induced change equals the marginal propensity to consume times the change in equilibrium real GDP, ΔYeq. Thus
Equation 28.13
Subtract the MPCΔYeq term from both sides of the equation:
Factor out the ΔYeq term on the left:
Finally, solve for the multiplier ΔYeq/Δ by dividing both sides of the equation above by ΔA and by dividing both sides by (1 − MPC). We get the following:
Equation 28.14
We thus compute the multiplier by taking 1 minus the marginal propensity to consume, then dividing the result into 1. In our example, the marginal propensity to consume is 0.8; the multiplier is 5, as we have already seen [multiplier = 1/(1 − MPC) = 1/(1 − 0.8) = 1/0.2 = 5]. Since the sum of the marginal propensity to consume and the marginal propensity to save is 1, the denominator on the right-hand side of Equation 28.13 is equivalent to the MPS, and the multiplier could also be expressed as 1/MPS.
Equation 28.15
We can rearrange terms in Equation 28.14 to use the multiplier to compute the impact of a change in autonomous aggregate expenditures. We simply multiply both sides of the equation by to obtain the following:
Equation 28.16
The change in the equilibrium level of income in the aggregate expenditures model (remember that the model assumes a constant price level) equals the change in autonomous aggregate expenditures times the multiplier. Thus, the greater the multiplier, the greater will be the impact on income of a change in autonomous aggregate expenditures.
The Aggregate Expenditures Model in a More Realistic Economy
Four conclusions emerge from our application of the aggregate expenditures model to the simplified economy presented so far. These conclusions can be applied to a more realistic view of the economy.
1. The aggregate expenditures function relates aggregate expenditures to real GDP. The intercept of the aggregate expenditures curve shows the level of autonomous aggregate expenditures. The slope of the aggregate expenditures curve shows how much increases in real GDP induce additional aggregate expenditures.
2. Equilibrium real GDP occurs where aggregate expenditures equal real GDP.
3. A change in autonomous aggregate expenditures changes equilibrium real GDP by a multiple of the change in autonomous aggregate expenditures.
4. The size of the multiplier depends on the slope of the aggregate expenditures curve. The steeper the aggregate expenditures curve, the larger the multiplier; the flatter the aggregate expenditures curve, the smaller the multiplier.
These four points still hold as we add the two other components of aggregate expenditures—government purchases and net exports—and recognize that government not only spends but also collects taxes. We look first at the effect of adding taxes to the aggregate expenditures model and then at the effect of adding government purchases and net exports.
Taxes and the Aggregate Expenditure Function
Suppose that the only difference between real GDP and disposable personal income is personal income taxes. Let us see what happens to the slope of the aggregate expenditures function.
As before, we assume that the marginal propensity to consume is 0.8, but we now add the assumption that income taxes take ¼ of real GDP. This means that for every additional \$1 of real GDP, disposable personal income rises by \$0.75 and, in turn, consumption rises by \$0.60 (= 0.8 × \$0.75). In the simplified model in which disposable personal income and real GDP were the same, an additional \$1 of real GDP raised consumption by \$0.80. The slope of the aggregate expenditures curve was 0.8, the marginal propensity to consume. Now, as a result of taxes, the aggregate expenditures curve will be flatter than the one shown in Figure 28.8 and Figure 28.10. In this example, the slope will be 0.6; an additional \$1 of real GDP will increase consumption by \$0.60.
Other things the same, the multiplier will be smaller than it was in the simplified economy in which disposable personal income and real GDP were identical. The wedge between disposable personal income and real GDP created by taxes means that the additional rounds of spending induced by a change in autonomous aggregate expenditures will be smaller than if there were no taxes. Hence, the multiplied effect of any change in autonomous aggregate expenditures is smaller.
The Addition of Government Purchases and Net Exports
Suppose that government purchases and net exports are autonomous. If so, they enter the aggregate expenditures function in the same way that investment did. Compared to the simplified aggregate expenditures model, the aggregate expenditures curve shifts up by the amount of government purchases and net exports1.
Figure 28.12 shows the difference between the aggregate expenditures model of the simplified economy in Figure 28.9 and a more realistic view of the economy. Panel (a) shows an AE curve for an economy with only consumption and investment expenditures. In Panel (b), the AE curve includes all four components of aggregate expenditures.
There are two major differences between the aggregate expenditures curves shown in the two panels. Notice first that the intercept of the AE curve in Panel (b) is higher than that of the AE curve in Panel (a). The reason is that, in addition to the autonomous part of consumption and planned investment, there are two other components of aggregate expenditures—government purchases and net exports—that we have also assumed are autonomous. Thus, the intercept of the aggregate expenditures curve in Panel (b) is the sum of the four autonomous aggregate expenditures components: consumption (Ca), planned investment (IP), government purchases (G), and net exports (Xn). In Panel (a), the intercept includes only the first two components.
Second, notice that the slope of the aggregate expenditures curve is flatter for the more realistic economy in Panel (b) than it is for the simplified economy in Panel (a). This can be seen by comparing the slope of the aggregate expenditures curve between points A and B in Panel (a) to the slope of the aggregate expenditures curve between points A′ and B′ in Panel (b). Between both sets of points, real GDP changes by the same amount, \$1,000 billion. In Panel (a), consumption rises by \$800 billion, whereas in Panel (b) consumption rises by only \$600 billion. This difference occurs because, in the more realistic view of the economy, households have only a fraction of real GDP available as disposable personal income. Thus, for a given change in real GDP, consumption rises by a smaller amount.
Let us examine what happens to equilibrium real GDP in each case if there is a shift in autonomous aggregate expenditures, such as an increase in planned investment, as shown in Figure 28.13. In both panels, the initial level of equilibrium real GDP is the same, Y1. Equilibrium real GDP occurs where the given aggregate expenditures curve intersects the 45-degree line. The aggregate expenditures curve shifts up by the same amount—ΔA is the same in both panels. The new level of equilibrium real GDP occurs where the new AE curve intersects the 45-degree line. In Panel (a), we see that the new level of equilibrium real GDP rises to Y2, but in Panel (b) it rises only to Y3. Since the same change in autonomous aggregate expenditures led to a greater increase in equilibrium real GDP in Panel (a) than in Panel (b), the multiplier for the more realistic model of the economy must be smaller. The multiplier is smaller, of course, because the slope of the aggregate expenditures curve is flatter.
Key Takeaways
• The aggregate expenditures model relates aggregate expenditures to real GDP. Equilibrium in the model occurs where aggregate expenditures equal real GDP and is found graphically at the intersection of the aggregate expenditures curve and the 45-degree line.
• Economists distinguish between autonomous and induced aggregate expenditures. The former do not vary with GDP; the latter do.
• Equilibrium in the aggregate expenditures model implies that unintended investment equals zero.
• A change in autonomous aggregate expenditures leads to a change in equilibrium real GDP, which is a multiple of the change in autonomous aggregate expenditures.
• The size of the multiplier depends on the slope of the aggregate expenditures curve. In general, the steeper the aggregate expenditures curve, the greater the multiplier. The flatter the aggregate expenditures curve, the smaller the multiplier.
• Income taxes tend to flatten the aggregate expenditures curve.
Try It!
Suppose you are given the following data for an economy. All data are in billions of dollars. Y is actual real GDP, and C, IP, G, and Xn are the consumption, planned investment, government purchases, and net exports components of aggregate expenditures, respectively.
Y C I
p
G X
n
\$0 \$800 \$1,000 \$1,400 −\$200
2,500 2,300 1,000 1,400 −200
5,000 3,800 1,000 1,400 −200
7,500 5,300 1,000 1,400 −200
10,000 6,800 1,000 1,400 −200
1. Plot the corresponding aggregate expenditures curve and draw in the 45-degree line.
2. What is the intercept of the AE curve? What is its slope?
3. Determine the equilibrium level of real GDP.
4. Now suppose that net exports fall by \$1,000 billion and that this is the only change in autonomous aggregate expenditures. Plot the new aggregate expenditures curve. What is the new equilibrium level of real GDP?
5. What is the value of the multiplier?
Case in Point: Fiscal Policy in the Kennedy Administration
Figure 28.14
U.S. Embassy New Delhi – President John F. Kennedy – CC BY-ND 2.0.
It was the first time expansionary fiscal policy had ever been proposed. The economy had slipped into a recession in 1960. Presidential candidate John Kennedy received proposals from several economists that year for a tax cut aimed at stimulating the economy. As a candidate, he was unconvinced. But, as president he proposed the tax cut in 1962. His chief economic adviser, Walter Heller, defended the tax cut idea before Congress and introduced what was politically a novel concept: the multiplier.
In testimony to the Senate Subcommittee on Employment and Manpower, Mr. Heller predicted that a \$10 billion cut in personal income taxes would boost consumption “by over \$9 billion.”
To assess the ultimate impact of the tax cut, Mr. Heller applied the aggregate expenditures model. He rounded the increased consumption off to \$9 billion and explained,
“This is far from the end of the matter. The higher production of consumer goods to meet this extra spending would mean extra employment, higher payrolls, higher profits, and higher farm and professional and service incomes. This added purchasing power would generate still further increases in spending and incomes. … The initial rise of \$9 billion, plus this extra consumption spending and extra output of consumer goods, would add over \$18 billion to our annual GDP.”
We can summarize this continuing process by saying that a “multiplier” of approximately 2 has been applied to the direct increment of consumption spending.
Mr. Heller also predicted that proposed cuts in corporate income tax rates would increase investment by about \$6 billion. The total change in autonomous aggregate expenditures would thus be \$15 billion: \$9 billion in consumption and \$6 billion in investment. He predicted that the total increase in equilibrium GDP would be \$30 billion, the amount the Council of Economic Advisers had estimated would be necessary to reach full employment.
In the end, the tax cut was not passed until 1964, after President Kennedy’s assassination in 1963. While the Council of Economic Advisers concluded that the tax cut had worked as advertised, it came long after the economy had recovered and tended to push the economy into an inflationary gap. As we will see in later chapters, the tax cut helped push the economy into a period of rising inflation.
Answers to Try It! Problems
1. The aggregate expenditures curve is plotted in the accompanying chart as AE1.
2. The intercept of the AE1 curve is \$3,000. It is the amount of aggregate expenditures (C + IP + G + Xn) when real GDP is zero. The slope of the AE1 curve is 0.6. It can be found by determining the amount of aggregate expenditures for any two levels of real GDP and then by dividing the change in aggregate expenditures by the change in real GDP over the interval. For example, between real GDP of \$2,500 and \$5,000, aggregate expenditures go from \$4,500 to \$6,000. Thus,
3. The equilibrium level of real GDP is \$7,500. It can be found by determining the intersection of AE1 and the 45-degree line. At Y = \$7,500, AE1 = \$5,300 + 1,000 + 1,400 − 200 = \$7,500.
4. A reduction of net exports of \$1,000 shifts the aggregate expenditures curve down by \$1,000 to AE2. The equilibrium real GDP falls from \$7,500 to \$5,000. The new aggregate expenditures curve, AE2, intersects the 45-degree line at real GDP of \$5,000.
5. The multiplier is 2.5 [= (−\$2,500)/(−\$1,000)].
Figure 28.15
1An even more realistic view of the economy might assume that imports are induced, since as a country’s real GDP rises it will buy more goods and services, some of which will be imports. In that case, the slope of the aggregate expenditures curve would change. | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_(LibreTexts)/13%3A_Consumption_and_the_Aggregate_Expenditures_Model/13.2%3A_The_Aggregate_Expenditures_Model.txt |
Learning Objective
1. Explain and illustrate how a change in the price level affects the aggregate expenditures curve.
2. Explain and illustrate how to derive an aggregate demand curve from the aggregate expenditures curve for different price levels.
3. Explain and illustrate how an increase or decrease in autonomous aggregate expenditures affects the aggregate demand curve.
We can use the aggregate expenditures model to gain greater insight into the aggregate demand curve. In this section we shall see how to derive the aggregate demand curve from the aggregate expenditures model. We shall also see how to apply the analysis of multiplier effects in the aggregate expenditures model to the aggregate demand–aggregate supply model.
Aggregate Expenditures Curves and Price Levels
An aggregate expenditures curve assumes a fixed price level. If the price level were to change, the levels of consumption, investment, and net exports would all change, producing a new aggregate expenditures curve and a new equilibrium solution in the aggregate expenditures model.
A change in the price level changes people’s real wealth. Suppose, for example, that your wealth includes \$10,000 in a bond account. An increase in the price level would reduce the real value of this money, reduce your real wealth, and thus reduce your consumption. Similarly, a reduction in the price level would increase the real value of money holdings and thus increase real wealth and consumption. The tendency for price level changes to change real wealth and consumption is called the wealth effect.
Because changes in the price level also affect the real quantity of money, we can expect a change in the price level to change the interest rate. A reduction in the price level will increase the real quantity of money and thus lower the interest rate. A lower interest rate, all other things unchanged, will increase the level of investment. Similarly, a higher price level reduces the real quantity of money, raises interest rates, and reduces investment. This is called the interest rate effect.
Finally, a change in the domestic price level will affect exports and imports. A higher price level makes a country’s exports fall and imports rise, reducing net exports. A lower price level will increase exports and reduce imports, increasing net exports. This impact of different price levels on the level of net exports is called the international trade effect.
Panel (a) of Figure 28.16 shows three possible aggregate expenditures curves for three different price levels. For example, the aggregate expenditures curve labeled AEP=1.0 is the aggregate expenditures curve for an economy with a price level of 1.0. Since that aggregate expenditures curve crosses the 45-degree line at \$6,000 billion, equilibrium real GDP is \$6,000 billion at that price level. At a lower price level, aggregate expenditures would rise because of the wealth effect, the interest rate effect, and the international trade effect. Assume that at every level of real GDP, a reduction in the price level to 0.5 would boost aggregate expenditures by \$2,000 billion to AEP = 0.5, and an increase in the price level from 1.0 to 1.5 would reduce aggregate expenditures by \$2,000 billion. The aggregate expenditures curve for a price level of 1.5 is shown as AEP=1.5. There is a different aggregate expenditures curve, and a different level of equilibrium real GDP, for each of these three price levels. A price level of 1.5 produces equilibrium at point A, a price level of 1.0 does so at point B, and a price level of 0.5 does so at point C. More generally, there will be a different level of equilibrium real GDP for every price level; the higher the price level, the lower the equilibrium value of real GDP.
Panel (b) of Figure 28.16 shows how an aggregate demand curve can be derived from the aggregate expenditures curves for different price levels. The equilibrium real GDP associated with each price level in the aggregate expenditures model is plotted as a point showing the price level and the quantity of goods and services demanded (measured as real GDP). At a price level of 1.0, for example, the equilibrium level of real GDP in the aggregate expenditures model in Panel (a) is \$6,000 billion at point B. That means \$6,000 billion worth of goods and services is demanded; point B’ on the aggregate demand curve in Panel (b) corresponds to a real GDP demanded of \$6,000 billion and a price level of 1.0. At a price level of 0.5 the equilibrium GDP demanded is \$10,000 billion at point C’, and at a price level of 1.5 the equilibrium real GDP demanded is \$2,000 billion at point A’. The aggregate demand curve thus shows the equilibrium real GDP from the aggregate expenditures model at each price level.
The Multiplier and Changes in Aggregate Demand
In the aggregate expenditures model, a change in autonomous aggregate expenditures changes equilibrium real GDP by the multiplier times the change in autonomous aggregate expenditures. That model, however, assumes a constant price level. How can we incorporate the concept of the multiplier into the model of aggregate demand and aggregate supply?
Consider the aggregate expenditures curves given in Panel (a) of Figure 28.17, each of which corresponds to a particular price level. Suppose net exports rise by \$1,000 billion. Such a change increases aggregate expenditures at each price level by \$1,000 billion.
A \$1,000-billion increase in net exports shifts each of the aggregate expenditures curves up by \$1,000 billion, to AEP=1.0 and AEP=1.5. That changes the equilibrium real GDP associated with each price level; it thus shifts the aggregate demand curve to AD2 in Panel (b). In the aggregate expenditures model, equilibrium real GDP changes by an amount equal to the initial change in autonomous aggregate expenditures times the multiplier, so the aggregate demand curve shifts by the same amount. In this example, we assume the multiplier is 2. The aggregate demand curve thus shifts to the right by \$2,000 billion, two times the \$1,000-billion change in autonomous aggregate expenditures.
In general, any change in autonomous aggregate expenditures shifts the aggregate demand curve. The amount of the shift is always equal to the change in autonomous aggregate expenditures times the multiplier. An increase in autonomous aggregate expenditures shifts the aggregate demand curve to the right; a reduction shifts it to the left.
Key Takeaways
• There will be a different aggregate expenditures curve for each price level.
• Aggregate expenditures will vary with the price level because of the wealth effect, the interest rate effect, and the international trade effect. The higher the price level, the lower the aggregate expenditures curve and the lower the equilibrium level of real GDP. The lower the price level, the higher the aggregate expenditures curve and the higher the equilibrium level of real GDP.
• A change in autonomous aggregate expenditures shifts the aggregate expenditures curve for each price level. That shifts the aggregate demand curve by an amount equal to the change in autonomous aggregate expenditures times the multiplier.
Try It!
Sketch three aggregate expenditures curves for price levels of P1, P2, and P3, where P1 is the lowest price level and P3 the highest (you do not have numbers for this exercise; simply sketch curves of the appropriate shape). Label the equilibrium levels of real GDP Y1, Y2, and Y3. Now draw the aggregate demand curve implied by your analysis, labeling points that correspond to P1, P2, and P3 and Y1, Y2, and Y3. You can use Figure 28.16 as a model for your work.
Case in Point: Predicting the Impact of Alternative Fiscal Policies in 2008
Figure 28.18
Wikimeida Commons – CC BY-SA 3.0.
Economists are often asked to simulate the effects of policy changes on the economy. In 2008, as the economy weakened and Congress and the president debated a stimulus package, Mark M. Zandi, an economist at Moody’s Economy.com, produced a paper assessing the impact of various possible stimulus packages. His research produced the following table.
Table 28.2 Fiscal Economic Bang for the Buck
Tax cuts
Nonrefundable lump-sum tax rebate 1.02
Refundable lump-sum tax rebate 1.26
Temporary tax cuts
Payroll tax holiday 1.29
Across-the-board tax cut 1.03
Accelerated depreciation 0.27
Permanent tax cuts
Extend alternative minimum tax patch 0.48
Make Bush income tax cuts permanent 0.29
Make dividend and capital gains tax cuts permanent 0.37
Spending increases
Extending UI benefits 1.64
Temporary increase in food stamps 1.73
General aid to state governments 1.36
Increased infrastructure spending 1.59
The \$100-billion tax rebate for households that was actually passed was of the nonrefundable lump-sum type. “Nonrefundable” refers to the fact those not earning enough to pay income taxes would not receive a rebate, meaning that many households received zero or partial refunds. As shown, he estimated that a \$100-billion tax rebate would shift the aggregate demand curve by \$102 billion, assuming a constant price level. As part of the analysis, in the article he mentioned that he assumed an MPC of about two-thirds, since many households at the time were living paycheck-to-paycheck. So, consumption would increase by about \$67 billion. The implied multiplier is thus 1.54 (= 102/67).
The table shows that other stimuli would have smaller or larger effects. He reasoned that making various tax cuts permanent would have little impact on consumption now, since households in 2008 were cash-strapped. The table shows an estimated bigger bang for the buck from various kinds of government spending increases. That follows, since the change in aggregate expenditure is the full amount of the spending increase instead of the portion of a tax rebate of the same magnitude that consumers decide to spend.
Answer to Try It! Problem
The lowest price level, P1, corresponds to the highest AE curve, AEP = P1, as shown. This suggests a downward-sloping aggregate demand curve. Points A, B, and C on the AE curve correspond to points A′, B′, and C′ on the AD curve, respectively.
Figure 28.19 | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_(LibreTexts)/13%3A_Consumption_and_the_Aggregate_Expenditures_Model/13.3%3A_Aggregate_Expenditures_and_Aggregate_Demand.txt |
Summary
This chapter presented the aggregate expenditures model. Aggregate expenditures are the sum of planned levels of consumption, investment, government purchases, and net exports at a given price level. The aggregate expenditures model relates aggregate expenditures to the level of real GDP.
We began by observing the close relationship between consumption and disposable personal income. A consumption function shows this relationship. The saving function can be derived from the consumption function.
The time period over which income is considered to be a determinant of consumption is important. The current income hypothesis holds that consumption in one period is a function of income in that same period. The permanent income hypothesis holds that consumption in a period is a function of permanent income. An important implication of the permanent income hypothesis is that the marginal propensity to consume will be smaller for temporary than for permanent changes in disposable personal income.
Changes in real wealth and consumer expectations can affect the consumption function. Such changes shift the curve relating consumption to disposable personal income, the graphical representation of the consumption function; changes in disposable personal income do not shift the curve but cause movements along it.
An aggregate expenditures curve shows total planned expenditures at each level of real GDP. This curve is used in the aggregate expenditures model to determine the equilibrium real GDP (at a given price level). A change in autonomous aggregate expenditures produces a multiplier effect that leads to a larger change in equilibrium real GDP. In a simplified economy, with only consumption and investment expenditures, in which the slope of the aggregate expenditures curve is the marginal propensity to consume (MPC), the multiplier is equal to 1/(1 − MPC). Because the sum of the marginal propensity to consume and the marginal propensity to save (MPS) is 1, the multiplier in this simplified model is also equal to 1/MPS.
Finally, we derived the aggregate demand curve from the aggregate expenditures model. Each point on the aggregate demand curve corresponds to the equilibrium level of real GDP as derived in the aggregate expenditures model for each price level. The downward slope of the aggregate demand curve (and the shifting of the aggregate expenditures curve at each price level) reflects the wealth effect, the interest rate effect, and the international trade effect. A change in autonomous aggregate expenditures shifts the aggregate demand curve by an amount equal to the change in autonomous aggregate expenditures times the multiplier.
In a more realistic aggregate expenditures model that includes all four components of aggregate expenditures (consumption, investment, government purchases, and net exports), the slope of the aggregate expenditures curve shows the additional aggregate expenditures induced by increases in real GDP, and the size of the multiplier depends on the slope of the aggregate expenditures curve. The steeper the aggregate expenditures curve, the larger the multiplier; the flatter the aggregate expenditures curve, the smaller the multiplier.
Concept Problems
1. Explain the difference between autonomous and induced expenditures. Give examples of each.
2. The consumption function we studied in the chapter predicted that consumption would sometimes exceed disposable personal income. How could this be?
3. The consumption function can be represented as a table, as an equation, or as a curve. Distinguish among these three representations.
4. The introduction to this chapter described the behavior of consumer spending at the end of 2008. Explain this phenomenon in terms of the analysis presented in this chapter.
5. Explain the role played by the 45-degree line in the aggregate expenditures model.
6. Your college or university, if it does what many others do, occasionally releases a news story claiming that its impact on the total employment in the local economy is understated by its own employment statistics. If the institution keeps accurate statistics, is that possible?
7. Suppose the level of investment in a certain economy changes when the level of real GDP changes; an increase in real GDP induces an increase in investment, while a reduction in real GDP causes investment to fall. How do you think such behavior would affect the slope of the aggregate expenditures curve? The multiplier?
8. Give an intuitive explanation for how the multiplier works on a reduction in autonomous aggregate expenditures. Why does equilibrium real GDP fall by more than the change in autonomous aggregate expenditures?
9. Explain why the marginal propensity to consume out of a temporary tax rebate would be lower than that for a permanent rebate.
10. Pretend you are a member of the Council of Economic Advisers and are trying to persuade the members of the House Appropriations Committee to purchase \$100 billion worth of new materials, in part to stimulate the economy. Explain to the members how the multiplier process will work.
Numerical Problems
1. Suppose the following information describes a simple economy. Figures are in billion of dollars.
Disposable personal income Consumption
0 100
100 120
200 140
300 160
1. What is the marginal propensity to consume?
2. What is the marginal propensity to save?
3. Write an equation that describes consumption.
4. Write an equation that describes saving.
2. The graph below shows a consumption function.
Figure 28.20
1. When disposable personal income is equal to zero, how much is consumption?
2. When disposable personal income is equal to \$4,000 billion, how much is consumption?
3. At what level of personal disposable income are consumption and disposable personal income equal?
4. How much is personal saving when consumption is \$2,500 billion?
5. How much is personal saving when consumption is \$5,000 billion?
6. What is the marginal propensity to consume?
7. What is the marginal propensity to save?
8. Draw the saving function implied by the consumption function above. | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_(LibreTexts)/13%3A_Consumption_and_the_Aggregate_Expenditures_Model/13.4%3A_Review_and_Practice.txt |
Thumbnail: https://unsplash.com/photos/OlSGcrLSYkw
14: Investment and Economic Activity
Learning Objective
1. Discuss the components of the investment spending category of GDP and distinguish between gross and net investment.
2. Discuss the relationship between consumption, saving, and investment, and explain the relationship using the production possibilities model.
How important is investment? Consider any job you have ever performed. Your productivity in that job was largely determined by the investment choices that had been made before you began to work. If you worked as a clerk in a store, the equipment used in collecting money from customers affected your productivity. It may have been a simple cash register, or a sophisticated computer terminal that scanned purchases and was linked to the store’s computer, which computed the store’s inventory and did an analysis of the store’s sales as you entered each sale. If you have worked for a lawn maintenance firm, the kind of equipment you had to work with influenced your productivity. You were more productive if you had the latest mulching power lawn mowers than if you struggled with a push mower. Whatever the work you might have done, the kind and quality of capital you had to work with strongly influenced your productivity. And that capital was available because investment choices had provided it.
Investment adds to the nation’s capital stock. We saw in the chapter on economic growth that an increase in capital shifts the aggregate production function outward, increases the demand for labor, and shifts the long-run aggregate supply curve to the right. Investment therefore affects the economy’s potential output and thus its standard of living in the long run.
Investment is a component of aggregate demand. Changes in investment shift the aggregate demand curve and thus change real GDP and the price level in the short run. An increase in investment shifts the aggregate demand curve to the right; a reduction shifts it to the left.
Components of Investment
Additions to the stock of private capital are called Gross Private Domestic Investment (GPDI). GPDI includes four categories of investment:
1. Nonresidential Structures. This category of investment includes the construction of business structures such as private office buildings, warehouses, factories, private hospitals and universities, and other structures in which the production of goods and services takes place. A structure is counted as GPDI only during the period in which it is built. It may be sold several times after being built, but such sales are not counted as investment. Recall that investment is part of GDP, and GDP is the value of production in any period, not total sales.
2. Nonresidential Equipment and Software. Producers’ equipment includes computers and software, machinery, computers, trucks, cars, and desks, that is, any business equipment that is expected to last more than a year. Equipment and software are counted as investment only in the period in which it is produced.
3. Residential Investment. This category includes all forms of residential construction, whether apartment houses or single-family homes, as well as residential equipment such as computers and software.
4. Change in Private Inventories. Private inventories are considered part of the nation’s capital stock, because those inventories are used to produce other goods. All private inventories are capital; additions to private inventories are thus investment. When private inventories fall, that is recorded as negative investment.
Figure 29.1 shows the components of gross private domestic investment from 1995 through 2010. We see that producers’ equipment and software constitute the largest component of GPDI in the United States. Residential investment was the second largest component of GPDI for most of the period shown but it shrank considerably during the 2007-2009 recession.
Gross and Net Investment
As capital is used, some of it wears out or becomes obsolete; it depreciates (the Commerce Department reports depreciation as “consumption of fixed capital”). Investment adds to the capital stock, and depreciation reduces it. Gross investment minus depreciation is net investment. If gross investment is greater than depreciation in any period, then net investment is positive and the capital stock increases. If gross investment is less than depreciation in any period, then net investment is negative and the capital stock declines.
In the official estimates of total output, gross investment (GPDI) minus depreciation equals net private domestic investment (NPDI). The value for NPDI in any period gives the amount by which the privately held stock of physical capital increased during that period.
Figure 29.2 reports the real values of GPDI, depreciation, and NPDI from 1990 to 2009. We see that the bulk of GPDI replaces capital that has been depreciated. Notice the sharp reductions in NPDI during the recessions of 1990–1991, 2001, and especially 2007 – 2009.
The Volatility of Investment
Investment, measured as GPDI, is among the most volatile components of GDP. In percentage terms, year-to-year changes in GPDI are far greater than the year-to-year changes in consumption or government purchases. Net exports are also quite volatile, but they represent a much smaller share of GDP. Figure 29.3 compares annual percentage changes in GPDI, personal consumption, and government purchases. Of course, a dollar change in investment will be a much larger change in percentage terms than a dollar change in consumption, which is the largest component of GDP. But compare investment and government purchases: their shares in GDP are comparable, but investment is clearly more volatile.
Given that the aggregate demand curve shifts by an amount equal to the multiplier times an initial change in investment, the volatility of investment can cause real GDP to fluctuate in the short run. Downturns in investment may trigger recessions.
Investment, Consumption, and Saving
Earlier we used the production possibilities curve to illustrate how choices are made about investment, consumption, and saving. Because such choices are crucial to understanding how investment affects living standards, it will be useful to reexamine them here.
Figure 29.4 shows a production possibilities curve for an economy that can produce two kinds of goods: consumption goods and investment goods. An economy operating at point A on PPC1 is using its factors of production fully and efficiently. It is producing CA units of consumption goods and IA units of investment each period. Suppose that depreciation equals IA, so that the quantity of investment each period is just sufficient to replace depreciated capital; net investment equals zero. If there is no change in the labor force, in natural resources, or in technology, the production possibilities curve will remain fixed at PPC1.
Now suppose decision makers in this economy decide to sacrifice the production of some consumption goods in favor of greater investment. The economy moves to point B on PPC1. Production of consumption goods falls to CB, and investment rises to IB. Assuming depreciation remains IA, net investment is now positive. As the nation’s capital stock increases, the production possibilities curve shifts outward to PPC2. Once that shift occurs, it will be possible to select a point such as D on the new production possibilities curve. At this point, consumption equals CD, and investment equals ID. By sacrificing consumption early on, the society is able to increase both its consumption and investment in the future. That early reduction in consumption requires an increase in saving.
We see that a movement along the production possibilities curve in the direction of the production of more investment goods and fewer consumption goods allows the production of more of both types of goods in the future.
Key Takeaways
• Investment adds to the nation’s capital stock.
• Gross private domestic investment includes the construction of nonresidential structures, the production of equipment and software, private residential construction, and changes in inventories.
• The bulk of gross private domestic investment goes to the replacement of depreciated capital.
• Investment is the most volatile component of GDP.
• Investment represents a choice to postpone consumption—it requires saving.
Try It!
Which of the following would be counted as gross private domestic investment?
1. Millie hires a contractor to build a new garage for her home.
2. Millie buys a new car for her teenage son.
3. Grandpa buys Tommy a savings bond.
4. General Motors builds a new automobile assembly plant.
Case in Point: The Reduction of Private Capital in the Depression
Figure 29.5
Wikimedia Commons – public domain.
Net private domestic investment (NPDI) has been negative during only two periods in the last 70 years. During one period, World War II, massive defense spending forced cutbacks in private sector spending. (Recall that government investment is not counted as part of net private domestic investment in the official accounts; production of defense capital thus is not reflected in these figures.) The other period in which NPDI was negative was the Great Depression.
Aggregate demand plunged during the first four years of the Depression. As firms cut their output in response to reductions in demand, their need for capital fell as well. They reduced their capital by holding gross private domestic investment below depreciation beginning in 1931. That produced negative net private domestic investment; it remained negative until 1936 and became negative again in 1938. In all, firms reduced the private capital stock by more than \$529.5 billion (in 2007 dollars) during the period.
Figure 29.6
Answers to Try It! Problems
1. A new garage would be part of residential construction and thus part of GPDI.
2. Consumer purchases of cars are part of the consumption component of the GDP accounts and thus not part of GPDI.
3. The purchase of a savings bond is an example of a financial investment. Since it is not an addition to the nation’s capital stock, it is not part of GPDI.
4. The construction of a new factory is counted in the nonresidential structures component of GPDI. | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_(LibreTexts)/14%3A_Investment_and_Economic_Activity/14.1%3A_The_Role_and_Nature_of_Investment.txt |
Learning Objective
1. Draw a hypothetical investment demand curve, and explain what it shows about the relationship between investment and the interest rate.
2. Discuss the factors that can cause an investment demand curve to shift.
We will see in this section that interest rates play a key role in the determination of the desired stock of capital and thus of investment. Because investment is a process through which capital is increased in one period for use in future periods, expectations play an important role in investment as well.
Capital is one factor of production, along with labor and natural resources. A decision to invest is a decision to use more capital in producing goods and services. Factors that affect firms’ choices in the mix of capital, labor, and natural resources will affect investment as well.
We will also see in this section that public policy affects investment. Some investment is done by government agencies as they add to the public stock of capital. In addition, the tax and regulatory policies chosen by the public sector can affect the investment choices of private firms and individuals.
Interest Rates and Investment
We often hear reports that low interest rates have stimulated housing construction or that high rates have reduced it. Such reports imply a negative relationship between interest rates and investment in residential structures. This relationship applies to all forms of investment: higher interest rates tend to reduce the quantity of investment, while lower interest rates increase it.
To see the relationship between interest rates and investment, suppose you own a small factory and are considering the installation of a solar energy collection system to heat your building. You have determined that the cost of installing the system would be \$10,000 and that the system would lower your energy bills by \$1,000 per year. To simplify the example, we shall suppose that these savings will continue forever and that the system will never need repair or maintenance. Thus, we need to consider only the \$10,000 purchase price and the \$1,000 annual savings.
If the system is installed, it will be an addition to the capital stock and will therefore be counted as investment. Should you purchase the system?
Suppose that your business already has the \$10,000 on hand. You are considering whether to use the money for the solar energy system or for the purchase of a bond. Your decision to purchase the system or the bond will depend on the interest rate you could earn on the bond.
Putting \$10,000 into the solar energy system generates an effective income of \$1,000 per year—the saving the system will produce. That is a return of 10% per year. Suppose the bond yields a 12% annual interest. It thus generates interest income of \$1,200 per year, enough to pay the \$1,000 in heating bills and have \$200 left over. At an interest rate of 12%, the bond is the better purchase. If, however, the interest rate on bonds were 8%, then the solar energy system would yield a higher income than the bond. At interest rates below 10%, you will invest in the solar energy system. At interest rates above 10%, you will buy a bond instead. At an interest rate of precisely 10%, it is a toss-up.
If you do not have the \$10,000 on hand and would need to borrow the money to purchase the solar energy system, the interest rate still governs your decision. At interest rates below 10%, it makes sense to borrow the money and invest in the system. At interest rates above 10%, it does not.
In effect, the interest rate represents the opportunity cost of putting funds into the solar energy system rather than into a bond. The cost of putting the \$10,000 into the system is the interest you would forgo by not purchasing the bond.
At any one time, millions of investment choices hinge on the interest rate. Each decision to invest will make sense at some interest rates but not at others. The higher the interest rate, the fewer potential investments will be justified; the lower the interest rate, the greater the number that will be justified. There is thus a negative relationship between the interest rate and the level of investment.
Figure 29.7 shows an investment demand curve for the economy—a curve that shows the quantity of investment demanded at each interest rate, with all other determinants of investment unchanged. At an interest rate of 8%, the level of investment is \$950 billion per year at point A. At a lower interest rate of 6%, the investment demand curve shows that the quantity of investment demanded will rise to \$1,000 billion per year at point B. A reduction in the interest rate thus causes a movement along the investment demand curve.
Heads Up!
To make sense of the relationship between interest rates and investment, you must remember that investment is an addition to capital, and that capital is something that has been produced in order to produce other goods and services. A bond is not capital. The purchase of a bond is not an investment. We can thus think of purchasing bonds as a financial investment—that is, as an alternative to investment. The more attractive bonds are (i.e., the higher their interest rate), the less attractive investment becomes. If we forget that investment is an addition to the capital stock and that the purchase of a bond is not investment, we can fall into the following kind of error: “Higher interest rates mean a greater return on bonds, so more people will purchase them. Higher interest rates will therefore lead to greater investment.” That is a mistake, of course, because the purchase of a bond is not an investment. Higher interest rates increase the opportunity cost of using funds for investment. They reduce investment.
Other Determinants of Investment Demand
Perhaps the most important characteristic of the investment demand curve is not its negative slope, but rather the fact that it shifts often. Although investment certainly responds to changes in interest rates, changes in other factors appear to play a more important role in driving investment choices.
This section examines eight additional determinants of investment demand: expectations, the level of economic activity, the stock of capital, capacity utilization, the cost of capital goods, other factor costs, technological change, and public policy. A change in any of these can shift the investment demand curve.
Expectations
A change in the capital stock changes future production capacity. Therefore, plans to change the capital stock depend crucially on expectations. A firm considers likely future sales; a student weighs prospects in different occupations and their required educational and training levels. As expectations change in a way that increases the expected return from investment, the investment demand curve shifts to the right. Similarly, expectations of reduced profitability shift the investment demand curve to the left.
The Level of Economic Activity
Firms need capital to produce goods and services. An increase in the level of production is likely to boost demand for capital and thus lead to greater investment. Therefore, an increase in GDP is likely to shift the investment demand curve to the right.
To the extent that an increase in GDP boosts investment, the multiplier effect of an initial change in one or more components of aggregate demand will be enhanced. We have already seen that the increase in production that occurs with an initial increase in aggregate demand will increase household incomes, which will increase consumption, thus producing a further increase in aggregate demand. If the increase also induces firms to increase their investment, this multiplier effect will be even stronger.
The Stock of Capital
The quantity of capital already in use affects the level of investment in two ways. First, because most investment replaces capital that has depreciated, a greater capital stock is likely to lead to more investment; there will be more capital to replace. But second, a greater capital stock can tend to reduce investment. That is because investment occurs to adjust the stock of capital to its desired level. Given that desired level, the amount of investment needed to reach it will be lower when the current capital stock is higher.
Suppose, for example, that real estate analysts expect that 100,000 homes will be needed in a particular community by 2010. That will create a boom in construction—and thus in investment—if the current number of houses is 50,000. But it will create hardly a ripple if there are now 99,980 homes.
How will these conflicting effects of a larger capital stock sort themselves out? Because most investment occurs to replace existing capital, a larger capital stock is likely to increase investment. But that larger capital stock will certainly act to reduce net investment. The more capital already in place, the less new capital will be required to reach a given level of capital that may be desired.
Capacity Utilization
The capacity utilization rate measures the percentage of the capital stock in use. Because capital generally requires downtime for maintenance and repairs, the measured capacity utilization rate typically falls below 100%. For example, the average manufacturing capacity utilization rate was 79.7% for the period from 1972 to 2007. In November 2008 it stood at 72.3.
If a large percentage of the current capital stock is being utilized, firms are more likely to increase investment than they would if a large percentage of the capital stock were sitting idle. During recessions, the capacity utilization rate tends to fall. The fact that firms have more idle capacity then depresses investment even further. During expansions, as the capacity utilization rate rises, firms wanting to produce more often must increase investment to do so.
The Cost of Capital Goods
The demand curve for investment shows the quantity of investment at each interest rate, all other things unchanged. A change in a variable held constant in drawing this curve shifts the curve. One of those variables is the cost of capital goods themselves. If, for example, the construction cost of new buildings rises, then the quantity of investment at any interest rate is likely to fall. The investment demand curve thus shifts to the left.
The \$10,000 cost of the solar energy system in the example given earlier certainly affects a decision to purchase it. We saw that buying the system makes sense at interest rates below 10% and does not make sense at interest rates above 10%. If the system costs \$5,000, then the interest return on the investment would be 20% (the annual saving of \$1,000 divided by the \$5,000 initial cost), and the investment would be undertaken at any interest rate below 20%.
Other Factor Costs
Firms have a range of choices concerning how particular goods can be produced. A factory, for example, might use a sophisticated capital facility and relatively few workers, or it might use more workers and relatively less capital. The choice to use capital will be affected by the cost of the capital goods and the interest rate, but it will also be affected by the cost of labor. As labor costs rise, the demand for capital is likely to increase.
Our solar energy collector example suggests that energy costs influence the demand for capital as well. The assumption that the system would save \$1,000 per year in energy costs must have been based on the prices of fuel oil, natural gas, and electricity. If these prices were higher, the savings from the solar energy system would be greater, increasing the demand for this form of capital.
Technological Change
The implementation of new technology often requires new capital. Changes in technology can thus increase the demand for capital. Advances in computer technology have encouraged massive investments in computers. The development of fiber-optic technology for transmitting signals has stimulated huge investments by telephone and cable television companies.
Public Policy
Public policy can have significant effects on the demand for capital. Such policies typically seek to affect the cost of capital to firms. The Kennedy administration introduced two such strategies in the early 1960s. One strategy, accelerated depreciation, allowed firms to depreciate capital assets over a very short period of time. They could report artificially high production costs in the first years of an asset’s life and thus report lower profits and pay lower taxes. Accelerated depreciation did not change the actual rate at which assets depreciated, of course, but it cut tax payments during the early years of the assets’ use and thus reduced the cost of holding capital.
The second strategy was the investment tax credit, which permitted a firm to reduce its tax liability by a percentage of its investment during a period. A firm acquiring new capital could subtract a fraction of its cost—10% under the Kennedy administration’s plan—from the taxes it owed the government. In effect, the government “paid” 10% of the cost of any new capital; the investment tax credit thus reduced the cost of capital for firms.
Though less direct, a third strategy for stimulating investment would be a reduction in taxes on corporate profits (called the corporate income tax). Greater after-tax profits mean that firms can retain a greater portion of any return on an investment.
A fourth measure to encourage greater capital accumulation is a capital gains tax rate that allows gains on assets held during a certain period to be taxed at a different rate than other income. When an asset such as a building is sold for more than its purchase price, the seller of the asset is said to have realized a capital gain. Such a gain could be taxed as income under the personal income tax. Alternatively, it could be taxed at a lower rate reserved exclusively for such gains. A lower capital gains tax rate makes assets subject to the tax more attractive. It thus increases the demand for capital. Congress reduced the capital gains tax rate from 28% to 20% in 1996 and reduced the required holding period in 1998. The Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003 reduced the capital gains tax further to 15% and also reduced the tax rate on dividends from 38% to 15%. A proposal to eliminate capital gains taxation for smaller firms was considered but dropped before the stimulus bill of 2009 was enacted.
Accelerated depreciation, the investment tax credit, and lower taxes on corporate profits and capital gains all increase the demand for private physical capital. Public policy can also affect the demands for other forms of capital. The federal government subsidizes state and local government production of transportation, education, and many other facilities to encourage greater investment in public sector capital. For example, the federal government pays 90% of the cost of investment by local government in new buses for public transportation.
Key Takeaways
• The quantity of investment demanded in any period is negatively related to the interest rate. This relationship is illustrated by the investment demand curve.
• A change in the interest rate causes a movement along the investment demand curve. A change in any other determinant of investment causes a shift of the curve.
• The other determinants of investment include expectations, the level of economic activity, the stock of capital, the capacity utilization rate, the cost of capital goods, other factor costs, technological change, and public policy.
Try It!
Show how the investment demand curve would be affected by each of the following:
1. A sharp increase in taxes on profits earned by firms
2. An increase in the minimum wage
3. The expectation that there will be a sharp upsurge in the level of economic activity
4. An increase in the cost of new capital goods
5. An increase in interest rates
6. An increase in the level of economic activity
7. A natural disaster that destroys a significant fraction of the capital stock
Case in Point: Assessing the Impact of a One-Year Tax Break on Investment
Figure 29.8
Wikimedia Commons – CC BY-SA 4.0.
The U.S. economy was expanding in 2004, but there was a feeling that it still was not functioning as well as it could, as job growth was rather sluggish. To try to spur growth, Congress, supported by President Bush, passed a law in 2004 called the American Jobs Creation Act that gave businesses a one-year special tax break on any profits accumulating overseas that were transferred to the United States. Such profits are called repatriated profits and were estimated at the time to be about \$800 billion. For 2005, the tax rate on repatriated profits essentially fell from 25% to 5.25%.
Did the tax break have the desired effect on the economy? To some extent yes, though business also found other uses for the repatriated funds. There were 843 companies that repatriated \$312 billion that qualified for the tax break. The Act thus generated about \$18 billion in tax revenue, a higher level than had been expected. Some companies announced they were repatriating profits and continuing to downsize. For example, Colgate-Palmolive brought back \$800 million and made known it was closing a third of its factories and eliminating 12% of its workforce. However, other companies’ plans seemed more in line with the objectives of the special tax break—to create jobs and spur investment.
For example, spokesman Chuck Mulloy of Intel, which repatriated over \$6 billion, said the company was building a \$3-billion wafer fabrication facility and spending \$345 million on expanding existing facilities. “I can’t say dollar-for-dollar how much of the funding for those comes from off-shore cash,” but he felt that the repatriated funds were contributing to Intel’s overall investments. Spokeswoman Margaret Graham of Bausch and Lomb, which makes eye-care products and repatriated \$805 million, said, “We plan to use that cash for capital expenditures, investment in research and development, and paying nonofficer compensation.”
Analysts are skeptical, though, that the repatriated profits really contributed to investment. The New York Times reported on one study that suggested it had not. Rather, the repatriated funds were used for other purposes, such as stock repurchases. The argument is that the companies made investments that they were planning to make and the repatriated funds essentially freed up funding for other purposes.
Answers to Try It! Problems
1. The investment demand curve shifts to the left: Panel (b).
2. A higher minimum wage makes labor more expensive. Firms are likely to shift to greater use of capital, so the investment demand curve shifts to the right: Panel (a).
3. The investment demand curve shifts to the right: Panel (a).
4. The investment demand curve shifts to the left: Panel (b).
5. An increase in interest rates causes a movement along the investment demand curve: Panel (c).
6. The investment demand curve shifts to the right: Panel (a).
7. The need to replace capital shifts the investment demand curve to the right: Panel (a).
Figure 29.9 | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_(LibreTexts)/14%3A_Investment_and_Economic_Activity/14.2%3A_Determinants_of_Investment.txt |
Learning Objective
1. Explain how investment affects aggregate demand.
2. Explain how investment affects economic growth.
We shall examine the impact of investment on the economy in the context of the model of aggregate demand and aggregate supply. Investment is a component of aggregate demand; changes in investment shift the aggregate demand curve by the amount of the initial change times the multiplier. Investment changes the capital stock; changes in the capital stock shift the production possibilities curve and the economy’s aggregate production function and thus shift the long- and short-run aggregate supply curves to the right or to the left.
Investment and Aggregate Demand
In the short run, changes in investment cause aggregate demand to change. Consider, for example, the impact of a reduction in the interest rate, given the investment demand curve (ID). In Figure 29.10, Panel (a), which uses the investment demand curve introduced in Figure 29.7, a reduction in the interest rate from 8% to 6% increases investment by \$50 billion per year. Assume that the multiplier is 2. With an increase in investment of \$50 billion per year and a multiplier of 2, the aggregate demand curve shifts to the right by \$100 billion to AD2 in Panel (b). The quantity of real GDP demanded at each price level thus increases. At a price level of 1.0, for example, the quantity of real GDP demanded rises from \$8,000 billion to \$8,100 billion per year.
A reduction in investment would shift the aggregate demand curve to the left by an amount equal to the multiplier times the change in investment.
The relationship between investment and interest rates is one key to the effectiveness of monetary policy to the economy. When the Fed seeks to increase aggregate demand, it purchases bonds. That raises bond prices, reduces interest rates, and stimulates investment and aggregate demand as illustrated in Figure 29.10. When the Fed seeks to decrease aggregate demand, it sells bonds. That lowers bond prices, raises interest rates, and reduces investment and aggregate demand. The extent to which investment responds to a change in interest rates is a crucial factor in how effective monetary policy is.
Investment and Economic Growth
Investment adds to the stock of capital, and the quantity of capital available to an economy is a crucial determinant of its productivity. Investment thus contributes to economic growth. We saw in Figure 29.4 that an increase in an economy’s stock of capital shifts its production possibilities curve outward. (Recall from the chapter on economic growth that it also shifts the economy’s aggregate production function upward.) That also shifts its long-run aggregate supply curve to the right. At the same time, of course, an increase in investment affects aggregate demand, as we saw in Figure 29.10.
Key Takeaways
• Changes in investment shift the aggregate demand curve to the right or left by an amount equal to the initial change in investment times the multiplier.
• Investment adds to the capital stock; it therefore contributes to economic growth
Try It!
The text notes that rising investment shifts the aggregate demand curve to the right and at the same time shifts the long-run aggregate supply curve to the right by increasing the nation’s stock of physical and human capital. Show this simultaneous shifting in the two curves with three graphs. One graph should show growth in which the price level rises, one graph should show growth in which the price level remains unchanged, and another should show growth with the price level falling.
Case in Point: Investment by Businesses Saves the Australian Expansion
Figure 29.11
Marc Dalmulder – Federation Bells – CC BY 2.0.
With consumer and export spending faltering in 2005, increased business investment spending seemed to be keeping the Australian economy afloat. “Corporate Australia is solidly behind the steering wheel of the Australian economy,” said Craig James, an economist for Commonwealth Securities, an Australian Internet securities brokerage firm. “The clear message from the latest investment survey is that corporate Australia is flush with cash and ready to spend,” he continued.
The data supported his conclusions. The level of investment spending in Australia on new buildings, plant, and equipment was 17% higher in 2005 than in 2004. Within the investment category, mining investment, spurred on by high prices for natural resources, was particularly strong.
Answer to Try It! Problem
Panel (a) shows AD shifting by more than LRAS; the price level will rise in the long run.
Panel (b) shows AD and LRAS shifting by equal amounts; the price level will remain unchanged in the long run.
Panel (c) shows LRAS shifting by more than AD; the price level falls in the long run.
Figure 29.12 | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_(LibreTexts)/14%3A_Investment_and_Economic_Activity/14.3%3A_Investment_and_the_Economy.txt |
Summary
Investment is an addition to the capital stock. Investment may occur as a net addition to capital or as a replacement of depreciated capital. The bulk of investment spending in the United States falls into the latter category. Investment is a highly volatile component of GDP.
The decision to save is linked directly to the decision to invest. If a nation is to devote a larger share of its production to investment, then it must devote a smaller share to consumption, all other things unchanged. And that requires people to save more.
Investment is affected by the interest rate; the negative relationship between investment and the interest rate is illustrated by the investment demand curve. The position of this curve is affected by expectations, the level of economic activity, the stock of capital, the price of capital, the prices of other factors, technology, and public policy.
Because investment is a component of aggregate demand, a change in investment shifts the aggregate demand curve to the right or left. The amount of the shift will equal the initial change in investment times the multiplier.
In addition to its impact on aggregate demand, investment can also affect economic growth. Investment shifts the production possibilities curve outward, shifts the economy’s aggregate production function upward, and shifts the long-run aggregate supply curve to the right.
Concept Problems
1. Which of the following would be counted as gross private domestic investment?
1. General Motors issues 1 million shares of stock.
2. Consolidated Construction purchases 1,000 acres of land for a regional shopping center it plans to build in a few years.
3. A K-Mart store adds 1,000 T-shirts to its inventory.
4. Crew buys computers for its office staff.
5. Your family buys a house.
2. If saving dropped sharply in the economy, what would likely happen to investment? Why?
3. Suppose local governments throughout the United States increase their tax on business inventories. What would you expect to happen to U.S. investment? Why?
4. Suppose the government announces it will pay for half of any new investment undertaken by firms. How will this affect the investment demand curve?
5. White House officials often exude more confidence than they actually feel about future prospects for the economy. Why might this be a good strategy? Are there any dangers inherent in it?
6. Suppose everyone expects investment to rise sharply in three months. How would this expectation be likely to affect bond prices?
7. Suppose that every increase of \$1 in real GDP automatically stimulates \$0.20 in additional investment spending. How would this affect the multiplier?
8. If environmental resources were counted as part of the capital stock, how would a major forest fire affect net investment?
9. In the Case in Point on reducing private capital in the Great Depression, we saw that net investment was negative during that period. Could gross investment ever be negative? Explain.
10. The Case in Point on lowering the tax rate for one year for companies that repatriated profits suggests that investment did not increase, even though company representatives are quoted as saying that they were using the repatriated profits for investment. Explain this seeming contradiction.
11. Use the model of aggregate demand and aggregate supply to evaluate the argument that an increase in investment would raise the standard of living.
Numerical Problems
1. Suppose a construction company is trying to decide whether to buy a new nail gun. The table below shows the hypothetical costs for the nail gun and the amount the gun will save the company each year. Assume the gun will last forever. In each case, determine the highest interest rate the company should pay for a loan that makes purchase of the nail gun possible.
Cost Savings
a. \$1,000 \$100
b. \$1,000 \$200
c. \$1,000 \$300
2. A car company currently has capital stock of \$100 million and desires a capital stock of \$110 million.
1. If it experiences no depreciation, how much will it need to invest to get to its desired level of capital stock?
2. If its annual depreciation is 5%, how much will it need to invest to get to its desired level?
3. If its annual depreciation is 10%, how much will it need to invest to get to its desired level?
3. Burger World is contemplating installing an automated ordering system. The ordering system will allow Burger World to permanently replace five employees for an annual (and permanent) cost savings of \$100,000.
1. If the automated system cost \$1,000,000, what is the rate of return on the investment?
2. If the system cost \$2,000,000, what would be its rate of return?
3. If the government were to introduce an investment tax credit that allows firms to deduct 10% of its investment from its tax liability, what would happen to the rate of return if the system costs \$1,000,000?
4. If Burger World has to pay 8% to borrow the funds to purchase the system, what is the most it should pay for the system? Assume that there is no investment tax credit.
4. The table below shows a number of investment projects and their effective earned interest rates or returns. Given the market interest rates shown below, identify which projects will be undertaken and the total amount of investment spending that will ensue.
Project Return on project Cost
A 30% \$1,000
B 28 500
C 22 2,500
D 17 1,000
E 8 750
F 4 1,200
1. 20%
2. 15%
3. 10%
4. 5%
5. 3%
6. Sketch out the investment demand curve implied by these data.
5. The table below describes the amounts of investment for different interest rates.
Interest rate Amount of investment (billions)
25% \$5
20 \$10
15 \$15
10 \$20
5 \$25
1. Draw the investment demand curve for this economy.
2. Show the effect you would expect a decrease in the cost of capital goods to have on this investment demand curve.
3. Show the effect you would expect an investment tax credit to have on this investment demand curve.
4. Show the effect you would expect a recession to have on this investment demand curve.
6. Suppose real GDP in an economy equals its potential output of \$2,000 billion, the multiplier is 2.5, investment is raised by \$200 billion, and the increased investment does not affect the economy’s potential.
1. Show the short- and long-run effects of the change upon real GDP and the price level, using the graphical framework for the model of aggregate demand and aggregate supply.
2. Would real GDP rise by the multiplier times the change in investment in the short run? In the long run? Explain.
7. Use the information below to compute the levels of gross and net private domestic investment. Data are in billions of dollars.
Change in business inventories \$ 59.3
Residential construction 369.6
Producers’ durable equipment 691.3
Nonresidential structures 246.9
Depreciation 713.9
8. Complete the table, which shows investment in the United States in billions of 2000 chained dollars.
Year Gross private domestic investment Depreciation Net private domestic investment
a. 2005 1,873.5 1,266.6
b. 2006 1,216.1 696.4
c. 2007 1,809.7 546.7 | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_(LibreTexts)/14%3A_Investment_and_Economic_Activity/14.4%3A_Review_and_Practice.txt |
Thumbnail: https://pixabay.com/illustrations/business-global-economy-trade-1676138/
15: Net Exports and International Finance
Learning Objective
1. Discuss the main arguments economists make in support of free trade.
2. Explain the determinants of net exports and tell how each affects aggregate demand.
How important is international trade?
Take a look at the labels on some of your clothing. You are likely to find that the clothes in your closet came from all over the globe. Look around any parking lot. You may find cars from Japan, Korea, Sweden, Britain, Germany, France, and Italy—and even the United States! Do you use a computer? Even if it is an American computer, its components are likely to have been assembled in Indonesia or in some other country. Visit the grocery store. Much of the produce may come from Latin America and Asia.
The international market is important not just in terms of the goods and services it provides to a country, but as a market for that country’s goods and services. Because foreign demand for U.S. exports is almost as large as investment and government purchases as a component of aggregate demand, it can be very important in terms of growth. The increase in exports from 2000 to 2007, for example, accounted for almost 20% of the gain in U.S. real GDP during that period. For the period 2004 to 2007, the increase in exports accounted for about 30% of the gain.
The Case for Trade
International trade increases the quantity of goods and services available to the world’s consumers. By allocating resources according to the principle of comparative advantage, trade allows nations to consume combinations of goods and services they would be unable to produce on their own, combinations that lie outside each country’s production possibilities curve.
A country has a comparative advantage in the production of a good if it can produce that good at a lower opportunity cost than can other countries. If each country specializes in the production of goods in which it has a comparative advantage and trades those goods for things in which other countries have a comparative advantage, global production of all goods and services will be increased. The result can be higher levels of consumption for all.
If international trade allows expanded world production of goods and services, it follows that restrictions on trade will reduce world production. That, in a nutshell, is the economic case for free trade. It suggests that restrictions on trade, such as a tariff, a tax imposed on imported goods and services, or a quota, a ceiling on the quantity of specific goods and services that can be imported, reduce world living standards.
The conceptual argument for free trade is a compelling one; virtually all economists support policies that reduce barriers to trade. Economists were among the most outspoken advocates for the 1993 ratification of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), which virtually eliminated trade restrictions between Mexico, the United States, and Canada, and the 2004 Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA), which did the same for trade between the United States, Central America, and the Dominican Republic. Most economists have also been strong supporters of worldwide reductions in trade barriers, including the 1994 ratification of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), a pact slashing tariffs and easing quotas among 117 nations, including the United States, and the Doha round of World Trade Organization negotiations, named after the site of the first meeting in Doha, Qatar, in 2001 and still continuing. In Europe, member nations of the European Union (EU) have virtually eliminated trade barriers among themselves, and 15 EU nations now have a common currency, the euro, and a single central bank, the European Central Bank, established in 1999. Trade barriers have also been slashed among the economies of Latin America and of Southeast Asia. A treaty has been signed that calls for elimination of trade barriers among the developed nations of the Pacific Rim (including the United States and Japan) by 2010 and among all Pacific rim nations by 2020.
The global embrace of the idea of free trade demonstrates the triumph of economic ideas over powerful forces that oppose free trade. One source of opposition to free trade comes from the owners of factors of production used in industries in which a nation lacks a comparative advantage.
A related argument against free trade is that it not only reduces employment in some sectors but also reduces employment in the economy as a whole. In the long run, this argument is clearly wrong. The economy’s natural level of employment is determined by forces unrelated to trade policy, and employment moves to its natural level in the long run.
Further, trade has no effect on real wage levels for the economy as a whole. The equilibrium real wage depends on the economy’s demand for and supply curve of labor. Trade affects neither.
In the short run, trade does affect aggregate demand. Net exports are one component of aggregate demand; a change in net exports shifts the aggregate demand curve and affects real GDP in the short run. All other things unchanged, a reduction in net exports reduces aggregate demand, and an increase in net exports increases it.
Protectionist sentiment always rises during recessions. The recession that began in the United States in 2007 is no exception. The stimulus bill contained a provision ordering U.S. government agencies and contractors to purchase goods and services produced in the United States in preference to goods and services from other countries. Our trading partners have already begun threatening a trade war as a result of this provision. The stimulus bill does say that the “buy America first” provision should be “consistent with international obligations.” As yet, it is not clear how significant this provision would become.
The Rising Importance of International Trade
International trade is important, and its importance is increasing. From 1965 to 2007, world output rose by about 300%. But the gains in total exports were even more spectacular; they soared by over 1,000%!
While international trade was rising around the world, it was playing a more significant role in the United States as well. In 1960, exports represented just 3.5% of real GDP; by 2010, exports accounted for 12.6% of real GDP. Figure 30.1 shows the growth in exports and imports as a percentage of real GDP in the United States from 1960 to 2010.
Why has world trade risen so spectacularly? Two factors have been important. First, advances in transportation and communication have dramatically reduced the costs of moving goods around the globe. The development of shipping containerization that allows cargo to be moved seamlessly from trucks or trains to ships, which began in 1956, drastically reduced the cost of moving goods around the world, by as much as 90%. As a result, the numbers of container ships and their capacities have markedly increased1. Second, we have already seen that trade barriers between countries have fallen and are likely to continue to fall.
Net Exports and the Economy
As trade has become more important worldwide, exports and imports have assumed increased importance in nearly every country on the planet. We have already discussed the increased shares of U.S. real GDP represented by exports and by imports. We will find in this section that the economy both influences, and is influenced by, net exports. First, we will examine the determinants of net exports and then discuss the ways in which net exports affect aggregate demand.
Determinants of Net Exports
Net exports equal exports minus imports. Many of the same forces affect both exports and imports, albeit in different ways.
Income
As incomes in other nations rise, the people of those nations will be able to buy more goods and services—including foreign goods and services. Any one country’s exports thus will increase as incomes rise in other countries and will fall as incomes drop in other countries.
A nation’s own level of income affects its imports the same way it affects consumption. As consumers have more income, they will buy more goods and services. Because some of those goods and services are produced in other nations, imports will rise. An increase in real GDP thus boosts imports; a reduction in real GDP reduces imports. Figure 30.2 shows the relationship between real GDP and the real level of import spending in the United States from 1960 through 2010. Notice that the observations lie close to a straight line one could draw through them and resemble a consumption function.
Relative Prices
A change in the price level within a nation simultaneously affects exports and imports. A higher price level in the United States, for example, makes U.S. exports more expensive for foreigners and thus tends to reduce exports. At the same time, a higher price level in the United States makes foreign goods and services relatively more attractive to U.S. buyers and thus increases imports. A higher price level therefore reduces net exports. A lower price level encourages exports and reduces imports, increasing net exports. As we saw in the chapter that introduced the aggregate demand and supply model, the negative relationship between net exports and the price level is called the international trade effect and is one reason for the negative slope of the aggregate demand curve.
The Exchange Rate
The purchase of U.S. goods and services by foreign buyers generally requires the purchase of dollars, because U.S. suppliers want to be paid in their own currency. Similarly, purchases of foreign goods and services by U.S. buyers generally require the purchase of foreign currencies, because foreign suppliers want to be paid in their own currencies. An increase in the exchange rate means foreigners must pay more for dollars, and must thus pay more for U.S. goods and services. It therefore reduces U.S. exports. At the same time, a higher exchange rate means that a dollar buys more foreign currency. That makes foreign goods and services cheaper for U.S. buyers, so imports are likely to rise. An increase in the exchange rate should thus tend to reduce net exports. A reduction in the exchange rate should increase net exports.
Trade Policies
A country’s exports depend on its own trade policies as well as the trade policies of other countries. A country may be able to increase its exports by providing some form of government assistance (such as special tax considerations for companies that export goods and services, government promotional efforts, assistance with research, or subsidies). A country’s exports are also affected by the degree to which other countries restrict or encourage imports. The United States, for example, has sought changes in Japanese policies toward products such as U.S.-grown rice. Japan banned rice imports in the past, arguing it needed to protect its own producers. That has been a costly strategy; consumers in Japan typically pay as much as 10 times the price consumers in the United States pay for rice. Japan has given in to pressure from the United States and other nations to end its ban on foreign rice as part of the GATT accord. That will increase U.S. exports and lower rice prices in Japan.
Similarly, a country’s imports are affected by its trade policies and by the policies of its trading partners. A country can limit its imports of some goods and services by imposing tariffs or quotas on them—it may even ban the importation of some items. If foreign governments subsidize the manufacture of a particular good, then domestic imports of the good might increase. For example, if the governments of countries trading with the United States were to subsidize the production of steel, then U.S. companies would find it cheaper to purchase steel from abroad than at home, increasing U.S. imports of steel.
Preferences and Technology
Consumer preferences are one determinant of the consumption of any good or service; a shift in preferences for a foreign-produced good will affect the level of imports of that good. The preference among the French for movies and music produced in the United States has boosted French imports of these services. Indeed, the shift in French preferences has been so strong that the government of France, claiming a threat to its cultural heritage, has restricted the showing of films produced in the United States. French radio stations are fined if more than 40% of the music they play is from “foreign” (in most cases, U.S.) rock groups.
Changes in technology can affect the kinds of capital firms import. Technological changes have changed production worldwide toward the application of computers to manufacturing processes, for example. This has led to increased demand for high-tech capital equipment, a sector in which the United States has a comparative advantage and tends to dominate world production. This has boosted net exports in the United States.
Net Exports and Aggregate Demand
Net exports affect both the slope and the position of the aggregate demand curve. A change in the price level causes a change in net exports that moves the economy along its aggregate demand curve. This is the international trade effect. A change in net exports produced by one of the other determinants of net exports listed above (incomes and price levels in other nations, the exchange rate, trade policies, and preferences and technology) will shift the aggregate demand curve. The magnitude of this shift equals the change in net exports times the multiplier, as shown in Figure 30.3. Panel (a) shows an increase in net exports; Panel (b) shows a reduction. In both cases, the aggregate demand curve shifts by the multiplier times the initial change in net exports, provided there is no other change in the other components of aggregate demand.
Changes in net exports that shift the aggregate demand curve can have a significant impact on the economy. The United States, for example, experienced a slowdown in the rate of increase in real GDP in the second and third quarters of 1998—virtually all of this slowing was the result of a reduction in net exports caused by recessions that staggered economies throughout Asia. The Asian slide reduced incomes there and thus reduced Asian demand for U.S. goods and services. We will see in the next section another mechanism through which difficulties in other nations can cause changes in a nation’s net exports and its level of real GDP in the short run.
Key Takeaways
• International trade allows the world’s resources to be allocated on the basis of comparative advantage and thus allows the production of a larger quantity of goods and services than would be available without trade.
• Trade affects neither the economy’s natural level of employment nor its real wage in the long run; those are determined by the demand for and the supply curve of labor.
• Growth in international trade has outpaced growth in world output over the past five decades.
• The chief determinants of net exports are domestic and foreign incomes, relative price levels, exchange rates, domestic and foreign trade policies, and preferences and technology.
• A change in the price level causes a change in net exports that moves the economy along its aggregate demand curve. This is the international trade effect. A change in net exports produced by one of the other determinants of net exports will shift the aggregate demand curve by an amount equal to the initial change in net exports times the multiplier.
Try It!
Draw graphs showing the aggregate demand and short-run aggregate supply curves in each of four countries: Mexico, Japan, Germany, and the United States. Assume that each country is initially in equilibrium with a real GDP of Y1 and a price level of P1. Now show how each of the following four events would affect aggregate demand, the price level, and real GDP in the country indicated.
1. The United States is the largest foreign purchaser of goods and services from Mexico. How does an expansion in the United States affect real GDP and the price level in Mexico?
2. Japan’s exchange rate falls sharply. How does this affect the price level and real GDP in Japan?
3. A wave of pro-German sentiment sweeps France, and the French sharply increase their purchases of German goods and services. How does this affect real GDP and the price level in Germany?
4. Canada, the largest importer of U.S. goods and services, slips into a recession. How does this affect the price level and real GDP in the United States?
Case in Point: Canadian Net Exports Survive the Loonie’s Rise
Figure 30.4
B Gilliard – Loonie – CC BY-SA 2.0.
Throughout 2003 and the first half of 2004, the Canadian dollar, nicknamed the loonie after the Canadian bird that is featured on its one-dollar coin, rose sharply in value against the U.S. dollar. Because the United States and Canada are major trading partners, the changing exchange rate suggested that, other things equal, Canadian exports to the United States would fall and imports rise. The resulting fall in net exports, other things equal, could slow the rate of growth in Canadian GDP.
Fortunately for Canada, “all other things” were not equal. In particular, strong income growth in the United States and China increased the demand for Canadian exports. In addition, the loonie’s appreciation against other currencies was less dramatic, and so Canadian exports remained competitive in those markets. While imports did increase, as expected due to the exchange rate change, exports grew at a faster rate, and hence net exports increased over the period.
In sum, Canadian net exports grew, although not by as much as they would have had the loonie not appreciated. As Beata Caranci, an economist for Toronto Dominion Bank put it, “We might have some bumpy months ahead but it definitely looks like the worst is over. … While Canadian exports appear to have survived the loonie’s run-up, their fortunes would be much brighter if the exchange rate were still at 65 cents.”
Answers to Try It! Problems
1. Mexico’s exports increase, shifting its aggregate demand curve to the right. Mexico’s real GDP and price level rise, as shown in Panel (a).
2. Japan’s net exports rise. This event shifts Japan’s aggregate demand curve to the right, increasing its real GDP and price level, as shown in Panel (b).
3. Germany’s net exports increase, shifting Germany’s aggregate demand curve to the right, increasing its price level and real GDP, as shown in Panel (c).
4. U.S. exports fall, shifting the U.S. aggregate demand curve to the left, which will reduce the price level and real GDP, as shown in Panel (d).
Figure 30.5
1For an interesting history of this remarkable development, see Marc Levinson, The Box: How the Shipping Container Made the World Smaller and the World Economy Bigger (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2006). | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_(LibreTexts)/15%3A_Net_Exports_and_International_Finance/15.1%3A_The_International_Sector%3A_An_Introduction.txt |
Learning Objective
1. Define a country’s balance of payments, and explain what is included on the current and capital accounts.
2. Assuming that the market for a country’s currency is in equilibrium, explain why the current account balance will always be the negative of the capital account balance.
3. Summarize the economic arguments per se against public opposition to a current account deficit and a capital account surplus.
There is an important difference between trade that flows, say, from one city to another and trade that flows from one nation to another. Unless they share a common currency, as some of the nations of the European Union do, trade among nations requires that currencies be exchanged as well as goods and services. Suppose, for example, that buyers in Mexico purchase silk produced in China. The Mexican buyers will pay in Mexico’s currency, the peso; the manufacturers of the silk must be paid in China’s currency, the yuan. The flow of trade between Mexico and China thus requires an exchange of pesos for yuan.
This section examines the relationship between spending that flows into a country and spending that flows out of it. These spending flows include not only spending for a nation’s exports and imports, but payments to owners of assets in other countries, international transfer payments, and purchases of foreign assets. The balance between spending flowing into a country and spending flowing out of it is called its balance of payments.
We will simplify our analysis by ignoring international transfer payments, which occur when an individual, firm, or government makes a gift to an individual, firm, or government in another country. Foreign aid is an example of an international transfer payment. International transfer payments play a relatively minor role in the international financial transactions of most countries; ignoring them will not change our basic conclusions.
A second simplification will be to treat payments to foreign owners of factors of production used in a country as imports and payments received by owners of factors of production used in other countries as exports. This is the approach when we use GNP rather than GDP as the measure of a country’s output.
These two simplifications leave two reasons for demanding a country’s currency: for foreigners to purchase a country’s goods and services (that is, its exports) and to purchase assets in the country. A country’s currency is supplied in order to purchase foreign currencies. A country’s currency is thus supplied for two reasons: to purchase goods and services from other countries (that is, its imports) and to purchase assets in other countries.
We studied the determination of exchange rates in the chapter on how financial markets work. We saw that, in general, exchange rates are determined by demand and supply and that the markets for the currencies of most nations can be regarded as being in equilibrium. Exchange rates adjust quickly, so that the quantity of a currency demanded equals the quantity of the currency supplied.
Our analysis will deal with flows of spending between the domestic economy and the rest of the world. Suppose, for example, that we are analyzing Japan’s economy and its transactions with the rest of the world. The purchase by a buyer in, say, Germany of bonds issued by a Japanese corporation would be part of the rest-of-world demand for yen to buy Japanese assets. Adding export demand to asset demand by people, firms, and governments outside a country, we get the total demand for a country’s currency.
A domestic economy’s currency is supplied to purchase currencies in the rest of the world. In an analysis of the market for Japanese yen, for example, yen are supplied when people, firms, and government agencies in Japan purchase goods and services from the rest of the world. This part of the supply of yen equals Japanese imports. Yen are also supplied so that holders of yen can acquire assets from other countries.
Equilibrium in the market for a country’s currency implies that the quantity of a particular country’s currency demanded equals the quantity supplied. Equilibrium thus implies that
Equation 30.1
Quantity of currency demanded = quantity of currency supplied
In turn, the quantity of a currency demanded is from two sources:
1. Exports
2. Rest-of-world purchases of domestic assets
The quantity supplied of a currency is from two sources:
1. Imports
2. Domestic purchases of rest-of-world assets
Therefore, we can rewrite Equation 30.1 as
Equation 30.2
Exports + (rest-of-world purchases of domestic assets) = imports + (domestic purchases of rest-of-world assets)
Accounting for International Payments
In this section, we will build a set of accounts to track international payments. To do this, we will use the equilibrium condition for foreign exchange markets given in Equation 30.2. We will see that the balance between a country’s purchases of foreign assets and foreign purchases of the country’s assets will have important effects on net exports, and thus on aggregate demand.
We can rearrange the terms in Equation 30.2 to write the following:
Equation 30.3
Exports – imports = -[(rest-of-world purchases of domestic assets) – (domestic purchases of rest-of-world assets)]
Equation 30.3 represents an extremely important relationship. Let us examine it carefully.
The left side of the equation is net exports. It is the balance between spending flowing from foreign countries into a particular country for the purchase of its goods and services and spending flowing out of the country for the purchase of goods and services produced in other countries. The current account is an accounting statement that includes all spending flows across a nation’s border except those that represent purchases of assets. The balance on current account equals spending flowing into an economy from the rest of the world on current account less spending flowing from the nation to the rest of the world on current account. Given our two simplifying assumptions—that there are no international transfer payments and that we can treat rest-of-world purchases of domestic factor services as exports and domestic purchases of rest-of-world factor services as imports—the balance on current account equals net exports. When the balance on current account is positive, spending flowing in for the purchase of goods and services exceeds spending that flows out, and the economy has a current account surplus (i.e., net exports are positive in our simplified analysis). When the balance on current account is negative, spending for goods and services that flows out of the country exceeds spending that flows in, and the economy has a current account deficit (i.e., net exports are negative in our simplified analysis).
A country’s capital account is an accounting statement of spending flows into and out of the country during a particular period for purchases of assets. The term within the parentheses on the right side of the equation gives the balance between rest-of-world purchases of domestic assets and domestic purchases of rest-of-world assets; this balance is a country’s balance on capital account. A positive balance on capital account is a capital account surplus. A capital account surplus means that buyers in the rest of the world are purchasing more of a country’s assets than buyers in the domestic economy are spending on rest-of-world assets. A negative balance on capital account is a capital account deficit. It implies that buyers in the domestic economy are purchasing a greater volume of assets in other countries than buyers in other countries are spending on the domestic economy’s assets. Remember that the balance on capital account is the term inside the parentheses on the right-hand side of Equation 30.3 and that there is a minus sign outside the parentheses.
Equation 30.3 tells us that a country’s balance on current account equals the negative of its balance on capital account. Suppose, for example, that buyers in the rest of the world are spending \$100 billion per year acquiring assets in a country, while that country’s buyers are spending \$70 billion per year to acquire assets in the rest of the world. The country thus has a capital account surplus of \$30 billion per year. Equation 30.3 tells us the country must have a current account deficit of \$30 billion per year.
Alternatively, suppose buyers from the rest of the world acquire \$25 billion of a country’s assets per year and that buyers in that country buy \$40 billion per year in assets in other countries. The economy has a capital account deficit of \$15 billion; its capital account balance equals −\$15 billion. Equation 30.3 tells us it thus has a current account surplus of \$15 billion. In general, we may write the following:
Equation 30.4
Current account balance = -(capital account balance)
Assuming the market for a nation’s currency is in equilibrium, a capital account surplus necessarily means a current account deficit. A capital account deficit necessarily means a current account surplus. Similarly, a current account surplus implies a capital account deficit; a current account deficit implies a capital account surplus. Whenever the market for a country’s currency is in equilibrium, and it virtually always is in the absence of exchange rate controls, Equation 30.3 is an identity—it must be true. Thus, any surplus or deficit in the current account means the capital account has an offsetting deficit or surplus.
The accounting relationships underlying international finance hold as long as a country’s currency market is in equilibrium. But what are the economic forces at work that cause these equalities to hold? Consider how global turmoil in 1997 and 1998, discussed in the chapter opening, affected the United States. Holders of assets, including foreign currencies, in the rest of the world were understandably concerned that the values of those assets might fall. To avoid a plunge in the values of their own holdings, many of them purchased U.S. assets, including U.S. dollars. Those purchases of U.S. assets increased the U.S. surplus on capital account. To buy those assets, foreign purchasers had to purchase dollars. Also, U.S. citizens became less willing to hold foreign assets, and their preference for holding U.S. assets increased. United States citizens were thus less willing to supply dollars to the foreign exchange market. The increased demand for dollars and the decreased supply of dollars sent the U.S. exchange rate higher, as shown in Panel (a) of Figure 30.6. Panel (b) shows the actual movement of the U.S. exchange rate in 1997 and 1998. Notice the sharp increases in the exchange rate throughout most of the period. A higher exchange rate in the United States reduces U.S. exports and increases U.S. imports, increasing the current account deficit. Panel (c) shows the movement of the current and capital accounts in the United States in 1997 and 1998. Notice that as the capital account surplus increased, the current account deficit rose. A reduction in the U.S. exchange rate at the end of 1998 coincided with a movement of these balances in the opposite direction.
Deficits and Surpluses: Good or Bad?
For the past quarter century, the United States has had a current account deficit and a capital account surplus. Is this good or bad?
Viewed from the perspective of consumers, neither phenomenon seems to pose a problem. A current account deficit is likely to imply a trade deficit. That means more goods and services are flowing into the country than are flowing out. A capital account surplus means more spending is flowing into the country for the purchase of assets than is flowing out. It is hard to see the harm in any of that.
Public opinion, however, appears to regard a current account deficit and capital account surplus as highly undesirable, perhaps because people associate a trade deficit with a loss of jobs. But that is erroneous; employment in the long run is determined by forces that have nothing to do with a trade deficit. An increase in the trade deficit (that is, a reduction in net exports) reduces aggregate demand in the short run, but net exports are only one component of aggregate demand. Other factors—consumption, investment, and government purchases—affect aggregate demand as well. There is no reason a trade deficit should imply a loss of jobs.
What about foreign purchases of U.S. assets? One objection to such purchases is that if foreigners own U.S. assets, they will receive the income from those assets—spending will flow out of the country. But it is hard to see the harm in paying income to financial investors. When someone buys a bond issued by Microsoft, interest payments will flow from Microsoft to the bond holder. Does Microsoft view the purchase of its bond as a bad thing? Of course not. Despite the fact that Microsoft’s payment of interest on the bond and the ultimate repayment of the face value of the bond will exceed what the company originally received from the bond purchaser, Microsoft is surely not unhappy with the arrangement. It expects to put that money to more productive use; that is the reason it issued the bond in the first place.
A second concern about foreign asset purchases is that the United States in some sense loses sovereignty when foreigners buy its assets. But why should this be a problem? Foreign-owned firms competing in U.S. markets are at the mercy of those markets, as are firms owned by U.S. nationals. Foreign owners of U.S. real estate have no special power. What about foreign buyers of bonds issued by the U.S. government? Foreigners owned about 28% of these bonds at the end of September 2008; they are thus the creditors for about 28% of the national debt. But this position hardly puts them in control of the government of the United States. They hold an obligation of the U.S. government to pay them a certain amount of U.S. dollars on a certain date, nothing more. A foreign owner could sell his or her bonds, but more than \$100 billion worth of these bonds are sold every day. The resale of U.S. bonds by a foreign owner will not affect the U.S. government.
In short, there is no economic justification for concern about having a current account deficit and a capital account surplus—nor would there be an economic reason to be concerned about the opposite state of affairs. The important feature of international trade is its potential to improve living standards for people. It is not a game in which current account balances are the scorecard.
Key Takeaways
• The balance of payments shows spending flowing into and out of a country.
• The current account is an accounting statement that includes all spending flows across a nation’s border except those that represent purchases of assets. In our simplified analysis, the balance on current account equals net exports.
• A nation’s balance on capital account equals rest-of-world purchases of its assets during a period less its purchases of rest-of-world assets.
• Provided that the market for a nation’s currency is in equilibrium, the balance on current account equals the negative of the balance on capital account.
• There is no economic justification for viewing any particular current account balance as a good or bad thing.
Try It!
Use Equation 30.3 and Equation 30.4 to compute the variables given in each of the following. Assume that the market for a nation’s currency is in equilibrium and that the balance on current account equals net exports.
1. Suppose U.S. exports equal \$300 billion, imports equal \$400 billion, and rest-of-world purchases of U.S. assets equal \$150 billion. What is the U.S. balance on current account? The balance on capital account? What is the value of U.S. purchases of rest-of-world assets?
2. Suppose Japanese exports equal ¥200 trillion (¥ is the symbol for the yen, Japan’s currency), imports equal ¥120 trillion, and Japan’s purchases of rest-of-world assets equal ¥90 trillion. What is the balance on Japan’s current account? The balance on Japan’s capital account? What is the value of rest-of-world purchases of Japan’s assets?
3. Suppose Britain’s purchases of rest-of-world assets equal £70 billion (£ is the symbol for the pound, Britain’s currency), rest-of-world purchases of British assets equal £90 billion, and Britain’s exports equal £40 billion. What is Britain’s balance on capital account? Its balance on current account? Its total imports?
4. Suppose Mexico’s purchases of rest-of-world assets equal \$500 billion (\$ is the symbol for the peso, Mexico’s currency), rest-of-world purchases of Mexico’s assets equal \$700 billion, and Mexico’s imports equal \$550 billion. What is Mexico’s balance on capital account? Its balance on current account? Its total exports?
Case in Point: Alan Greenspan on the U.S. Current Account Deficit
Figure 30.7
Javier – Alan Greenspan 2 – CC BY-NC-ND 2.0.
The growing U.S. current account deficit has generated considerable alarm. But, is there cause for alarm? In a speech in December 2005, former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan analyzed what he feels are the causes of the growing deficit and explains how the U.S. current account deficit may, under certain circumstances, decrease over time without a crisis.
“In November 2003, I noted that we saw little evidence of stress in funding the U.S. current account deficit even though the real exchange rate for the dollar, on net, had declined more than 10% since early 2002. … Two years later, little has changed except that our current account deficit has grown still larger. Most policy makers marvel at the seeming ease with which the United States continues to finance its current account deficit.
“Of course, deficits that cumulate to ever-increasing net external debt, with its attendant rise in servicing costs, cannot persist indefinitely. At some point, foreign investors will balk at a growing concentration of claims against U.S. residents … and will begin to alter their portfolios. … The rise of the U.S. current account deficit over the past decade appears to have coincided with a pronounced new phase of globalization that is characterized by a major acceleration in U.S. productivity growth and the decline in what economists call home bias. In brief, home bias is the parochial tendency of persons, though faced with comparable or superior foreign opportunities, to invest domestic savings in the home country. The decline in home bias is reflected in savers increasingly reaching across national borders to invest in foreign assets. The rise in U.S. productivity attracted much of those savings toward investments in the United States. …
“Accordingly, it is tempting to conclude that the U.S. current account deficit is essentially a byproduct of long-term secular forces, and thus is largely benign. After all, we do seem to have been able to finance our international current account deficit with relative ease in recent years.
“But does the apparent continued rise in the deficits of U.S. individual households and nonfinancial businesses themselves reflect growing economic strain? (We do not think so.) And does it matter how those deficits of individual economic entities are being financed? Specifically, does the recent growing proportion of these deficits being financed, net, by foreigners matter? …
“If the currently disturbing drift toward protectionism is contained and markets remain sufficiently flexible, changing terms of trade, interest rates, asset prices, and exchange rates will cause U.S. saving to rise, reducing the need for foreign finance, and reversing the trend of the past decade toward increasing reliance on it. If, however, the pernicious drift toward fiscal instability in the United States and elsewhere is not arrested and is compounded by a protectionist reversal of globalization, the adjustment process could be quite painful for the world economy.”
Answers to Try It! Problems
1. All figures are in billions of U.S. dollars per period. The left-hand side of Equation 30.3 is the current account balance
Exports − imports = \$300 − \$400 = −\$100
Using Equation 30.4, the balance on capital account is
−\$100 = −(capital account balance)
Solving this equation for the capital account balance, we find that it is \$100. The term in parentheses on the right-hand side of Equation 30.3 is also the balance on capital account. We thus have
\$100 = \$150 − U.S. purchases of rest-of-world assets
Solving this for U.S. purchase of rest-of-world assets, we find they are \$50.
2. All figures are in trillions of yen per period. The left-hand side of Equation 30.3 is the current account balance
Exports − imports = ¥200 − ¥120 = ¥80
Using Equation 30.4, the balance on capital account is
¥80 = −(capital account balance)
Solving this equation for the capital account balance, we find that it is −¥80. The term in parentheses on the right-hand side of Equation 30.3 is also the balance on capital account. We thus have
−¥80 = rest-of-world purchases of Japan’s assets − ¥90
Solving this for the rest-of-world purchases of Japan’s assets, we find they are ¥10.
3. All figures are in billions of pounds per period. The term in parentheses on the right-hand side of Equation 30.3 is the balance on capital account. We thus have
£90 − £70 = £20
Using Equation 30.4, the balance on current account is
Current account balance = −(£20)
The left-hand side of Equation 30.3 is also the current account balance
£40 − imports = −£20
Solving for imports, we find they are £60. Britain’s balance on current account is −£20 billion, its balance on capital account is £20 billion, and its total imports equal £60 billion per period.
4. All figures are in billions of pesos per period. The term in parentheses on the right-hand side of Equation 30.3 is the balance on capital account. We thus have
\$700 − \$500 = \$200
Using Equation 30.4, the balance on current account is
Current account balance = −(\$200)
The left-hand side of Equation 30.3 is also the current account balance
Exports − \$550 = −\$200
Solving for exports, we find they are \$350. | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_(LibreTexts)/15%3A_Net_Exports_and_International_Finance/15.2%3A_International_Finance.txt |
Learning Objective
1. Define the various types of exchange rate systems.
2. Discuss some of the pros and cons of different exchange rate systems.
Exchange rates are determined by demand and supply. But governments can influence those exchange rates in various ways. The extent and nature of government involvement in currency markets define alternative systems of exchange rates. In this section we will examine some common systems and explore some of their macroeconomic implications.
There are three broad categories of exchange rate systems. In one system, exchange rates are set purely by private market forces with no government involvement. Values change constantly as the demand for and supply of currencies fluctuate. In another system, currency values are allowed to change, but governments participate in currency markets in an effort to influence those values. Finally, governments may seek to fix the values of their currencies, either through participation in the market or through regulatory policy.
Free-Floating Systems
In a free-floating exchange rate system, governments and central banks do not participate in the market for foreign exchange. The relationship between governments and central banks on the one hand and currency markets on the other is much the same as the typical relationship between these institutions and stock markets. Governments may regulate stock markets to prevent fraud, but stock values themselves are left to float in the market. The U.S. government, for example, does not intervene in the stock market to influence stock prices.
The concept of a completely free-floating exchange rate system is a theoretical one. In practice, all governments or central banks intervene in currency markets in an effort to influence exchange rates. Some countries, such as the United States, intervene to only a small degree, so that the notion of a free-floating exchange rate system comes close to what actually exists in the United States.
A free-floating system has the advantage of being self-regulating. There is no need for government intervention if the exchange rate is left to the market. Market forces also restrain large swings in demand or supply. Suppose, for example, that a dramatic shift in world preferences led to a sharply increased demand for goods and services produced in Canada. This would increase the demand for Canadian dollars, raise Canada’s exchange rate, and make Canadian goods and services more expensive for foreigners to buy. Some of the impact of the swing in foreign demand would thus be absorbed in a rising exchange rate. In effect, a free-floating exchange rate acts as a buffer to insulate an economy from the impact of international events.
The primary difficulty with free-floating exchange rates lies in their unpredictability. Contracts between buyers and sellers in different countries must not only reckon with possible changes in prices and other factors during the lives of those contracts, they must also consider the possibility of exchange rate changes. An agreement by a U.S. distributor to purchase a certain quantity of Canadian lumber each year, for example, will be affected by the possibility that the exchange rate between the Canadian dollar and the U.S. dollar will change while the contract is in effect. Fluctuating exchange rates make international transactions riskier and thus increase the cost of doing business with other countries.
Managed Float Systems
Governments and central banks often seek to increase or decrease their exchange rates by buying or selling their own currencies. Exchange rates are still free to float, but governments try to influence their values. Government or central bank participation in a floating exchange rate system is called a managed float.
Countries that have a floating exchange rate system intervene from time to time in the currency market in an effort to raise or lower the price of their own currency. Typically, the purpose of such intervention is to prevent sudden large swings in the value of a nation’s currency. Such intervention is likely to have only a small impact, if any, on exchange rates. Roughly \$1.5 trillion worth of currencies changes hands every day in the world market; it is difficult for any one agency—even an agency the size of the U.S. government or the Fed—to force significant changes in exchange rates.
Still, governments or central banks can sometimes influence their exchange rates. Suppose the price of a country’s currency is rising very rapidly. The country’s government or central bank might seek to hold off further increases in order to prevent a major reduction in net exports. An announcement that a further increase in its exchange rate is unacceptable, followed by sales of that country’s currency by the central bank in order to bring its exchange rate down, can sometimes convince other participants in the currency market that the exchange rate will not rise further. That change in expectations could reduce demand for and increase supply of the currency, thus achieving the goal of holding the exchange rate down.
Fixed Exchange Rates
In a fixed exchange rate system, the exchange rate between two currencies is set by government policy. There are several mechanisms through which fixed exchange rates may be maintained. Whatever the system for maintaining these rates, however, all fixed exchange rate systems share some important features.
A Commodity Standard
In a commodity standard system, countries fix the value of their respective currencies relative to a certain commodity or group of commodities. With each currency’s value fixed in terms of the commodity, currencies are fixed relative to one another.
For centuries, the values of many currencies were fixed relative to gold. Suppose, for example, that the price of gold were fixed at \$20 per ounce in the United States. This would mean that the government of the United States was committed to exchanging 1 ounce of gold to anyone who handed over \$20. (That was the case in the United States—and \$20 was roughly the price—up to 1933.) Now suppose that the exchange rate between the British pound and gold was £5 per ounce of gold. With £5 and \$20 both trading for 1 ounce of gold, £1 would exchange for \$4. No one would pay more than \$4 for £1, because \$4 could always be exchanged for 1/5 ounce of gold, and that gold could be exchanged for £1. And no one would sell £1 for less than \$4, because the owner of £1 could always exchange it for 1/5 ounce of gold, which could be exchanged for \$4. In practice, actual currency values could vary slightly from the levels implied by their commodity values because of the costs involved in exchanging currencies for gold, but these variations are slight.
Under the gold standard, the quantity of money was regulated by the quantity of gold in a country. If, for example, the United States guaranteed to exchange dollars for gold at the rate of \$20 per ounce, it could not issue more money than it could back up with the gold it owned.
The gold standard was a self-regulating system. Suppose that at the fixed exchange rate implied by the gold standard, the supply of a country’s currency exceeded the demand. That would imply that spending flowing out of the country exceeded spending flowing in. As residents supplied their currency to make foreign purchases, foreigners acquiring that currency could redeem it for gold, since countries guaranteed to exchange gold for their currencies at a fixed rate. Gold would thus flow out of the country running a deficit. Given an obligation to exchange the country’s currency for gold, a reduction in a country’s gold holdings would force it to reduce its money supply. That would reduce aggregate demand in the country, lowering income and the price level. But both of those events would increase net exports in the country, eliminating the deficit in the balance of payments. Balance would be achieved, but at the cost of a recession. A country with a surplus in its balance of payments would experience an inflow of gold. That would boost its money supply and increase aggregate demand. That, in turn, would generate higher prices and higher real GDP. Those events would reduce net exports and correct the surplus in the balance of payments, but again at the cost of changes in the domestic economy.
Because of this tendency for imbalances in a country’s balance of payments to be corrected only through changes in the entire economy, nations began abandoning the gold standard in the 1930s. That was the period of the Great Depression, during which world trade virtually was ground to a halt. World War II made the shipment of goods an extremely risky proposition, so trade remained minimal during the war. As the war was coming to an end, representatives of the United States and its allies met in 1944 at Bretton Woods, New Hampshire, to fashion a new mechanism through which international trade could be financed after the war. The system was to be one of fixed exchange rates, but with much less emphasis on gold as a backing for the system.
In recent years, a number of countries have set up currency board arrangements, which are a kind of commodity standard, fixed exchange rate system in which there is explicit legislative commitment to exchange domestic currency for a specified foreign currency at a fixed rate and a currency board to ensure fulfillment of the legal obligations this arrangement entails. In its simplest form, this type of arrangement implies that domestic currency can be issued only when the currency board has an equivalent amount of the foreign currency to which the domestic currency is pegged. With a currency board arrangement, the country’s ability to conduct independent monetary policy is severely limited. It can create reserves only when the currency board has an excess of foreign currency. If the currency board is short of foreign currency, it must cut back on reserves.
Argentina established a currency board in 1991 and fixed its currency to the U.S. dollar. For an economy plagued in the 1980s with falling real GDP and rising inflation, the currency board served to restore confidence in the government’s commitment to stabilization policies and to a restoration of economic growth. The currency board seemed to work well for Argentina for most of the 1990s, as inflation subsided and growth of real GDP picked up.
The drawbacks of a currency board are essentially the same as those associated with the gold standard. Faced with a decrease in consumption, investment, and net exports in 1999, Argentina could not use monetary and fiscal policies to try to shift its aggregate demand curve to the right. It abandoned the system in 2002.
Fixed Exchange Rates Through Intervention
The Bretton Woods Agreement called for each currency’s value to be fixed relative to other currencies. The mechanism for maintaining these rates, however, was to be intervention by governments and central banks in the currency market.
Again suppose that the exchange rate between the dollar and the British pound is fixed at \$4 per £1. Suppose further that this rate is an equilibrium rate, as illustrated in Figure 30.8. As long as the fixed rate coincides with the equilibrium rate, the fixed exchange rate operates in the same fashion as a free-floating rate.
Now suppose that the British choose to purchase more U.S. goods and services. The supply curve for pounds increases, and the equilibrium exchange rate for the pound (in terms of dollars) falls to, say, \$3. Under the terms of the Bretton Woods Agreement, Britain and the United States would be required to intervene in the market to bring the exchange rate back to the rate fixed in the agreement, \$4. If the adjustment were to be made by the British central bank, the Bank of England, it would have to purchase pounds. It would do so by exchanging dollars it had previously acquired in other transactions for pounds. As it sold dollars, it would take in checks written in pounds. When a central bank sells an asset, the checks that come into the central bank reduce the money supply and bank reserves in that country. We saw in the chapter explaining the money supply, for example, that the sale of bonds by the Fed reduces the U.S. money supply. Similarly, the sale of dollars by the Bank of England would reduce the British money supply. In order to bring its exchange rate back to the agreed-to level, Britain would have to carry out a contractionary monetary policy.
Alternatively, the Fed could intervene. It could purchase pounds, writing checks in dollars. But when a central bank purchases assets, it adds reserves to the system and increases the money supply. The United States would thus be forced to carry out an expansionary monetary policy.
Domestic disturbances created by efforts to maintain fixed exchange rates brought about the demise of the Bretton Woods system. Japan and West Germany gave up the effort to maintain the fixed values of their currencies in the spring of 1971 and announced they were withdrawing from the Bretton Woods system. President Richard Nixon pulled the United States out of the system in August of that year, and the system collapsed. An attempt to revive fixed exchange rates in 1973 collapsed almost immediately, and the world has operated largely on a managed float ever since.
Under the Bretton Woods system, the United States had redeemed dollars held by other governments for gold; President Nixon terminated that policy as he withdrew the United States from the Bretton Woods system. The dollar is no longer backed by gold.
Fixed exchange rate systems offer the advantage of predictable currency values—when they are working. But for fixed exchange rates to work, the countries participating in them must maintain domestic economic conditions that will keep equilibrium currency values close to the fixed rates. Sovereign nations must be willing to coordinate their monetary and fiscal policies. Achieving that kind of coordination among independent countries can be a difficult task.
The fact that coordination of monetary and fiscal policies is difficult does not mean it is impossible. Eleven members of the European Union not only agreed to fix their exchange rates to one another, they agreed to adopt a common currency, the euro. The new currency was introduced in 1998 and became fully adopted in 1999. Since then, four other nations have joined. The nations that have adopted it have agreed to strict limits on their fiscal policies. Each will continue to have its own central bank, but these national central banks will operate similarly to the regional banks of the Federal Reserve System in the United States. The new European Central Bank will conduct monetary policy throughout the area. Details of this revolutionary venture are provided in the accompanying Case in Point.
When exchange rates are fixed but fiscal and monetary policies are not coordinated, equilibrium exchange rates can move away from their fixed levels. Once exchange rates start to diverge, the effort to force currencies up or down through market intervention can be extremely disruptive. And when countries suddenly decide to give that effort up, exchange rates can swing sharply in one direction or another. When that happens, the main virtue of fixed exchange rates, their predictability, is lost.
Thailand’s experience with the baht illustrates the potential difficulty with attempts to maintain a fixed exchange rate. Thailand’s central bank had held the exchange rate between the dollar and the baht steady, at a price for the baht of \$0.04. Several factors, including weakness in the Japanese economy, reduced the demand for Thai exports and thus reduced the demand for the baht, as shown in Panel (a) of Figure 30.9. Thailand’s central bank, committed to maintaining the price of the baht at \$0.04, bought baht to increase the demand, as shown in Panel (b). Central banks buy their own currency using their reserves of foreign currencies. We have seen that when a central bank sells bonds, the money supply falls. When it sells foreign currency, the result is no different. Sales of foreign currency by Thailand’s central bank in order to purchase the baht thus reduced Thailand’s money supply and reduced the bank’s holdings of foreign currencies. As currency traders began to suspect that the bank might give up its effort to hold the baht’s value, they sold baht, shifting the supply curve to the right, as shown in Panel (c). That forced the central bank to buy even more baht—selling even more foreign currency—until it finally gave up the effort and allowed the baht to become a free-floating currency. By the end of 1997, the baht had lost nearly half its value relative to the dollar.
As we saw in the introduction to this chapter, the plunge in the baht was the first in a chain of currency crises that rocked the world in 1997 and 1998. International trade has the great virtue of increasing the availability of goods and services to the world’s consumers. But financing trade—and the way nations handle that financing—can create difficulties.
Key Takeaways
• In a free-floating exchange rate system, exchange rates are determined by demand and supply.
• Exchange rates are determined by demand and supply in a managed float system, but governments intervene as buyers or sellers of currencies in an effort to influence exchange rates.
• In a fixed exchange rate system, exchange rates among currencies are not allowed to change. The gold standard and the Bretton Woods system are examples of fixed exchange rate systems.
Try It!
Suppose a nation’s central bank is committed to holding the value of its currency, the mon, at \$2 per mon. Suppose further that holders of the mon fear that its value is about to fall and begin selling mon to purchase U.S. dollars. What will happen in the market for mon? Explain your answer carefully, and illustrate it using a demand and supply graph for the market for mon. What action will the nation’s central bank take? Use your graph to show the result of the central bank’s action. Why might this action fuel concern among holders of the mon about its future prospects? What difficulties will this create for the nation’s central bank?
Case in Point: The Euro
Figure 30.10
Dana McMahan – Found euros – CC BY-NC 2.0.
It marks the most dramatic development in international finance since the collapse of the Bretton Woods system. A new currency, the euro, began trading among 11 European nations—Austria, Belgium, Finland, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Portugal, and Spain—in 1999. During a three-year transition, each nation continued to have its own currency, which traded at a fixed rate with the euro. In 2002, the currencies of the participant nations disappeared altogether and were replaced by the euro. In 2007, Slovenia adopted the euro, as did Cyprus and Malta in 2008 and Slovakia in 2009. Several other countries are also hoping to join. Notable exceptions are Britain, Sweden, Switzerland, and Denmark. Still, most of Europe now operates as the ultimate fixed exchange rate regime, a region with a single currency.
To participate in this radical experiment, the nations switching to the euro had to agree to give up considerable autonomy in monetary and fiscal policy. While each nation continues to have its own central bank, those central banks operate more like regional banks of the Federal Reserve System in the United States; they have no authority to conduct monetary policy. That authority is vested in a new central bank, the European Central Bank.
The participants have also agreed in principle to strict limits on their fiscal policies. Their deficits can be no greater than 3% of nominal GDP, and their total national debt cannot exceed 60% of nominal GDP.
Whether sovereign nations will be able—or willing—to operate under economic restrictions as strict as these remains to be seen. Indeed, several of the nations in the eurozone have exceeded the limit on national deficits.
A major test of the euro coincided with its 10th anniversary at about the same time the 2008 world financial crisis occurred. It has been a mixed blessing in getting through this difficult period. For example, guarantees that the Irish government made concerning bank deposits and debt have been better received, because Ireland is part of the euro system. On the other hand, if Ireland had a floating currency, its depreciation might enhance Irish exports, which would help Ireland to get out of its recession.
The 2008 crisis also revealed insights into the value of the euro as an international currency. The dollar accounts for about two-thirds of global currency reserves, while the euro accounts for about 25%. Most of world trade is still conducted in dollars, and even within the eurozone about a third of trade is conducted in dollars. One reason that the euro has not gained more on the dollar in terms of world usage during its first 10 years is that, whereas the U.S. government is the single issuer of its public debt, each of the 16 separate European governments in the eurozone issues its own debt. The smaller market for each country’s debt, each with different risk premiums, makes them less liquid, especially in difficult financial times.
When the euro was launched it was hoped that having a single currency would nudge the countries toward greater market flexibility and higher productivity. However, income per capita is about at the same level in the eurozone as it was 10 years ago in comparison to that of the United States—about 70%.
Answer to Try It! Problem
The value of the mon is initially \$2. Fear that the mon might fall will lead to an increase in its supply to S2, putting downward pressure on the currency. To maintain the value of the mon at \$2, the central bank will buy mon, thus shifting the demand curve to D2. This policy, though, creates two difficulties. First, it requires that the bank sell other currencies, and a sale of any asset by a central bank is a contractionary monetary policy. Second, the sale depletes the bank’s holdings of foreign currencies. If holders of the mon fear the central bank will give up its effort, then they might sell mon, shifting the supply curve farther to the right and forcing even more vigorous action by the central bank.
Figure 30.11 | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_(LibreTexts)/15%3A_Net_Exports_and_International_Finance/15.3%3A_Exchange_Rate_Systems.txt |
Summary
In this chapter we examined the role of net exports in the economy. We found that export and import demand are influenced by many different factors, the most important being domestic and foreign income levels, changes in relative prices, the exchange rate, and preferences and technology. An increase in net exports shifts the aggregate demand curve to the right; a reduction shifts it to the left.
In the foreign exchange market, the equilibrium exchange rate is determined by the intersection of the demand and supply curves for a currency. Given the ease with which most currencies can be traded, we can assume this equilibrium is achieved, so that the quantity of a currency demanded equals the quantity supplied. An economy can experience current account surpluses or deficits. The balance on current account equals the negative of the balance on capital account. We saw that one reason for the current account deficit in the United States is the U.S. capital account surplus; the United States has attracted a great deal of foreign financial investment.
The chapter closed with an examination of floating and fixed exchange rate systems. Fixed exchange rate systems include commodity-based systems and fixed rates that are maintained through intervention. Exchange rate systems have moved from a gold standard, to a system of fixed rates with intervention, to a mixed set of arrangements of floating and fixed exchange rates.
Concept Problems
1. David Ricardo, a famous English economist of the 19th century, stressed that a nation has a comparative advantage in those products for which its efficiency relative to other nations is the highest. He argued in favor of specialization and trade based on comparative, not absolute, advantage. From a global perspective, what would be the “advantage” of such a system?
2. For several months prior to your vacation trip to Naples, Italy, you note that the exchange rate for the dollar has been increasing relative to the euro (that is, it takes more euro to buy a dollar). Are you pleased or sad? Explain.
3. Who might respond in a way different from your own to the falling value of the euro in Question 2?
4. Suppose a nation has a deficit on capital account. What does this mean? What can you conclude about its balance on current account?
5. Suppose a nation has a surplus on capital account. What does this mean? What can you conclude about its balance on current account?
6. The following analysis appeared in a newspaper editorial:
“If foreigners own our businesses and land, that’s one thing, but when they own billions in U.S. bonds, that’s another. We don’t care who owns the businesses, but our grandchildren will have to put up with a lower standard of living because of the interest payments sent overseas. Therefore, we must reduce our trade deficit.”
Critically analyze this editorial view. Are the basic premises correct? The conclusion?
7. In the years prior to the abandonment of the gold standard, foreigners cashed in their dollars and the U.S. Treasury “lost gold” at unprecedented rates. Today, the dollar is no longer tied to gold and is free to float. What are the fundamental differences between a currency based on the gold standard and one that is allowed to float? What would the U.S. “lose” if foreigners decided to “cash in” their dollars today?
8. Can there be a deficit on current account and a deficit on capital account at the same time? Explain.
9. Suppose the people of a certain economy increase their spending on foreign-produced goods and services. What will be the effect on real GDP and the price level in the short run? In the long run?
10. Now suppose the people of a certain economy reduce their spending on foreign-produced goods and services. What will be the effect on real GDP and the price level in the short run? In the long run?
11. Canada, Mexico, and the United States have a free trade zone. What would be some of the advantages of having a common currency as well? The disadvantages? Do you think it would be a good idea? Why or why not?
12. The text says that the U.S. capital account surplus necessarily implies a current account deficit. Suppose that the United States were to undertake measures to eliminate its capital account surplus. What sorts of measures might it take? Do you think such measures would be a good idea? Why or why not?
Numerical Problems
1. For each of the following scenarios, determine whether the aggregate demand curve will shift. If so, in which direction will it shift and by how much?
1. A change in consumer preferences leads to an initial \$25-billion decrease in net exports. The multiplier is 1.5.
2. A change in trade policies leads to an initial \$25-billion increase in net exports. The multiplier is 1.
3. There is an increase in the domestic price level from 1 to 1.05, while the price level of the country’s major trading partner does not change. The multiplier is 2.
4. Recession in a country’s trading partner lowers exports by \$20 billion. The multiplier is 2.
2. Fill in the missing items in the table below. All figures are in U.S. billions of dollars.
U.S. exports U.S. imports Domestic purchases of foreign assets Rest-of-world purchases of U.S. assets
a. 100 100 400
b. 100 200 200
c. 300 400 600
d. 800 800 1,100
3. Suppose the market for a country’s currency is in equilibrium and that its exports equal \$700 billion, its purchases of rest-of-world assets equal \$1,000 billion, and foreign purchases of its assets equal \$1,200 billion. Assuming it has no international transfer payments and that output is measured as GNP:
1. What are the country’s imports?
2. What is the country’s balance on current account?
3. What is the country’s balance on capital account?
4. Suppose that the market for a country’s currency is in equilibrium and that its exports equal \$400, its imports equal \$500 billion, and rest-of-world purchases of the country’s assets equal \$100. Assuming it has no international transfer payments and that output is measured as GNP:
1. What is the country’s balance on current account?
2. What is the country’s balance on capital account?
3. What is the value of the country’s purchases of rest-of-world assets?
5. The information below describes the trade-weighted exchange rate for the dollar (standardized at a value of 100) and net exports (in billions of dollars) for an eight-month period.
Month Trade-weighted exchange rate Net exports
January 100.5 −9.8
February 99.9 −11.6
March 100.5 −13.5
April 100.3 −14.0
May 99.6 −15.6
June 100.9 −14.2
July 101.4 −14.9
August 101.8 −16.7
1. Plot the data on a graph.
2. Do the data support the expected relationship between the trade-weighted exchange rate and net exports? Explain.
6. The graph below shows the foreign exchange market between the United States and Japan before and after an increase in the demand for Japanese goods by U.S. consumers.
1. If the exchange rate was free-floating prior to the change in demand for Japanese goods, what was its likely value?
2. After the change in demand, the free-floating exchange rate would be how many yen per dollar?
3. If the Japanese central bank wanted to keep the exchange rate fixed at its initial value, how many dollars would it have to buy?
Figure 30.12
1. Suppose Japan relaxes its restrictions on imports of foreign goods and services and begins importing more from the United States. Illustrate graphically how this will affect the U.S. exchange rate, price level, and level of real GDP in the short run and in the long run. How will it affect these same variables in Japan? (Assume both economies are initially operating at their potential levels of output.)
2. Suppose U.S. investors begin purchasing assets in Mexico. Illustrate graphically how this will affect the U.S. exchange rate, price level, and level of real GDP in the short run and in the long run. How will it affect these same variables in Mexico? (Assume both economies are initially operating at their potential levels of output.)
3. Suppose foreigners begin buying more assets in the United States. Illustrate graphically how this will affect the U.S. exchange rate, price level, and level of real GDP in the short run and in the long run. (Assume the economy is initially operating at its potential output.) | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_(LibreTexts)/15%3A_Net_Exports_and_International_Finance/15.4%3A_Review_and_Practice.txt |
Thumbnail: https://unsplash.com/photos/untSDM2Hihg
16: Inflation and Unemployment
Learning Objective
1. Draw a Phillips curve and describe the relationship between inflation and unemployment that it expresses.
2. Describe the other relationships or phases that have been observed between inflation and unemployment.
It has often been the case that progress against inflation comes at the expense of greater unemployment, and that reduced unemployment comes at the expense of greater inflation. This section looks at the record and traces the emergence of the view that a simple trade-off between these macroeconomic “bad guys” exists.
Clearly, it is desirable to reduce unemployment and inflation. Unemployment represents a lost opportunity for workers to engage in productive effort—and to earn income. Inflation erodes the value of money people hold, and more importantly, the threat of inflation adds to uncertainty and makes people less willing to save and firms less willing to invest. If there were a trade-off between the two, we could reduce the rate of inflation or the rate of unemployment, but not both. The fact that the United States did make progress against unemployment and inflation through most of the 1990s and early 2000s represented a macroeconomic triumph, one that appeared impossible just a few years earlier. The next section examines the argument that once dominated macroeconomic thought—that a simple trade-off between inflation and unemployment did, indeed, exist. The argument continues to appear in discussions of macroeconomic policy today; it will be useful to examine it.
The Phillips Curve
In 1958, New Zealand-born economist Almarin Phillips reported that his analysis of a century of British wage and unemployment data suggested that an inverse relationship existed between rates of increase in wages and British unemployment (Phillips, 1958). Economists were quick to incorporate this idea into their thinking, extending the relationship to the rate of price-level changes—inflation—and unemployment. The notion that there is a trade-off between the two is expressed by a Phillips curve, a curve that suggests a negative relationship between inflation and unemployment. Figure 31.1 shows a Phillips curve.
The Phillips curve seemed to make good theoretical sense. The dominant school of economic thought in the 1960s suggested that the economy was likely to experience either a recessionary or an inflationary gap. An economy with a recessionary gap would have high unemployment and little or no inflation. An economy with an inflationary gap would have very little unemployment and a higher rate of inflation. The Phillips curve suggested a smooth transition between the two. As expansionary policies were undertaken to move the economy out of a recessionary gap, unemployment would fall and inflation would rise. Policies to correct an inflationary gap would bring down the inflation rate, but at a cost of higher unemployment.
The experience of the 1960s suggested that precisely the kind of trade-off the Phillips curve implied did, in fact, exist in the United States. Figure 31.2 shows annual rates of inflation (computed using the implicit price deflator) plotted against annual rates of unemployment from 1961 to 1969. The points appear to follow a path quite similar to a Phillips curve relationship. The civilian unemployment rate fell from 6.7% in 1961 to 3.5% in 1969. The inflation rate rose from 1.1% in 1961 to 4.8% in 1969. While inflation dipped slightly in 1963, it appeared that, for the decade as a whole, a reduction in unemployment had been “traded” for an increase in inflation.
In the mid-1960s, the economy moved into an inflationary gap as unemployment fell below its natural level. The economy had already reached its full employment level of output when the 1964 tax cut was passed. The Fed undertook a more expansionary monetary policy at the same time. The combined effect of the two policies increased aggregate demand and pushed the economy beyond full employment and into an inflationary gap. Aggregate demand continued to rise as U.S. spending for the war in Vietnam expanded and as President Lyndon Johnson launched an ambitious program aimed at putting an end to poverty in the United States.
By the end of the decade, unemployment at 3.5% was substantially below its natural level, estimated by the Congressional Budget Office to be 5.6% that year. When Richard Nixon became president in 1969, it was widely believed that, with an economy operating with an inflationary gap, it was time to move back down the Phillips curve, trading a reduction in inflation for an increase in unemployment. President Nixon moved to do precisely that, serving up a contractionary fiscal policy by ordering cuts in federal government purchases. The Fed pursued a contractionary monetary policy aimed at bringing inflation down.
The Phillips Curve Goes Awry
The effort to nudge the economy back down the Phillips curve to an unemployment rate closer to the natural level and a lower rate of inflation met with an unhappy surprise in 1970. Unemployment increased as expected. But inflation rose! The inflation rate rose to 5.3% from its 1969 rate of 4.8%.
The tidy relationship between inflation and unemployment that had been suggested by the experience of the 1960s fell apart in the 1970s. Unemployment rose substantially, but inflation remained the same in 1971. In 1972, both rates fell. The economy seemed to fall back into the pattern described by the Phillips curve in 1973, as inflation rose while unemployment fell. But the next two years saw increases in both rates. The Phillips curve relationship between inflation and unemployment that had seemed to hold true in the 1960s no longer prevailed.
Indeed, a look at annual rates of inflation and unemployment since 1961 suggests that the 1960s were quite atypical. Figure 31.3 shows the two variables over the period from 1961 through 2009. It is hard to see a Phillips curve lurking within that seemingly random scatter of points.
Cycles of Inflation and Unemployment
Although the points plotted in Figure 31.3 are not consistent with a Phillips curve, we can find a relationship. Suppose we draw connecting lines through the sequence of observations, as is done in Figure 31.4. This approach suggests a pattern of clockwise loops, at least until 2002 when we see the beginnings of a counterclockwise loop. We see periods in which inflation rises as unemployment falls, followed by periods in which unemployment rises while inflation remains high or fairly constant. And those periods are followed by periods in which inflation and unemployment both fall.
Figure 31.5 gives an idealized version of the general cycle suggested by the data in Figure 31.4. There is a Phillips phase in which inflation rises as unemployment falls. In this phase, the relationship suggested by the Phillips curve holds. The Phillips phase is followed by a stagflation phase in which inflation remains high while unemployment increases. The term, coined by Massachusetts Institute of Technology economist and Nobel laureate Paul Samuelson during the 1970s, suggests a combination of a stagnating economy and continued inflation. And finally, there is a recovery phase in which inflation and unemployment both decline. This pattern of a Phillips phase, then stagflation, and then a recovery can be termed the inflation—unemployment cycle.
Trace the path of the inflation—unemployment cycle as it unfolds in Figure 31.4. Starting with the Phillips phase in the 1960s, we see that the economy went through three inflation—unemployment cycles through the 1970s. Each took the United States to successively higher rates of inflation and unemployment. As the cycle that began in the late 1970s passed through the stagflation phase, however, something quite significant happened. The economy suffered its highest rate of unemployment since the Great Depression during that period. It also achieved its most dramatic gains against inflation. The recovery phase of the 1990s was the longest since the U.S. government began tracking inflation and unemployment. Good luck explains some of that: oil prices fell in the late 1990s, shifting the short-run aggregate supply curve to the right. That boosted real GDP and put downward pressure on the price level. But one cause of that improved performance seemed to be the better understanding economists gained from some policy mistakes of the 1970s.
In the early 2000s, following the brief recession in 2001, the inflation–unemployment trajectory moves in a counterclockwise direction, as the economy moved back quickly into the Phillips phase of falling unemployment and rising inflation but at higher levels of both compared to what prevailed in the late 1990s. During this recent period, oil and other commodity prices were rising, due primarily to rising demand in developing countries, principally China and India. Thus, the short-run aggregate supply curve was moving to the left while aggregate demand was shifting to the right. During the recession of 2007 to 2009, the unemployment rate spiked while inflation fell. The primary reason was that the aggregate demand curve was shifting to the left.
The next section will explain these experiences in a stylized way in terms of the aggregate demand and supply model.
Key Takeaways
• The view that there is a trade-off between inflation and unemployment is expressed by a Phillips curve.
• While there are periods in which a trade-off between inflation and unemployment exists, the actual relationship between these variables between 1961 and 2002 followed a cyclical pattern: the inflation—unemployment cycle.
• In a Phillips phase, the inflation rate rises and unemployment falls. A stagflation phase is marked by rising unemployment while inflation remains high. In a recovery phase, inflation and unemployment both fall.
Try It!
Suppose an economy has experienced the rates of inflation and of unemployment shown below. Plot these data graphically in a grid with the inflation rate on the vertical axis and the unemployment rate on the horizontal axis. Identify the periods during which the economy experienced each of the three phases of the inflation—unemployment cycle identified in the text.
Period Unemployment rate (%) Inflation rate (%)
1 2.5 6.3
2 2.6 5.9
3 2.8 4.8
4 4.7 4.1
5 4.9 5.0
6 5.0 6.1
7 4.5 5.7
8 4.0 5.1
Case in Point: Some Reflections on the 1970s
Figure 31.6
Rupert Colley – Richard Nixon – CC BY 2.0.
Looking back, we may find it difficult to appreciate how stunning the experience of 1970 and 1971 was. But those two years changed the face of macroeconomic thought.
Introductory textbooks of that time contained no mention of aggregate supply. The model of choice was the aggregate expenditures model. Students learned that the economy could be in equilibrium below full employment, in which case unemployment would be the primary macroeconomic problem. Alternatively, equilibrium could occur at an income greater than the full employment level, in which case inflation would be the main culprit to worry about.
These ideas could be summarized using a Phillips curve, a new analytical device. It suggested that economists could lay out for policy makers a menu of possibilities. Policy makers could then choose the mix of inflation and unemployment they were willing to accept. Economists would then show them how to attain that mix with the appropriate fiscal and monetary policies.
Then 1970 and 1971 came crashing in on this well-ordered fantasy. President Richard Nixon had come to office with a pledge to bring down inflation. The consumer price index had risen 4.7% during 1968, the highest rate since 1951. Mr. Nixon cut government purchases in 1969, and the Fed produced a sharp slowing in money growth. The president’s economic advisers predicted at the beginning of 1970 that inflation and unemployment would both fall. Appraising the 1970 debacle early in 1971, the president’s economists said that the experience had not been consistent with what standard models would predict. The economists suggested, however, that this was probably due to a number of transitory factors. Their forecast that inflation and unemployment would improve in 1971 proved wide of the mark—the unemployment rate rose from 4.9% to 5.9% (an increase of 20%), while the rate of inflation measured by the change in the implicit price deflator barely changed from 5.3% to 5.2%.
As we will see, the experience can be readily explained using the model of aggregate demand and aggregate supply. But this tool was not well developed then. The experience of the 1970s forced economists back to their analytical drawing boards and spawned dramatic advances in our understanding of macroeconomic events. We will explore many of those advances in the next chapter.
Figure 31.7 | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_(LibreTexts)/16%3A_Inflation_and_Unemployment/16.1%3A_Relating_Inflation_and_Unemployment.txt |
Learning Objective
1. Use the model of aggregate demand and aggregate supply to explain a Phillips phase, a stagflation phase, and a recovery phase.
We have examined the cyclical pattern of inflation and unemployment suggested by the experience of the past four decades. Our task now is to explain it. We will apply the model of aggregate demand and aggregate supply, along with our knowledge of monetary and fiscal policy, to explain just why the economy performed as it did. We will find that the relationship between inflation and unemployment depends crucially on macroeconomic policy and on expectations.
The next three sections illustrate the unfolding of the inflation—unemployment cycle. Each phase of the cycle results from a specific pattern of shifts in the aggregate demand and short-run aggregate supply curves.
It is important to be careful in thinking about the meaning of changes in inflation as we examine the cycle of inflation and unemployment. The rise in inflation during the Phillips phase does not simply mean that the price level rises. It means that the price level rises by larger and larger percentages. Rising inflation means that the price level is rising at an increasing rate. In the recovery phase, a falling rate of inflation does not imply a falling price level. It means the price level is rising, but by smaller and smaller percentages. Falling inflation means that the price level is rising more slowly, not that the price level is falling.
The Phillips Phase: Increasing Aggregate Demand
As we saw in the last section, the Phillips phase of the inflation—unemployment cycle conforms to the concept of a Phillips curve. It is a period in which inflation tends to rise and unemployment tends to fall.
Figure 31.8 shows how a Phillips phase can unfold. Panel (a) shows the model of aggregate demand and aggregate supply; Panel (b) shows the corresponding path of inflation and unemployment.
We shall assume in Figure 31.8 and in the next two figures that the following relationship between real GDP and the unemployment rate holds. In our example, the level of potential output will be \$1,000 billion, while the natural rate of unemployment is 5.0%. The numbers given in the table correspond to the numbers used in Figure 31.8 through Figure 31.10. Notice that the higher the level of real GDP, the lower the unemployment rate. That is because the production of more goods and services requires more employment. For a given labor force, a higher level of employment implies a lower rate of unemployment.
Real GDP (billions) Rate of unemployment (%)
\$880 9.0
910 8.0
940 7.0
970 6.0
1,000 5.0
1,030 4.0
1,060 3.0
1,090 2.0
Suppose that in Period 1 the price level is 1.01 and real GDP equals \$880 billion. The economy is operating below its potential level. The unemployment rate is 9.0%; we shall assume the price level in Period 1 has risen by 0.8% from the previous period. Point 1 in Panel (b) thus shows an initial rate of inflation of 0.8% and an unemployment rate of 9.0%.
Now suppose policy makers respond to the recessionary gap of the first period with an expansionary monetary or fiscal policy. Aggregate demand in Period 2 shifts to AD2. In Panel (a), we see that the price level rises to 1.02 and real GDP rises to \$940 billion. Unemployment falls to 7.0%. The price increase from 1.01 to 1.02 gives us an inflation rate of about 1.0%. Panel (b) shows the new combination of inflation and unemployment rates for Period 2.
Impact lags mean that expansionary policies, even those undertaken in response to the recessionary gap in Periods 1 and 2, continue to expand aggregate demand in Period 3. In the case shown, aggregate demand rises to AD3, pushing the economy well past its level of potential output into an inflationary gap. Real GDP rises to \$1,090 billion, and the price level rises to 1.045 in Panel (a) of Figure 31.8. The increase in real GDP lowers the unemployment rate to 2.0%, and the inflation rate rises to 2.5% at point 3 in Panel (b). Unemployment has fallen at a cost of rising inflation.
The shifts from point 1 to point 2 to point 3 in Panel (b) are characteristic of the Phillips phase. It is crucial to note how these changes occurred. Inflation rose and unemployment fell, because increasing aggregate demand moved along the original short-run aggregate supply curve SRAS1,2,3. We saw in the chapter that introduced the model of aggregate demand and aggregate supply that a short-run aggregate supply curve is drawn for a given level of the nominal wage and for a given set of expected prices. The Phillips phase, however, drives prices above what workers and firms expected when they agreed to a given set of nominal wages; real wages are thus driven below their expected level during this phase. Firms that have sticky prices are in the same situation. Firms set their prices based on some expected price level. As rising inflation drives the price level beyond their expectations, their prices will be too low relative to the rest of the economy. Because some firms and workers are committed to their present set of prices and wages for some period of time, they will be stuck with the wrong prices and wages for a while. During that time, their lower-than-expected relative prices will mean greater sales and greater production. The combination of increased production and lower real wages means greater employment and, thus, lower unemployment.
Ultimately, we should expect that workers and firms will begin adjusting nominal wages and other sticky prices to reflect the new, higher level of prices that emerges during the Phillips phase. It is this adjustment that can set the stage for a stagflation phase.
Changes in Expectations and the Stagflation Phase
As workers and firms become aware that the general price level is rising, they will incorporate this fact into their expectations of future prices. In reaching new agreements on wages, they are likely to settle on higher nominal wages. Firms with sticky prices will adjust their prices upward as they anticipate higher prices throughout the economy.
As we saw in the chapter introducing the model of aggregate demand and aggregate supply, increases in nominal wages and in prices that were sticky will shift the short-run aggregate supply curve to the left. Such a shift is illustrated in Panel (a) of Figure 31.9, where SRAS1,2,3 shifts to SRAS4. The result is a shift to point 4; the price level rises to 1.075, and real GDP falls to \$970 billion. The increase in the price level to 1.075 from 1.045 implies an inflation rate of 2.9% ([1.075 − 1.045] / 1.045 = 2.9%); unemployment rises to 6.0% with the decrease in real GDP. The new combination of inflation and unemployment is given by point 4 in Panel (b).
The essential feature of the stagflation phase is a change in expectations. Workers and firms that were blindsided by rising prices during the Phillips phase ended up with lower real wages and lower relative price levels than they intended. In the stagflation phase, they catch up. But the catching up shifts the short-run aggregate supply curve to the left, producing a reduction in real GDP and an increase in the price level.
The Recovery Phase
The stagflation phase shown in Figure 31.9 leaves the economy with a recessionary gap at point 4 in Panel (a). The economy is bumped into a recession by changing expectations. Policy makers can be expected to respond to the recessionary gap by boosting aggregate demand. That increase in aggregate demand will lead the economy into the recovery phase of the inflation—unemployment cycle.
Figure 31.10 illustrates a recovery phase. In Panel (a), aggregate demand increases to AD5, boosting the price level to 1.09 and real GDP to \$1,060. The new price level represents a 1.4% ([1.09 − 1.075] / 1.075 = 1.4%) increase over the previous price level. The price level is higher, but the inflation rate has fallen sharply. Meanwhile, the increase in real GDP cuts the unemployment rate to 3.0%, shown by point 5 in Panel (b).
Policies that stimulate aggregate demand and changes in expected price levels are not the only forces that affect the values of inflation and unemployment. Changes in production costs shift the short-run aggregate supply curve. Depending on when these changes occur, they can reinforce or reduce the swings in inflation and unemployment that mark the inflation—unemployment cycle. For example, Figure 31.4 shows that inflation was exceedingly low in the late 1990s. During this period, oil prices were very low—only \$12.50 per barrel in 1998, for example. In terms of Figure 31.9, we can represent the low oil prices by a short-run aggregate supply curve that is to the right of SRAS4,5. That would mean that output would be somewhat higher, unemployment somewhat lower, and inflation somewhat lower than what is shown as point 5 in Panels (a) and (b) of Figure 31.10.
Comparing the late 1990s to the early 2000s, Figure 31.4 shows that both periods exhibit Phillips phases, but that the early 2000s has both higher inflation and higher unemployment. One way to explain these back-to-back Phillips phases is to look at Figure 31.8. Assume point 1 represents the economy in 2001, with aggregate demand increasing. At the same time, though, oil and other commodity prices were rising markedly—tripling between 2001 and 2007. Thus, the short-run aggregate supply curve was also shifting to the left of SRAS1,2,3. This would mean that output would be somewhat lower, unemployment somewhat higher, and inflation somewhat higher than what is shown as points 2 and 3 in Panels (a) and (b) of Figure 31.8. The 2000s Phillips curve would thus be above the late 1990s Phillips curve. While the Phillips phase of the early 2000s is farther from the origin than that of the late 1990s, it is noteworthy that the economy did not go through a severe stagflation phase, suggesting some learning about how to conduct monetary and fiscal policy. It will be interesting to see how the U.S. economy emerges from the 2007-2009 recession. Will the expansionary monetary and fiscal policies generate inflation or will inflation remain low as the unemployment rate drops?
So, while the economy does not move neatly through the phases outlined in the inflation—unemployment cycle, we can conclude that efforts to stimulate aggregate demand, together with changes in expectations, have played an important role in generating the inflation–unemployment patterns we observe in the past half-century.
Lags have played a crucial role in the cycle as well. If policy makers respond to a recessionary gap with an expansionary fiscal or monetary policy, then we know that aggregate demand will increase, but with a lag. Policy makers could thus undertake an expansionary policy and see little or no response at first. They might respond by making further expansionary efforts. When the first efforts finally shift aggregate demand, subsequent expansionary efforts can shift it too far, pushing real GDP beyond potential and creating an inflationary gap. These increases in aggregate demand create a Phillips phase. The economy’s correction of the gap creates a stagflation phase. If policy makers respond to the stagflation phase with a new round of expansionary policies, the initial result will be a recovery phase. Sufficiently large increases in aggregate demand can then push the economy into another Phillips phase, and the cycle continues.
Key Takeaways
• In a Phillips phase, aggregate demand rises and boosts real GDP, lowering the unemployment rate. The price level rises by larger and larger percentages. Inflation thus rises while unemployment falls.
• A stagflation phase is marked by a leftward shift in short-run aggregate supply as wages and sticky prices are adjusted upwards. Unemployment rises while inflation remains high.
• In a recovery phase, policy makers boost aggregate demand. The price level rises, but at a slower rate than in the stagflation phase, so inflation falls. Unemployment falls as well.
Try It!
Using the model of aggregate demand and aggregate supply; sketch the changes in the curve(s) that produced each of the phases you identified in Try It! 16-1. Do not worry about specific numbers; just show the direction of changes in aggregate demand and/or short-run aggregate supply in each phase.
Case in Point: From the Challenging 1970s to the Calm 1990s
Figure 31.11
Third Way Think Tank – Paul Volcker, former Federal Reserve Chairman – CC BY-NC-ND 2.0.
The path of U.S. inflation and unemployment followed a fairly consistent pattern of clockwise loops from 1961 to 2002, but the nature of these loops changed with changes in policy.
If we follow the cycle shown in Figure 31.4, we see that the three Phillips phases that began in 1961, 1972, and 1976 started at successively higher rates of inflation. Fiscal and monetary policy became expansionary at the beginnings of each of these phases, despite rising rates of inflation.
As inflation soared into the double-digit range in 1979, President Jimmy Carter appointed a new Fed chairman, Paul Volcker. The president gave the new chairman a clear mandate: bring inflation under control, regardless of the cost. The Fed responded with a sharply contractionary monetary policy and stuck with it even as the economy experienced its worse recession since the Great Depression.
Falling oil prices after 1982 contributed to an unusually long recovery phase: Inflation and unemployment both fell from 1982 to 1986. The inflation rate at which the economy started its next Phillips phase was the lowest since the Phillips phase of the 1960s.
The Fed’s policies since then have clearly shown a reduced tolerance for inflation. The Fed shifted to a contractionary monetary policy in 1988, so that inflation during the 1986–1989 Phillips phase never exceeded 4%. When oil prices rose at the outset of the Persian Gulf War in 1990, the resultant swings in inflation and unemployment were much less pronounced than they had been in the 1970s.
The Fed continued its effort to restrain inflation in 1994 and 1995. It shifted to a contractionary policy early in 1994 when the economy was still in a recessionary gap left over from the 1990–1991 recession. The Fed’s announced intention was to prevent any future increase in inflation. In effect, the Fed was taking explicit account of the lag in monetary policy. Had it continued an expansionary monetary policy, it might well have put the economy in another Phillips phase. Instead, the Fed has conducted a carefully orchestrated series of slight shifts in policy that succeeded in keeping the economy in the longest recovery phase since World War II.
To be sure, the stellar economic performance of the United States in the late 1990s was due in part to falling oil prices, which shifted the short-run aggregate supply curve to the right and helped push inflation and unemployment down. But it seems clear that a good deal of the credit can be claimed by the Fed, which paid closer attention to the lags inherent in macroeconomic policy. Ignoring those lags helped create the inflation—unemployment cycles that emerged with activist stabilization policies in the 1960s.
Figure 31.12 | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_(LibreTexts)/16%3A_Inflation_and_Unemployment/16.2%3A_Explaining_InflationUnemployment_Relationships.txt |
Learning Objective
1. Use the equation of exchange to explain what determines the inflation rate in the long run.
2. Explain why in the long run the Phillips curve is vertical.
3. Describe frictional and structural unemployment and the factors that may affect these two types of unemployment.
4. Describe efficiency wage theory and its predictions concerning cyclical unemployment.
In the last section, we saw how stabilization policy, together with changes in expectations, can produce the cycles of inflation and unemployment that characterized the past several decades. These cycles, though, are short-run phenomena. They involve swings in economic activity around the economy’s potential output.
This section examines forces that affect the values of inflation and the unemployment rate in the long run. We shall see that the rates of money growth and of economic growth determine the inflation rate. Unemployment that persists in the long run includes frictional and structural unemployment. We shall examine some of the forces that affect both types of unemployment, as well as a new theory of unemployment.
The Inflation Rate in the Long Run
What factors determine the inflation rate? The price level is determined by the intersection of aggregate demand and short-run aggregate supply; anything that shifts either of these two curves changes the price level and thus affects the inflation rate. We have seen how these shifts can generate different inflation–unemployment combinations in the short run. In the long run, the rate of inflation will be determined by two factors: the rate of money growth and the rate of economic growth.
Economists generally agree that the rate of money growth is one determinant of an economy’s inflation rate in the long run. The conceptual basis for that conclusion lies in the equation of exchange: MV = PY. That is, the money supply times the velocity of money equals the price level times the value of real GDP.
Given the equation of exchange, which holds by definition, we learned in the chapter on monetary policy that the sum of the percentage rates of change in M and V will be roughly equal to the sum of the percentage rates of change in P and Y. That is,
Equation 31.1
Suppose that velocity is stable in the long run, so that %ΔV equals zero. Then, the inflation rate (%ΔP) roughly equals the percentage rate of change in the money supply minus the percentage rate of change in real GDP:
Equation 31.2
In the long run, real GDP moves to its potential level, YP. Thus, in the long run we can write Equation 31.2 as follows:
Equation 31.3
There is a limit to how fast the economy’s potential output can grow. Economists generally agree that potential output increases at only about a 2% to 3% annual rate in the United States. Given that the economy stays close to its potential, this puts a rough limit on the speed with which Y can grow. Velocity can vary, but it is not likely to change at a rapid rate over a sustained period. These two facts suggest that very rapid increases in the quantity of money, M, will inevitably produce very rapid increases in the price level, P. If the money supply grows more slowly than potential output, then the right-hand side of Equation 31.3 will be negative. The price level will fall; the economy experiences deflation.
Numerous studies point to the strong relationship between money growth and inflation, especially for high-inflation countries. Figure 31.13 is from a recent study by economists Paul De Grauwe and Magdalena Polan. It is based on a sample of 160 countries over a 30-year period. Panel (a) includes all 160 countries and suggests a positive relationship between money growth and the rate of inflation. The relationship is clearly not precise, and the relationship is strengthened by the presence of countries with very high inflation rates. When the researchers break down the sample into countries with inflation rates of less than 10%, less than 20%, and less than 50%, they find that for countries with single-digit inflation the relationship between inflation and money growth is quite weak. Panel (b) shows that there is still a visible, though of course not perfect, correlation when examining countries with inflation rates of less than 50% (Grauwe & Polan, 2005).
In the model of aggregate demand and aggregate supply, increases in the money supply shift the aggregate demand curve to the right and thus force the price level upward. Money growth thus produces inflation.
Of course, other factors can shift the aggregate demand curve as well. For example, expansionary fiscal policy or an increase in investment will shift aggregate demand. We have already seen that changes in the expected price level or in production costs shift the short-run aggregate supply curve. But such increases are not likely to continue year after year, as money growth can. Factors other than money growth may influence the inflation rate from one year to the next, but they are not likely to cause sustained inflation.
Inflation Rates and Economic Growth
Our conclusion is a simple and an important one. In the long run, the inflation rate is determined by the relative values of the economy’s rate of money growth and of its rate of economic growth. If the money supply increases more rapidly than the rate of economic growth, inflation is likely to result. A money growth rate equal to the rate of economic growth will, in the absence of a change in velocity, produce a zero rate of inflation. Finally, a money growth rate that falls short of the rate of economic growth is likely to lead to deflation.
Unemployment in the Long Run
Economists distinguish three types of unemployment: frictional unemployment, structural unemployment, and cyclical unemployment. The first two exist at all times, even when the economy operates at its potential. These two types of unemployment together determine the natural rate of unemployment. In the long run, the economy will operate at potential, and the unemployment rate will be the natural rate of unemployment. For this reason, in the long run the Phillips curve will be vertical at the natural rate of unemployment. Figure 31.14 explains why. Suppose the economy is operating at YP on AD1 and SRAS1. Suppose the price level is P0, the same as in the last period. In that case, the inflation rate is 0. Panel (b) shows that the unemployment rate is UP, the natural rate of unemployment. Now suppose that the aggregate demand curve shifts to AD2. In the short run, output will increase to Y1. The price level will rise to P1, and the unemployment rate will fall to U1. In Panel (b) we show the new unemployment rate, U1, to be associated with an inflation rate of π1, and the beginnings of the negatively sloped short-run Phillips curve emerges. In the long run, as price and nominal wages increase, the short-run aggregate supply curve moves to SRAS2 and output returns to YP, as shown in Panel (a). In Panel (b), unemployment returns to UP, regardless of the rate of inflation. Thus, in the long-run, the Phillips curve is vertical.
An economy operating at its potential would have no cyclical unemployment. Because an economy achieves its potential output in the long run, an analysis of unemployment in the long run is an analysis of frictional and structural unemployment. In this section, we will also look at some new research that challenges the very concept of an economy achieving its potential output.
Frictional Unemployment
Frictional unemployment occurs because it takes time for people seeking jobs and employers seeking workers to find each other. If the amount of time could be reduced, frictional unemployment would fall. The economy’s natural rate of unemployment would drop, and its potential output would rise. This section presents a model of frictional unemployment and examines some issues in reducing the frictional unemployment rate.
A period of frictional unemployment ends with the individual getting a job. The process through which the job is obtained suggests some important clues to the nature of frictional unemployment.
By definition, a person who is unemployed is seeking work. At the outset of a job search, we presume that the individual has a particular wage in mind as he or she considers various job possibilities. The lowest wage that an unemployed worker would accept, if it were offered, is called the reservation wage. This is the wage an individual would accept; any offer below it would be rejected. Once a firm offers the reservation wage, the individual will take it and the job search will be terminated. Many people may hold out for more than just a wage—they may be seeking a certain set of working conditions, opportunities for advancement, or a job in a particular area. In practice, then, an unemployed worker might be willing to accept a variety of combinations of wages and other job characteristics. We shall simplify our analysis by lumping all these other characteristics into a single reservation wage.
A worker’s reservation wage is likely to change as his or her search continues. One might initiate a job search with high expectations and thus have a high reservation wage. As the job search continues, however, this reservation wage might be adjusted downward as the worker obtains better information about what is likely to be available in the market and as the financial difficulties associated with unemployment mount. We can thus draw a reservation wage curve (Figure 31.15), that suggests a negative relationship between the reservation wage and the duration of a person’s job search. Similarly, as a job search continues, the worker will accumulate better offers. The “best-offer-received” curve shows what its name implies; it is the best offer the individual has received so far in the job search. The upward slope of the curve suggests that, as a worker’s search continues, the best offer received will rise.
The search begins at time t0, with the unemployed worker seeking wage W0. Because the worker’s reservation wage exceeds the best offer received, the worker continues the search. The worker reduces his or her reservation wage and accumulates better offers until the two curves intersect at time tc. The worker accepts wage Wc, and the job search is terminated.
The job search model in Figure 31.15 does not determine an equilibrium duration of job search or an equilibrium initial wage. The reservation wage and best-offer-received curves will be unique to each individual’s experience. We can, however, use the model to reach some conclusions about factors that affect frictional unemployment.
First, the duration of search will be shorter when more job market information is available. Suppose, for example, that the only way to determine what jobs and wages are available is to visit each firm separately. Such a situation would require a lengthy period of search before a given offer was received. Alternatively, suppose there are agencies that make such information readily available and that link unemployed workers to firms seeking to hire workers. In that second situation, the time required to obtain a given offer would be reduced, and the best-offer-received curves for individual workers would shift to the left. The lower the cost for obtaining job market information, the lower the average duration of unemployment. Government and private agencies that provide job information and placement services help to reduce information costs to unemployed workers and firms. They tend to lower frictional unemployment by shifting the best-offer-received curves for individual workers to the left, as shown in Panel (a) of Figure 31.16. Workers obtain higher-paying jobs when they do find work; the wage at which searches are terminated rises to W2.
Unemployment compensation, which was introduced in the United States during the Great Depression to help workers who had lost jobs through unemployment, also affects frictional unemployment. Because unemployment compensation reduces the financial burden of being unemployed, it is likely to increase the amount of time people will wait for a given wage. It thus shifts the reservation wage curve to the right, raises the average duration of unemployment, and increases the wage at which searches end, as shown in Panel (b). An increase in the average duration of unemployment implies a higher unemployment rate. Unemployment compensation thus has a paradoxical effect—it tends to increase the problem against which it protects.
Structural Unemployment
Structural unemployment occurs when a firm is looking for a worker and an unemployed worker is looking for a job, but the particular characteristics the firm seeks do not match up with the characteristics the worker offers. Technological change is one source of structural unemployment. New technologies are likely to require different skills than old technologies. Workers with training to equip them for the old technology may find themselves caught up in a structural mismatch.
Technological and managerial changes have, for example, changed the characteristics firms seek in workers they hire. Firms looking for assembly-line workers once sought men and women with qualities such as reliability, integrity, strength, and manual dexterity. Reliability and integrity remain important, but many assembly-line jobs now require greater analytical and communications skills. Automobile manufacturers, for example, now test applicants for entry-level factory jobs on their abilities in algebra, in trigonometry, and in written and oral communications. Strong, agile workers with weak analytical and language skills may find many job openings for which they do not qualify. They would be examples of the structurally unemployed.
Changes in demand can also produce structural unemployment. As consumers shift their demands to different products, firms that are expanding and seeking more workers may need different skills than firms for which demand has shrunk. Similarly, firms may shift their use of different types of jobs in response to changing market conditions, leaving some workers with the “wrong” set of skills. Regional shifts in demand can produce structural unemployment as well. The economy of one region may be expanding rapidly, creating job vacancies, while another region is in a slump, with many workers seeking jobs but not finding them.
Public and private job training firms seek to reduce structural unemployment by providing workers with skills now in demand. Employment services that provide workers with information about jobs in other regions also reduce the extent of structural unemployment.
Cyclical Unemployment and Efficiency Wages
In our model, unemployment above the natural level occurs if, at a given real wage, the quantity of labor supplied exceeds the quantity of labor demanded. In the analysis we’ve done so far, the failure to achieve equilibrium is a short-run phenomenon. In the long run, wages and prices will adjust so that the real wage reaches its equilibrium level. Employment reaches its natural level.
Some economists, however, argue that a real wage that achieves equilibrium in the labor market may never be reached. They suggest that firms may intentionally pay a wage greater than the market equilibrium. Such firms could hire additional workers at a lower wage, but they choose not to do so. The idea that firms may hold to a real wage greater than the equilibrium wage is called efficiency-wage theory.
Why would a firm pay higher wages than the market requires? Suppose that by paying higher wages, the firm is able to boost the productivity of its workers. Workers become more contented and more eager to perform in ways that boost the firm’s profits. Workers who receive real wages above the equilibrium level may also be less likely to leave their jobs. That would reduce job turnover. A firm that pays its workers wages in excess of the equilibrium wage expects to gain by retaining its employees and by inducing those employees to be more productive. Efficiency-wage theory thus suggests that the labor market may divide into two segments. Workers with jobs will receive high wages. Workers without jobs, who would be willing to work at an even lower wage than the workers with jobs, find themselves closed out of the market.
Whether efficiency wages really exist remains a controversial issue, but the argument is an important one. If it is correct, then the wage rigidity that perpetuates a recessionary gap is transformed from a temporary phenomenon that will be overcome in the long run to a permanent feature of the market. The argument implies that the ordinary processes of self-correction will not eliminate a recessionary gap1.
Key Takeaways
• Two factors that can influence the rate of inflation in the long run are the rate of money growth and the rate of economic growth.
• In the long run, the Phillips curve will be vertical since when output is at potential, the unemployment rate will be the natural rate of unemployment, regardless of the rate of inflation.
• The rate of frictional unemployment is affected by information costs and by the existence of unemployment compensation.
• Policies to reduce structural unemployment include the provision of job training and information about labor-market conditions in other regions.
• Efficiency-wage theory predicts that profit-maximizing firms will maintain the wage level at a rate too high to achieve full employment in the labor market.
Try It!
Using the model of a job search (see Figure 31.15), show graphically how each of the following would be likely to affect the duration of an unemployed worker’s job search and thus the unemployment rate:
1. A new program provides that workers who have lost their jobs will receive unemployment compensation from the government equal to the pay they were earning when they lost their jobs, and that this compensation will continue for at least five years.
2. Unemployment compensation is provided, but it falls by 20% each month a person is out of work.
3. Access to the Internet becomes much more widely available and is used by firms looking for workers and by workers seeking jobs.
Case in Point: Altering the Incentives for Unemployment Insurance Claimants
Figure 31.17
Tax Credits – Unemployment – CC BY 2.0.
While the rationale for unemployment insurance is clear—to help people weather bouts of unemployment—especially during economic downturns, designing programs that reduce adverse incentives is challenging. A review article by economists Peter Fredriksson and Bertil Holmlund examined decades of research that looks at how unemployment insurance programs could be improved. In particular, they consider the value of changing the duration and profile of benefit payments, increasing monitoring and sanctions imposed on unemployment insurance recipients, and changing work requirements. Some of the research is theoretical, while some comes out of actual experiments.
Concerning benefit payments, they suggest that reducing payments over time provides better incentives than either keeping payments constant or increasing them over time. Research also suggests that a waiting period might also be useful. Concerning monitoring and sanctions, most unemployment insurance systems require claimants to demonstrate in some way that they have looked for work. For example, they must report regularly to employment agencies or provide evidence they have applied for jobs. If they do not, the benefit may be temporarily cut. A number of experiments support the notion that greater search requirements reduce the length of unemployment. One experiment conducted in Maryland assigned recipients to different processes ranging from the standard requirement at the time of two employer contacts per week to requiring at least four contacts per week, attending a four-day job search workshop, and telling claimants that their employer contacts would be verified. The results showed that increasing the number of employer contacts reduced the duration by 6%, attending the workshop reduced duration by 5%, and the possibility of verification reduced it by 7.5%. Indeed, just telling claimants that they were going to have to attend the workshop led to a reduction in claimants. Evidence on instituting some kind of work requirement is similar to that of instituting workshop attendance.
The authors conclude that the effectiveness of all these instruments results from the fact that they encourage more active job search.
Answer to Try It! Problem
The duration of an unemployed worker’s job search increases in situation (1), as illustrated in panel (a) and decreases in situations (2) and (3), as illustrated in panels (b) and (c) respectively. Thus, the unemployment rate increases in situation (1) and decreases in situations (2) and (3)
Figure 31.18
1For a discussion of the argument, see Janet Yellen, “Efficiency Wage Models of Unemployment,” American Economic Review, Papers and Proceedings (May 1984): 200–205. | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_(LibreTexts)/16%3A_Inflation_and_Unemployment/16.3%3A_Inflation_and_Unemployment_in_the_Long_Run.txt |
Summary
During the 1960s, it appeared that there was a stable trade-off between the rate of unemployment and the rate of inflation. The Phillips curve, which describes such a trade-off, suggests that lower rates of unemployment come with higher rates of inflation, and that lower rates of inflation come with higher rates of unemployment. But during subsequent decades, the actual values for unemployment and inflation have not always followed the Phillips curve script.
There has, however, been a relationship between unemployment and inflation over the four decades from 1961. Periods of rising inflation and falling unemployment have been followed by periods of rising unemployment and continued inflation; those periods have, in turn, been followed by periods in which both the inflation rate and the unemployment rate fall. These periods are defined as the Phillips phase, the stagflation phase, and the recovery phase of the inflation—unemployment cycle, respectively. Following the recession of 2001, the economy returned quickly to a Phillips phase.
The Phillips phase is a period in which aggregate demand increases, boosting output and the price level. Unemployment drops and inflation rises. An essential feature of the Phillips phase is that the price increases that occur are unexpected. Workers thus experience lower real wages than they anticipated. Firms with sticky prices find that their prices are low relative to other prices. As workers and firms adjust to the higher inflation of the Phillips phase, they demand higher wages and post higher prices, so the short-run aggregate supply curve shifts leftward. Inflation continues, but real GDP falls. This is the stagflation phase. Finally, aggregate demand begins to increase again, boosting both real GDP and the price level. The higher price level, however, is likely to represent a much smaller percentage increase than had occurred during the stagflation phase. This is the recovery phase: inflation and unemployment fall together.
There is nothing inherent in a market economy that would produce the inflation—unemployment cycle we have observed since 1961. The cycle can begin if expansionary policies are launched to correct a recessionary gap, producing the Phillips phase. If those policies push the economy into an inflationary gap, then the adjustment of short-run aggregate supply will produce the stagflation phase. And, in the economy’s first response to an expansionary policy launched to deal with the recession of the stagflation phase, the price level rises, but at a slower rate than before. The economy experiences falling inflation and falling unemployment at the same time: the recovery phase.
In the long run, the Phillips curve is vertical, and inflation is essentially a monetary phenomenon. Assuming stable velocity of money over the long run, the inflation rate roughly equals the money growth rate minus the rate of growth of real GDP. For a given money growth rate, inflation is thus reduced by faster economic growth.
Frictional unemployment is affected by information costs in the labor market. A reduction in those costs would reduce frictional unemployment. Hastening the retraining of workers would reduce structural unemployment. Reductions in frictional or structural unemployment would lower the natural rate of unemployment and thus raise potential output. Unemployment compensation is likely to increase frictional unemployment.
Some economists believe that cyclical unemployment may persist because firms have an incentive to maintain real wages above the equilibrium level. Whether this efficiency-wage argument holds is controversial.
Concept Problems
1. The Case in Point titled “Some Reflections on the 1970s” describes the changes in inflation and in unemployment in 1970 and 1971 as a watershed development for macroeconomic thought. Why was an increase in unemployment such a significant event?
2. As the economy slipped into recession in 1980 and 1981, the Fed was under enormous pressure to adopt an expansionary monetary policy. Suppose it had begun an expansionary policy early in 1981. What does the text’s analysis of the inflation—unemployment cycle suggest about how the macroeconomic history of the 1980s might have been changed?
3. Here are some news reports covering events of the past 35 years. In each case, identify the stage of the inflation—unemployment cycle, and suggest what change in aggregate demand or aggregate supply might have caused it.
1. “President Nixon expressed satisfaction with last year’s economic performance. He said that with inflation and unemployment heading down, the nation ‘is on the right course.’”
2. “The nation’s inflation rate rose to a record high last month, the government reported yesterday. The consumer price index jumped 0.3% in January. Coupled with the announcement earlier this month that unemployment had risen by 0.5 percentage points, the reports suggested that the first month of President Nixon’s second term had gotten off to a rocky start.”
3. “President Carter expressed concern about reports of rising inflation but insisted the economy is on the right course. He pointed to recent reductions in unemployment as evidence that his economic policies are working.”
4. The text notes that changes in oil prices can affect the inflation—unemployment cycle. Should they be incorporated as part of the theory of the cycle?
5. The introduction to this chapter suggests that unemployment fell, and inflation generally fell, through most of the 1990s. What phase of the inflation—unemployment cycle does this represent? Relative to U.S. experience since the 1960s, what was unusual about this?
6. Suppose that declining resource supplies reduce potential output in each period by 4%. What kind of monetary policy would be needed to maintain a zero rate of inflation at full employment?
7. The Humphrey–Hawkins Act of 1978 required that the federal government maintain an unemployment rate of 4% and hold the inflation rate to less than 3%. What does the inflation–unemployment relationship tell you about achieving such goals?
8. The American Economic Association publishes a newsletter (which is available on the AEA’s Internet site at http://www.aeaweb.org/joe/) called Job Openings for Economists (JOE). Virtually all academic and many nonacademic positions for which applicants are being sought for economics positions are listed in the newsletter, which is quite inexpensive. How do you think that the publication of this journal affects the unemployment rate among economists? What type of unemployment does it affect?
9. Many economists think that we are in the very early stages of putting computer technology to work and that full incorporation of computers will cause a massive restructuring of virtually every institution of modern life. If they are right, what are the implications for unemployment? What kind of unemployment would be affected?
10. The natural unemployment rate in the United States has varied over the last 50 years. According to the Congressional Budget Office, the natural rate was 5.5% in 1960, rose to about 6.5% in the 1970s, and had declined to about 4.8% by 2000. What do you think might have caused this variation?
11. Suppose the Fed begins carrying out an expansionary monetary policy in order to close a recessionary gap. Relate what happens during the next two phases of the inflation—unemployment cycle to the maxim “You can fool some of the people some of the time, but you can’t fool all of the people all of the time.”
Numerical Problems
1. Here are annual data for the inflation and unemployment rates for the United States for the 1948–1961 period.
Year Unemployment rate (%) Inflation rate (%)
1948 3.8 3.0
1949 5.9 −2.1
1950 5.3 5.9
1951 3.3 6.0
1952 3.0 0.8
1953 2.9 0.7
1954 5.5 −0.7
1955 4.4 0.4
1956 4.1 3.0
1957 4.3 2.9
1958 6.8 1.8
1959 5.5 1.7
1960 5.5 1.4
1961 6.7 0.7
1. Plot these observations and connect the points as in Figure 31.5.
2. How does this period compare to the decades that followed?
3. What do you think accounts for the difference?
2. Here are hypothetical inflation and unemployment data for Econoland.
Time period Inflation rate (%) Unemployment rate (%)
1 0 6
2 3 4
3 7 3
4 8 5
5 7 7
6 3 6
1. Plot these points.
2. Identify which points correspond to a Phillips phase, which correspond to a stagflation phase, and which correspond to a recovery phase.
3. Relate the observations in Numerical Problem 2 to what must have been happening in the aggregate demand–aggregate supply model.
4. Suppose the full-employment level of real GDP is increasing at a rate of 3% per period and the money supply is growing at a 4% rate. What will happen to the long-run inflation rate, assuming constant velocity? | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_(LibreTexts)/16%3A_Inflation_and_Unemployment/16.4%3A_Review_and_Practice.txt |
Thumbnail: https://pixabay.com/photos/dollar-currency-money-us-dollar-4057665/
17: A Brief History of Macroeconomic Thought and Policy
Learning Objective
1. Explain the basic assumptions of the classical school of thought that dominated macroeconomic thinking before the Great Depression, and tell why the severity of the Depression struck a major blow to this view.
2. Compare Keynesian and classical macroeconomic thought, discussing the Keynesian explanation of prolonged recessionary and inflationary gaps as well as the Keynesian approach to correcting these problems.
It is hard to imagine that anyone who lived during the Great Depression was not profoundly affected by it. From the beginning of the Depression in 1929 to the time the economy hit bottom in 1933, real GDP plunged nearly 30%. Real per capita disposable income sank nearly 40%. More than 12 million people were thrown out of work; the unemployment rate soared from 3% in 1929 to 25% in 1933. Some 85,000 businesses failed. Hundreds of thousands of families lost their homes. By 1933, about half of all mortgages on all urban, owner-occupied houses were delinquent (Wheelock, 2008).
The economy began to recover after 1933, but a huge recessionary gap persisted. Another downturn began in 1937, pushing the unemployment rate back up to 19% the following year.
The contraction in output that began in 1929 was not, of course, the first time the economy had slumped. But never had the U.S. economy fallen so far and for so long a period. Economic historians estimate that in the 75 years before the Depression there had been 19 recessions. But those contractions had lasted an average of less than two years. The Great Depression lasted for more than a decade. The severity and duration of the Great Depression distinguish it from other contractions; it is for that reason that we give it a much stronger name than “recession.”
Figure 32.1 shows the course of real GDP compared to potential output during the Great Depression. The economy did not approach potential output until 1941, when the pressures of world war forced sharp increases in aggregate demand.
The Classical School and the Great Depression
The Great Depression came as a shock to what was then the conventional wisdom of economics. To see why, we must go back to the classical tradition of macroeconomics that dominated the economics profession when the Depression began.
Classical economics is the body of macroeconomic thought associated primarily with 19th-century British economist David Ricardo. His Principles of Political Economy and Taxation, published in 1817, established a tradition that dominated macroeconomic thought for over a century. Ricardo focused on the long run and on the forces that determine and produce growth in an economy’s potential output. He emphasized the ability of flexible wages and prices to keep the economy at or near its natural level of employment.
According to the classical school, achieving what we now call the natural level of employment and potential output is not a problem; the economy can do that on its own. Classical economists recognized, however, that the process would take time. Ricardo admitted that there could be temporary periods in which employment would fall below the natural level. But his emphasis was on the long run, and in the long run all would be set right by the smooth functioning of the price system.
Economists of the classical school saw the massive slump that occurred in much of the world in the late 1920s and early 1930s as a short-run aberration. The economy would right itself in the long run, returning to its potential output and to the natural level of employment.
Keynesian Economics
In Britain, which had been plunged into a depression of its own, John Maynard Keynes had begun to develop a new framework of macroeconomic analysis, one that suggested that what for Ricardo were “temporary effects” could persist for a long time, and at terrible cost. Keynes’s 1936 book, The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money, was to transform the way many economists thought about macroeconomic problems.
Keynes versus the Classical Tradition
In a nutshell, we can say that Keynes’s book shifted the thrust of macroeconomic thought from the concept of aggregate supply to the concept of aggregate demand. Ricardo’s focus on the tendency of an economy to reach potential output inevitably stressed the supply side—an economy tends to operate at a level of output given by the long-run aggregate supply curve. Keynes, in arguing that what we now call recessionary or inflationary gaps could be created by shifts in aggregate demand, moved the focus of macroeconomic analysis to the demand side. He argued that prices in the short run are quite sticky and suggested that this stickiness would block adjustments to full employment.
Keynes dismissed the notion that the economy would achieve full employment in the long run as irrelevant. “In the long run,” he wrote acidly, “we are all dead.”
Keynes’s work spawned a new school of macroeconomic thought, the Keynesian school. Keynesian economics asserts that changes in aggregate demand can create gaps between the actual and potential levels of output, and that such gaps can be prolonged. Keynesian economists stress the use of fiscal and of monetary policy to close such gaps.
Keynesian Economics and the Great Depression
The experience of the Great Depression certainly seemed consistent with Keynes’s argument. A reduction in aggregate demand took the economy from above its potential output to below its potential output, and, as we saw in Figure 32.1, the resulting recessionary gap lasted for more than a decade. While the Great Depression affected many countries, we shall focus on the U.S. experience.
The plunge in aggregate demand began with a collapse in investment. The investment boom of the 1920s had left firms with an expanded stock of capital. As the capital stock approached its desired level, firms did not need as much new capital, and they cut back investment. The stock market crash of 1929 shook business confidence, further reducing investment. Real gross private domestic investment plunged nearly 80% between 1929 and 1932. We have learned of the volatility of the investment component of aggregate demand; it was very much in evidence in the first years of the Great Depression.
Other factors contributed to the sharp reduction in aggregate demand. The stock market crash reduced the wealth of a small fraction of the population (just 5% of Americans owned stock at that time), but it certainly reduced the consumption of the general population. The stock market crash also reduced consumer confidence throughout the economy. The reduction in wealth and the reduction in confidence reduced consumption spending and shifted the aggregate demand curve to the left.
Fiscal policy also acted to reduce aggregate demand. As consumption and income fell, governments at all levels found their tax revenues falling. They responded by raising tax rates in an effort to balance their budgets. The federal government, for example, doubled income tax rates in 1932. Total government tax revenues as a percentage of GDP shot up from 10.8% in 1929 to 16.6% in 1933. Higher tax rates tended to reduce consumption and aggregate demand.
Other countries were suffering declining incomes as well. Their demand for U.S. goods and services fell, reducing the real level of exports by 46% between 1929 and 1933. The Smoot–Hawley Tariff Act of 1930 dramatically raised tariffs on products imported into the United States and led to retaliatory trade-restricting legislation around the world. This act, which more than 1,000 economists opposed in a formal petition, contributed to the collapse of world trade and to the recession.
As if all this were not enough, the Fed, in effect, conducted a sharply contractionary monetary policy in the early years of the Depression. The Fed took no action to prevent a wave of bank failures that swept the country at the outset of the Depression. Between 1929 and 1933, one-third of all banks in the United States failed. As a result, the money supply plunged 31% during the period.
The Fed could have prevented many of the failures by engaging in open-market operations to inject new reserves into the system and by lending reserves to troubled banks through the discount window. But it generally refused to do so; Fed officials sometimes even applauded bank failures as a desirable way to weed out bad management!
Figure 32.2 shows the shift in aggregate demand between 1929, when the economy was operating just above its potential output, and 1933. The plunge in aggregate demand produced a recessionary gap. Our model tells us that such a gap should produce falling wages, shifting the short-run aggregate supply curve to the right. That happened; nominal wages plunged roughly 20% between 1929 and 1933. But we see that the shift in short-run aggregate supply was insufficient to bring the economy back to its potential output.
The failure of shifts in short-run aggregate supply to bring the economy back to its potential output in the early 1930s was partly the result of the magnitude of the reductions in aggregate demand, which plunged the economy into the deepest recessionary gap ever recorded in the United States. We know that the short-run aggregate supply curve began shifting to the right in 1930 as nominal wages fell, but these shifts, which would ordinarily increase real GDP, were overwhelmed by continued reductions in aggregate demand.
A further factor blocking the economy’s return to its potential output was federal policy. President Franklin Roosevelt thought that falling wages and prices were in large part to blame for the Depression; programs initiated by his administration in 1933 sought to block further reductions in wages and prices. That stopped further reductions in nominal wages in 1933, thus stopping further shifts in aggregate supply. With recovery blocked from the supply side, and with no policy in place to boost aggregate demand, it is easy to see now why the economy remained locked in a recessionary gap so long.
Keynes argued that expansionary fiscal policy represented the surest tool for bringing the economy back to full employment. The United States did not carry out such a policy until world war prompted increased federal spending for defense. New Deal policies did seek to stimulate employment through a variety of federal programs. But, with state and local governments continuing to cut purchases and raise taxes, the net effect of government at all levels on the economy did not increase aggregate demand during the Roosevelt administration until the onset of world war1. As Figure 32.3 shows, expansionary fiscal policies forced by the war had brought output back to potential by 1941. The U.S. entry into World War II after Japan’s attack on American forces in Pearl Harbor in December of 1941 led to much sharper increases in government purchases, and the economy pushed quickly into an inflationary gap.
For Keynesian economists, the Great Depression provided impressive confirmation of Keynes’s ideas. A sharp reduction in aggregate demand had gotten the trouble started. The recessionary gap created by the change in aggregate demand had persisted for more than a decade. And expansionary fiscal policy had put a swift end to the worst macroeconomic nightmare in U.S. history—even if that policy had been forced on the country by a war that would prove to be one of the worst episodes of world history.
Key Takeaways
• Classical economic thought stressed the ability of the economy to achieve what we now call its potential output in the long run. It thus stressed the forces that determine the position of the long-run aggregate supply curve as the determinants of income.
• Keynesian economics focuses on changes in aggregate demand and their ability to create recessionary or inflationary gaps. Keynesian economists argue that sticky prices and wages would make it difficult for the economy to adjust to its potential output.
• Because Keynesian economists believe that recessionary and inflationary gaps can persist for long periods, they urge the use of fiscal and monetary policy to shift the aggregate demand curve and to close these gaps.
• Aggregate demand fell sharply in the first four years of the Great Depression. As the recessionary gap widened, nominal wages began to fall, and the short-run aggregate supply curve began shifting to the right. These shifts, however, were not sufficient to close the recessionary gap. World War II forced the U.S. government to shift to a sharply expansionary fiscal policy, and the Depression ended.
Try It!
Imagine that it is 1933. President Franklin Roosevelt has just been inaugurated and has named you as his senior economic adviser. Devise a program to bring the economy back to its potential output. Using the model of aggregate demand and aggregate supply, demonstrate graphically how your proposal could work.
Case in Point: Early Views on Stickiness
Figure 32.4
Wikimedia Commons – public domain.
Although David Ricardo’s focus on the long run emerged as the dominant approach to macroeconomic thought, not all of his contemporaries agreed with his perspective. Many eighteenth- and nineteenth-century economists developed theoretical arguments suggesting that changes in aggregate demand could affect the real level of economic activity in the short run. Like the new Keynesians, they based their arguments on the concept of price stickiness.
Henry Thornton’s 1802 book, An Enquiry into the Nature and Effects of the Paper Credit of Great Britain, argued that a reduction in the money supply could, because of wage stickiness, produce a short-run slump in output:
“The tendency, however, of a very great and sudden reduction of the accustomed number of bank notes, is to create an unusual and temporary distress, and a fall of price arising from that distress. But a fall arising from temporary distress, will be attended probably with no correspondent fall in the rate of wages; for the fall of price, and the distress, will be understood to be temporary, and the rate of wages, we know, is not so variable as the price of goods. There is reason, therefore, to fear that the unnatural and extraordinary low price arising from the sort of distress of which we now speak, would occasion much discouragement of the fabrication of manufactures.”
A half-century earlier, David Hume had noted that an increase in the quantity of money would boost output in the short run, again because of the stickiness of prices. In an essay titled “Of Money,” published in 1752, Hume described the process through which an increased money supply could boost output:
“At first, no alteration is perceived; by degrees the price rises, first of one commodity, then of another, till the whole at least reaches a just proportion with the new quantity of (money) which is in the kingdom. In my opinion, it is only in this interval or intermediate situation … that the encreasing quantity of gold and silver is favourable to industry.”
Hume’s argument implies sticky prices; some prices are slower to respond to the increase in the money supply than others.
Eighteenth- and nineteenth-century economists are generally lumped together as adherents to the classical school, but their views were anything but uniform. Many developed an analytical framework that was quite similar to the essential elements of new Keynesian economists today. Economist Thomas Humphrey, at the Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond, marvels at the insights shown by early economists: “When you read these old guys, you find out first that they didn’t speak with one voice. There was no single body of thought to which everyone subscribed. And second, you find out how much they knew. You could take Henry Thornton’s 1802 book as a textbook in any money course today.”
Answer to Try It! Problem
An expansionary fiscal or monetary policy, or a combination of the two, would shift aggregate demand to the right as shown in Panel (a), ideally returning the economy to potential output. One piece of evidence suggesting that fiscal policy would work is the swiftness with which the economy recovered from the Great Depression once World War II forced the government to carry out such a policy. An alternative approach would be to do nothing. Ultimately, that should force nominal wages down further, producing increases in short-run aggregate supply, as in Panel (b). We do not know if such an approach might have worked; federal policies enacted in 1933 prevented wages and prices from falling further than they already had.
Figure 32.5
1For a discussion of fiscal policy during the Great Depression, see E. Cary Brown, “Fiscal Policy in the ’Thirties: A Reappraisal,” American Economic Review 46, no. 5 (December 1956): 857–79. | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_(LibreTexts)/17%3A_A_Brief_History_of_Macroeconomic_Thought_and_Policy/17.1%3A_The_Great_Depression_and_Keynesian_Economics.txt |
Learning Objective
1. Briefly summarize the monetarist school of thought that emerged in the 1960s, and discuss how the experiences of the 1960s and 1970s seemed to be broadly consistent with it.
2. Briefly summarize the new classical school of thought that emerged in the 1970s, and discuss how the experiences of the 1970s seemed to be broadly consistent with it.
3. Summarize the lessons that economists learned from the decade of the 1970s.
The experience of the Great Depression led to the widespread acceptance of Keynesian ideas among economists, but its acceptance as a basis for economic policy was slower. The administrations of Presidents Roosevelt, Truman, and Eisenhower rejected the notion that fiscal policy could or should be used to manipulate real GDP. Truman vetoed a 1948 Republican-sponsored tax cut aimed at stimulating the economy after World War II (Congress, however, overrode the veto), and Eisenhower resisted stimulative measures to deal with the recessions of 1953, 1957, and 1960.
It was the administration of President John F. Kennedy that first used fiscal policy with the intent of manipulating aggregate demand to move the economy toward its potential output. Kennedy’s willingness to embrace Keynes’s ideas changed the nation’s approach to fiscal policy for the next two decades.
Expansionary Policy in the 1960s
We can think of the macroeconomic history of the 1960s as encompassing two distinct phases. The first showed the power of Keynesian policies to correct economic difficulties. The second showed the power of these same policies to create them.
Correcting a Recessionary Gap
President Kennedy took office in 1961 with the economy in a recessionary gap. He had appointed a team of economic advisers who believed in Keynesian economics, and they advocated an activist approach to fiscal policy. The new president was quick to act on their advice.
Expansionary policy served the administration’s foreign-policy purposes. Kennedy argued that the United States had fallen behind the Soviet Union, its avowed enemy, in military preparedness. He won approval from Congress for sharp increases in defense spending in 1961.
The Kennedy administration also added accelerated depreciation to the tax code. Under the measure, firms could deduct depreciation expenses more quickly, reducing their taxable profits—and thus their taxes—early in the life of a capital asset. The measure encouraged investment. The administration also introduced an investment tax credit, which allowed corporations to reduce their income taxes by 10% of their investment in any one year. The combination of increased defense spending and tax measures to stimulate investment provided a quick boost to aggregate demand.
The Fed followed the administration’s lead. It, too, shifted to an expansionary policy in 1961. The Fed purchased government bonds to increase the money supply and reduce interest rates.
As shown in Panel (a) of Figure 32.6, the expansionary fiscal and monetary policies of the early 1960s had pushed real GDP to its potential by 1963. But the concept of potential output had not been developed in 1963; Kennedy administration economists had defined full employment to be an unemployment rate of 4%. The actual unemployment rate in 1963 was 5.7%; the perception of the time was that the economy needed further stimulus.
Expansionary Policy and an Inflationary Gap
Kennedy proposed a tax cut in 1963, which Congress would approve the following year, after the president had been assassinated. In retrospect, we may regard the tax cut as representing a kind of a recognition lag— policy makers did not realize the economy had already reached what we now recognize was its potential output. Instead of closing a recessionary gap, the tax cut helped push the economy into an inflationary gap, as illustrated in Panel (b) of Figure 32.6.
The expansionary policies, however, did not stop with the tax cut. Continued increases in federal spending for the newly expanded war in Vietnam and for President Lyndon Johnson’s agenda of domestic programs, together with continued high rates of money growth, sent the aggregate demand curve further to the right. While President Johnson’s Council of Economic Advisers recommended contractionary policy as early as 1965, macroeconomic policy remained generally expansionary through 1969. Wage increases began shifting the short-run aggregate supply curve to the left, but expansionary policy continued to increase aggregate demand and kept the economy in an inflationary gap for the last six years of the 1960s. Panel (b) of Figure 32.6 shows expansionary policies pushing the economy beyond its potential output after 1963.
The 1960s had demonstrated two important lessons about Keynesian macroeconomic policy. First, stimulative fiscal and monetary policy could be used to close a recessionary gap. Second, fiscal policies could have a long implementation lag. The tax cut recommended by President Kennedy’s economic advisers in 1961 was not enacted until 1964—after the recessionary gap it was designed to fight had been closed. The tax increase recommended by President Johnson’s economic advisers in 1965 was not passed until 1968—after the inflationary gap it was designed to close had widened.
Macroeconomic policy after 1963 pushed the economy into an inflationary gap. The push into an inflationary gap did produce rising employment and a rising real GDP. But the inflation that came with it, together with other problems, would create real difficulties for the economy and for macroeconomic policy in the 1970s.
The 1970s: Troubles from the Supply Side
For many observers, the use of Keynesian fiscal and monetary policies in the 1960s had been a triumph. That triumph turned into a series of macroeconomic disasters in the 1970s as inflation and unemployment spiraled to ever-higher levels. The fiscal and monetary medicine that had seemed to work so well in the 1960s seemed capable of producing only instability in the 1970s. The experience of the period shook the faith of many economists in Keynesian remedies and made them receptive to alternative approaches.
This section describes the major macroeconomic events of the 1970s. It then examines the emergence of two schools of economic thought as major challengers to the Keynesian orthodoxy that had seemed so dominant a decade earlier.
Macroeconomic Policy: Coping with the Supply Side
When Richard Nixon became president in 1969, he faced a very different economic situation than the one that had confronted John Kennedy eight years earlier. The economy had clearly pushed beyond full employment; the unemployment rate had plunged to 3.6% in 1968. Inflation, measured using the implicit price deflator, had soared to 4.3%, the highest rate that had been recorded since 1951. The economy needed a cooling off. Nixon, the Fed, and the economy’s own process of self-correction delivered it.
Figure 32.7 tells the story—it is a simple one. The economy in 1969 was in an inflationary gap. It had been in such a gap for years, but this time policy makers were no longer forcing increases in aggregate demand to keep it there. The adjustment in short-run aggregate supply brought the economy back to its potential output.
But what we can see now as a simple adjustment seemed anything but simple in 1970. Economists did not think in terms of shifts in short-run aggregate supply. Keynesian economics focused on shifts in aggregate demand, not supply.
For the Nixon administration, the slump in real GDP in 1970 was a recession, albeit an odd one. The price level had risen sharply. That was not, according to the Keynesian story, supposed to happen; there was simply no reason to expect the price level to soar when real GDP and employment were falling.
The administration dealt with the recession by shifting to an expansionary fiscal policy. By 1973, the economy was again in an inflationary gap. The economy’s 1974 adjustment to the gap came with another jolt. The Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) tripled the price of oil. The resulting shift to the left in short-run aggregate supply gave the economy another recession and another jump in the price level.
The second half of the decade was, in some respects, a repeat of the first. The administrations of Gerald Ford and then Jimmy Carter, along with the Fed, pursued expansionary policies to stimulate the economy. Those helped boost output, but they also pushed up prices. As we saw in the chapter on inflation and unemployment, inflation and unemployment followed a cycle to higher and higher levels.
The 1970s presented a challenge not just to policy makers, but to economists as well. The sharp changes in real GDP and in the price level could not be explained by a Keynesian analysis that focused on aggregate demand. Something else was happening. As economists grappled to explain it, their efforts would produce the model with which we have been dealing and around which a broad consensus of economists has emerged. But, before that consensus was to come, two additional elements of the puzzle had to be added. The first was the recognition of the importance of monetary policy. The second was the recognition of the role of aggregate supply, both in the long and in the short run.
The Monetarist Challenge
The idea that changes in the money supply are the principal determinant of the nominal value of total output is one of the oldest in economic thought; it is implied by the equation of exchange, assuming the stability of velocity. Classical economists stressed the long run and thus the determination of the economy’s potential output. This meant that changes in the price level were, in the long run, the result of changes in the money supply.
At roughly the same time Keynesian economics was emerging as the dominant school of macroeconomic thought, some economists focused on changes in the money supply as the primary determinant of changes in the nominal value of output. Led by Milton Friedman, they stressed the role of changes in the money supply as the principal determinant of changes in nominal output in the short run as well as in the long run. They argued that fiscal policy had no effect on the economy. Their “money rules” doctrine led to the name monetarists. The monetarist school holds that changes in the money supply are the primary cause of changes in nominal GDP.
Monetarists generally argue that the impact lags of monetary policy—the lags from the time monetary policy is undertaken to the time the policy affects nominal GDP—are so long and variable that trying to stabilize the economy using monetary policy can be destabilizing. Monetarists thus are critical of activist stabilization policies. They argue that, because of crowding-out effects, fiscal policy has no effect on GDP. Monetary policy does, but it should not be used. Instead, most monetarists urge the Fed to increase the money supply at a fixed annual rate, preferably the rate at which potential output rises. With stable velocity, that would eliminate inflation in the long run. Recessionary or inflationary gaps could occur in the short run, but monetarists generally argue that self-correction will take care of them more effectively than would activist monetary policy.
While monetarists differ from Keynesians in their assessment of the impact of fiscal policy, the primary difference in the two schools lies in their degree of optimism about whether stabilization policy can, in fact, be counted on to bring the economy back to its potential output. For monetarists, the complexity of economic life and the uncertain nature of lags mean that efforts to use monetary policy to stabilize the economy can be destabilizing. Monetarists argued that the difficulties encountered by policy makers as they tried to respond to the dramatic events of the 1970s demonstrated the superiority of a policy that simply increased the money supply at a slow, steady rate.
Monetarists could also cite the apparent validity of an adjustment mechanism proposed by Milton Friedman in 1968. As the economy continued to expand in the 1960s, and as unemployment continued to fall, Friedman said that unemployment had fallen below its natural rate, the rate consistent with equilibrium in the labor market. Any divergence of unemployment from its natural rate, he insisted, would necessarily be temporary. He suggested that the low unemployment of 1968 (the rate was 3.6% that year) meant that workers had been surprised by rising prices. Higher prices had produced a real wage below what workers and firms had expected. Friedman predicted that as workers demanded and got higher nominal wages, the price level would shoot up and unemployment would rise. That, of course, is precisely what happened in 1970 and 1971. Friedman’s notion of the natural rate of unemployment buttressed the monetarist argument that the economy moves to its potential output on its own.
Perhaps the most potent argument from the monetarist camp was the behavior of the economy itself. During the 1960s, monetarist and Keynesian economists alike could argue that economic performance was consistent with their respective views of the world. Keynesians could point to expansions in economic activity that they could ascribe to expansionary fiscal policy, but economic activity also moved closely with changes in the money supply, just as monetarists predicted. During the 1970s, however, it was difficult for Keynesians to argue that policies that affected aggregate demand were having the predicted impact on the economy. Changes in aggregate supply had repeatedly pushed the economy off a Keynesian course. But monetarists, once again, could point to a consistent relationship between changes in the money supply and changes in economic activity.
Figure 32.8 shows the movement of nominal GDP and M2 during the 1960s and 1970s. In the figure, annual percentage changes in M2 are plotted against percentage changes in nominal GDP a year later to account for the lagged effects of changes in the money supply. We see that there was a close relationship between changes in the quantity of money and subsequent changes in nominal GDP.
Monetarist doctrine emerged as a potent challenge to Keynesian economics in the 1970s largely because of the close correspondence between nominal GDP and the money supply. The next section examines another school of thought that came to prominence in the 1970s.
New Classical Economics: A Focus on Aggregate Supply
Much of the difficulty policy makers encountered during the decade of the 1970s resulted from shifts in aggregate supply. Keynesian economics and, to a lesser degree, monetarism had focused on aggregate demand. As it became clear that an analysis incorporating the supply side was an essential part of the macroeconomic puzzle, some economists turned to an entirely new way of looking at macroeconomic issues.
These economists started with what we identified at the beginning of this text as a distinguishing characteristic of economic thought: a focus on individuals and their decisions. Keynesian economics employed aggregate analysis and paid little attention to individual choices. Monetarist doctrine was based on the analysis of individuals’ maximizing behavior with respect to money demand, but it did not extend that analysis to decisions that affect aggregate supply. The new approach aimed at an analysis of how individual choices would affect the entire spectrum of economic activity.
These economists rejected the entire framework of conventional macroeconomic analysis. Indeed, they rejected the very term. For them there is no macroeconomics, nor is there something called microeconomics. For them, there is only economics, which they regard as the analysis of behavior based on individual maximization. The analysis of the determination of the price level and real GDP becomes an application of basic economic theory, not a separate body of thought. The approach to macroeconomic analysis built from an analysis of individual maximizing choices is called new classical economics.
Like classical economic thought, new classical economics focuses on the determination of long-run aggregate supply and the economy’s ability to reach this level of output quickly. But the similarity ends there. Classical economics emerged in large part before economists had developed sophisticated mathematical models of maximizing behavior. The new classical economics puts mathematics to work in an extremely complex way to generalize from individual behavior to aggregate results.
Because the new classical approach suggests that the economy will remain at or near its potential output, it follows that the changes we observe in economic activity result not from changes in aggregate demand but from changes in long-run aggregate supply. New classical economics suggests that economic changes don’t necessarily imply economic problems.
New classical economists pointed to the supply-side shocks of the 1970s, both from changes in oil prices and changes in expectations, as evidence that their emphasis on aggregate supply was on the mark. They argued that the large observed swings in real GDP reflected underlying changes in the economy’s potential output. The recessionary and inflationary gaps that so perplexed policy makers during the 1970s were not gaps at all, the new classical economists insisted. Instead, they reflected changes in the economy’s own potential output.
Two particularly controversial propositions of new classical theory relate to the impacts of monetary and of fiscal policy. Both are implications of the rational expectations hypothesis, which assumes that individuals form expectations about the future based on the information available to them, and that they act on those expectations.
The rational expectations hypothesis suggests that monetary policy, even though it will affect the aggregate demand curve, might have no effect on real GDP. This possibility, which was suggested by Robert Lucas, is illustrated in Figure 32.9. Suppose the economy is initially in equilibrium at point 1 in Panel (a). Real GDP equals its potential output, YP. Now suppose a reduction in the money supply causes aggregate demand to fall to AD2. In our model, the solution moves to point 2; the price level falls to P2, and real GDP falls to Y2. There is a recessionary gap. In the long run, the short-run aggregate supply curve shifts to SRAS2, the price level falls to P3, and the economy returns to its potential output at point 3.
The new classical story is quite different. Consumers and firms observe that the money supply has fallen and anticipate the eventual reduction in the price level to P3. They adjust their expectations accordingly. Workers agree to lower nominal wages, and the short-run aggregate supply curve shifts to SRAS2. This occurs as aggregate demand falls. As suggested in Panel (b), the price level falls to P3, and output remains at potential. The solution moves from (1) to (2) with no loss in real GDP.
In this new classical world, there is only one way for a change in the money supply to affect output, and that is for the change to take people by surprise. An unexpected change cannot affect expectations, so the short-run aggregate supply curve does not shift in the short run, and events play out as in Panel (a). Monetary policy can affect output, but only if it takes people by surprise.
The new classical school offers an even stronger case against the operation of fiscal policy. It argues that fiscal policy does not shift the aggregate demand curve at all! Consider, for example, an expansionary fiscal policy. Such a policy involves an increase in government purchases or transfer payments or a cut in taxes. Any of these policies will increase the deficit or reduce the surplus. New classical economists argue that households, when they observe the government carrying out a policy that increases the debt, will anticipate that they, or their children, or their children’s children, will end up paying more in taxes. And, according to the new classical story, these households will reduce their consumption as a result. This will, the new classical economists argue, cancel any tendency for the expansionary policy to affect aggregate demand.
Lessons from the 1970s
The 1970s put Keynesian economics and its prescription for activist policies on the defensive. The period lent considerable support to the monetarist argument that changes in the money supply were the primary determinant of changes in the nominal level of GDP. A series of dramatic shifts in aggregate supply gave credence to the new classical emphasis on long-run aggregate supply as the primary determinant of real GDP. Events did not create the new ideas, but they produced an environment in which those ideas could win greater support.
For economists, the period offered some important lessons. These lessons, as we will see in the next section, forced a rethinking of some of the ideas that had dominated Keynesian thought. The experience of the 1970s suggested the following:
1. The short-run aggregate supply curve could not be viewed as something that provided a passive path over which aggregate demand could roam. The short-run aggregate supply curve could shift in ways that clearly affected real GDP, unemployment, and the price level.
2. Money mattered more than Keynesians had previously suspected. Keynes had expressed doubts about the effectiveness of monetary policy, particularly in the face of a recessionary gap. Work by monetarists suggested a close correspondence between changes in M2 and subsequent changes in nominal GDP, convincing many Keynesian economists that money was more important than they had thought.
3. Stabilization was a more difficult task than many economists had anticipated. Shifts in aggregate supply could frustrate the efforts of policy makers to achieve certain macroeconomic goals.
Key Takeaways
• Beginning in 1961, expansionary fiscal and monetary policies were used to close a recessionary gap; this was the first major U.S. application of Keynesian macroeconomic policy.
• The experience of the 1960s and 1970s appeared to be broadly consistent with the monetarist argument that changes in the money supply are the primary determinant of changes in nominal GDP.
• The new classical school’s argument that the economy operates at its potential output implies that real GDP is determined by long-run aggregate supply. The experience of the 1970s, in which changes in aggregate supply forced changes in real GDP and in the price level, seemed consistent with the new classical economists’ arguments that focused on aggregate supply.
• The experience of the 1970s suggested that changes in the money supply and in aggregate supply were more important determinants of economic activity than many Keynesians had previously thought.
Try It!
Draw the aggregate demand and the short-run and long-run aggregate supply curves for an economy operating with an inflationary gap. Show how expansionary fiscal and/or monetary policies would affect such an economy. Now show how this economy could experience a recession and an increase in the price level at the same time.
Case in Point: Tough Medicine
Figure 32.10
Wikimedia Commons – public domain.
The Keynesian prescription for an inflationary gap seems simple enough. The federal government applies contractionary fiscal policy, or the Fed applies contractionary monetary policy, or both. But what seems simple in a graph can be maddeningly difficult in the real world. The medicine for an inflationary gap is tough, and it is tough to take.
President Johnson’s new chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers, Gardner Ackley, urged the president in 1965 to adopt fiscal policies aimed at nudging the aggregate demand curve back to the left. The president reluctantly agreed and called in the chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, the committee that must initiate all revenue measures, to see what he thought of the idea. Wilbur Mills flatly told Johnson that he wouldn’t even hold hearings to consider a tax increase. For the time being, the tax boost was dead.
The Federal Reserve System did slow the rate of money growth in 1966. But fiscal policy remained sharply expansionary. Mr. Ackley continued to press his case, and in 1967 President Johnson proposed a temporary 10% increase in personal income taxes. Mr. Mills now endorsed the measure. The temporary tax boost went into effect the following year. The Fed, concerned that the tax hike would be too contractionary, countered the administration’s shift in fiscal policy with a policy of vigorous money growth in 1967 and 1968.
The late 1960s suggested a sobering reality about the new Keynesian orthodoxy. Stimulating the economy was politically more palatable than contracting it. President Kennedy, while he was not able to win approval of his tax cut during his lifetime, did manage to put the other expansionary aspects of his program into place early in his administration. The Fed reinforced his policies. Dealing with an inflationary gap proved to be quite another matter. President Johnson, a master of the legislative process, took three years to get even a mildly contractionary tax increase put into place, and the Fed acted to counter the impact of this measure by shifting to an expansionary policy.
The second half of the 1960s was marked, in short, by persistent efforts to boost aggregate demand, efforts that kept the economy in an inflationary gap through most of the decade. It was a gap that would usher in a series of supply-side troubles in the next decade.
Answer to Try It! Problem
Even with an inflationary gap, it is possible to pursue expansionary fiscal and monetary policies, shifting the aggregate demand curve to the right, as shown. The inflationary gap will, however, produce an increase in nominal wages, reducing short-run aggregate supply over time. In the case shown here, real GDP rises at first, then falls back to potential output with the reduction in short-run aggregate supply.
Figure 32.11 | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_(LibreTexts)/17%3A_A_Brief_History_of_Macroeconomic_Thought_and_Policy/17.2%3A_Keynesian_Economics_in_the_1960s_and_1970s.txt |
Learning Objective
1. Discuss how the Fed incorporated a strong inflation constraint and lags into its policies from the 1980s onwards.
2. Describe the fiscal policies that were undertaken from the 1980s onwards and their rationales.
3. Discuss the challenges that events from the 1980s onwards raised for the monetarist and new classical schools of thought.
4. Summarize the views and policy approaches of the new Keynesian school of economic thought.
The last two decades of the twentieth century brought progress in macroeconomic policy and in macroeconomic theory. The outlines of a broad consensus in macroeconomic theory began to take shape in the 1980s. This consensus has grown out of the three bodies of macroeconomic thought that, in turn, grew out of the experiences of the twentieth century. Keynesian economics, monetarism, and new classical economics all developed from economists’ attempts to understand macroeconomic change. We shall see how all three schools of macroeconomic thought have contributed to the development of a new school of macroeconomic thought: the new Keynesian school.
New Keynesian economics is a body of macroeconomic thought that stresses the stickiness of prices and the need for activist stabilization policies through the manipulation of aggregate demand to keep the economy operating close to its potential output. It incorporates monetarist ideas about the importance of monetary policy and new classical ideas about the importance of aggregate supply, both in the long and in the short run.
Another “new” element in new Keynesian economic thought is the greater use of microeconomic analysis to explain macroeconomic phenomena, particularly the analysis of price and wage stickiness. We saw in the chapter that introduced the model of aggregate demand and aggregate supply, for example, that sticky prices and wages may be a response to the preferences of consumers and of firms. That idea emerged from research by economists of the new Keynesian school.
New Keynesian ideas guide macroeconomic policy; they are the basis for the model of aggregate demand and aggregate supply with which we have been working. To see how the new Keynesian school has come to dominate macroeconomic policy, we shall review the major macroeconomic events and policies of the 1980s, 1990s, and early 2000s.
The 1980s and Beyond: Advances in Macroeconomic Policy
The exercise of monetary and of fiscal policy has changed dramatically in the last few decades.
The Revolution in Monetary Policy
It is fair to say that the monetary policy revolution of the last two decades began on July 25, 1979. On that day, President Jimmy Carter appointed Paul Volcker to be chairman of the Fed’s Board of Governors. Mr. Volcker, with President Carter’s support, charted a new direction for the Fed. The new direction damaged Mr. Carter politically but ultimately produced dramatic gains for the economy.
Oil prices rose sharply in 1979 as war broke out between Iran and Iraq. Such an increase would, by itself, shift the short-run aggregate supply curve to the left, causing the price level to rise and real GDP to fall. But expansionary fiscal and monetary policies had pushed aggregate demand up at the same time. As a result, real GDP stayed at potential output, while the price level soared. The implicit price deflator jumped 8.1%; the CPI rose 13.5%, the highest inflation rate recorded in the twentieth century. Public opinion polls in 1979 consistently showed that most people regarded inflation as the leading problem facing the nation.
Chairman Volcker charted a monetarist course of fixing the growth rate of the money supply at a rate that would bring inflation down. After the high rates of money growth of the past, the policy was sharply contractionary. Its first effects were to shift the aggregate demand curve to the left. Continued oil price increases produced more leftward shifts in the short-run aggregate supply curve, and the economy suffered a recession in 1980. Inflation remained high. Figure 32.12 shows how the combined shifts in aggregate demand and short-run aggregate supply produced a reduction in real GDP and an increase in the price level.
The Fed stuck to its contractionary guns, and the inflation rate finally began to fall in 1981. But the recession worsened. Unemployment soared, shooting above 10% late in the year. It was the worst recession since the Great Depression. The inflation rate, though, fell sharply in 1982, and the Fed began to shift to a modestly expansionary policy in 1983. But inflation had been licked. Inflation, measured by the implicit price deflator, dropped to a 4.1% rate that year, the lowest since 1967.
The Fed’s actions represented a sharp departure from those of the previous two decades. Faced with soaring unemployment, the Fed did not shift to an expansionary policy until inflation was well under control. Inflation continued to edge downward through most of the remaining years of the 20th century and into the new century. The Fed has clearly shifted to a stabilization policy with a strong inflation constraint. It shifts to expansionary policy when the economy has a recessionary gap, but only if it regards inflation as being under control.
This concern about inflation was evident again when the U.S. economy began to weaken in 2008, and there was initially discussion among the members of the Federal Open Market Committee about whether or not easing would contribute to inflation. At that time, it looked like inflation was becoming a more serious problem, largely due to increases in oil and other commodity prices. Some members of the Fed, including Chairman Bernanke, argued that these price increases were likely to be temporary and the Fed began using expansionary monetary policy early on. By late summer and early fall, inflationary pressures had subsided, and all the members of the FOMC were behind continued expansionary policy. Indeed, at that point, the Fed let it be known that it was willing to do anything in its power to fight the current recession.
The next major advance in monetary policy came in the 1990s, under Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan. The Fed had shifted to an expansionary policy as the economy slipped into a recession when Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait in 1990 began the Persian Gulf War and sent oil prices soaring. By early 1994, real GDP was rising, but the economy remained in a recessionary gap. Nevertheless, the Fed announced on February 4, 1994, that it had shifted to a contractionary policy, selling bonds to boost interest rates and to reduce the money supply. While the economy had not reached its potential output, Chairman Greenspan explained that the Fed was concerned that it might push past its potential output within a year. The Fed, for the first time, had explicitly taken the impact lag of monetary policy into account. The issue of lags was also a part of Fed discussions in the 2000s.
Fiscal Policy: A Resurgence of Interest
President Ronald Reagan, whose 1980 election victory was aided by a recession that year, introduced a tax cut, combined with increased defense spending, in 1981. While this expansionary fiscal policy was virtually identical to the policy President Kennedy had introduced 20 years earlier, President Reagan rejected Keynesian economics, embracing supply-side arguments instead. He argued that the cut in tax rates, particularly in high marginal rates, would encourage work effort. He reintroduced an investment tax credit, which stimulated investment. With people working harder and firms investing more, he expected long-run aggregate supply to increase more rapidly. His policy, he said, would stimulate economic growth.
The tax cut and increased defense spending increased the federal deficit. Increased spending for welfare programs and unemployment compensation, both of which were induced by the plunge in real GDP in the early 1980s, contributed to the deficit as well. As deficits continued to rise, they began to dominate discussions of fiscal policy. In 1990, with the economy slipping into a recession, President George H. W. Bush agreed to a tax increase despite an earlier promise not to do so. President Bill Clinton, whose 1992 election resulted largely from the recession of 1990–1991, introduced another tax increase in 1994, with the economy still in a recessionary gap. Both tax increases were designed to curb the rising deficit.
Congress in the first years of the 1990s rejected the idea of using an expansionary fiscal policy to close a recessionary gap on grounds it would increase the deficit. President Clinton, for example, introduced a stimulus package of increased government investment and tax cuts designed to stimulate private investment in 1993; a Democratic Congress rejected the proposal. The deficit acted like a straitjacket for fiscal policy. The Bush and Clinton tax increases, coupled with spending restraint and increased revenues from economic growth, brought an end to the deficit in 1998.
Initially, it was expected that the budget surplus would continue well into the new century. But, this picture changed rapidly. President George W. Bush campaigned on a platform of large tax cuts, arguing that less government intervention in the economy would be good for long-term economic growth. His administration saw the enactment of two major pieces of tax-cutting legislation in 2001 and 2003. Coupled with increases in government spending, in part for defense but also for domestic purposes including a Medicare prescription drug benefit, the government budget surpluses gave way to budget deficits. To deal with times of economic weakness during President Bush’s administration, temporary tax cuts were enacted, both in 2001 and again in 2008.
As the economy continued to weaken in 2008, there seemed to be a resurgence of interest in using discretionary increases in government spending, as discussed in the Case in Point, to respond to the recession. Three factors were paramount: (1) the temporary tax cuts had provided only a minor amount of stimulus to the economy, as sizable portions had been used for saving rather than spending, (2) expansionary monetary policy, while useful, had not seemed adequate, and (3) the recession threatening the global economy seemed to be larger than those in recent economic history.
The Rise of New Keynesian Economics
New Keynesian economics emerged in the last three decades as the dominant school of macroeconomic thought for two reasons. First, it successfully incorporated important monetarist and new classical ideas into Keynesian economics. Second, developments in the 1980s and 1990s shook economists’ confidence in the ability of the monetarist or the new classical school alone to explain macroeconomic change.
Monetary Change and Monetarism
Look again at Figure 32.8. The close relationship between M2 and nominal GDP in the 1960s and 1970s helped win over many economists to the monetarist camp. Now look at Figure 32.13. It shows the same two variables, M2 and nominal GDP, from the 1980s through 2009. The tidy relationship between the two seems to have vanished. What happened?
The close relationship between M2 and nominal GDP a year later that had prevailed in the 1960s and 1970s seemed to vanish from the 1980s onward.
The sudden change in the relationship between the money stock and nominal GDP has resulted partly from public policy. Deregulation of the banking industry in the early 1980s produced sharp changes in the ways individuals dealt with money, thus changing the relationship of money to economic activity. Banks have been freed to offer a wide range of financial alternatives to their customers. One of the most important developments has been the introduction of bond funds offered by banks. These funds allowed customers to earn the higher interest rates paid by long-term bonds while at the same time being able to transfer funds easily into checking accounts as needed. Balances in these bond funds are not counted as part of M2. As people shifted assets out of M2 accounts and into bond funds, velocity rose. That changed the once-close relationship between changes in the quantity of money and changes in nominal GDP.
Many monetarists have argued that the experience of the 1980s, 1990s, and 2000s reinforces their view that the instability of velocity in the short run makes monetary policy an inappropriate tool for short-run stabilization. They continue to insist, however, that the velocity of M2 remains stable in the long run. But the velocity of M2 appears to have diverged in recent years from its long-run path. Although it may return to its long-run level, the stability of velocity remains very much in doubt. Because of this instability, in 2000, when the Fed was no longer required by law to report money target ranges, it discontinued the practice.
The New Classical School and Responses to Policy
New classical economics suggests that people should have responded to the fiscal and monetary policies of the 1980s in predictable ways. They did not, and that has created new doubts among economists about the validity of the new classical argument.
The rational expectations hypothesis predicts that if a shift in monetary policy by the Fed is anticipated, it will have no effect on real GDP. The slowing in the rate of growth of the money supply over the period from 1979 to 1982 was surely well known. The Fed announced at the outset what it was going to do, and then did it. It had the full support first of President Carter and then of President Reagan. But the policy plunged the economy into what was then its worst recession since the Great Depression. The experience hardly seemed consistent with new classical logic. New classical economists argued that people may have doubted the Fed would keep its word, but the episode still cast doubt on the rational expectations argument.
The public’s response to the huge deficits of the Reagan era also seemed to belie new classical ideas. One new classical argument predicts that people will increase their saving rate in response to an increase in public sector borrowing. The resultant reduction in consumption will cancel the impact of the increase in deficit-financed government expenditures. But the private saving rate in the United States fell during the 1980s. New classical economists contend that standard measures of saving do not fully represent the actual saving rate, but the experience of the 1980s did not seem to support the new classical argument.
The events of the 1980s do not suggest that either monetarist or new classical ideas should be abandoned, but those events certainly raised doubts about relying solely on these approaches. Doubts about Keynesian economics raised by the events of the 1970s led Keynesians to modify and strengthen their approach. Perhaps the events of the 1980s and 1990s will produce similar progress within the monetarist and new classical camps.
A Macroeconomic Consensus?
While there is less consensus on macroeconomic policy issues than on some other economic issues (particularly those in the microeconomic and international areas), surveys of economists generally show that the new Keynesian approach has emerged as the preferred approach to macroeconomic analysis. The finding that about 80% of economists agree that expansionary fiscal measures can deal with recessionary gaps certainly suggests that most economists can be counted in the new Keynesian camp. Neither monetarist nor new classical analysis would support such measures. At the same time, there is considerable discomfort about actually using discretionary fiscal policy, as the same survey shows that about 70% of economists feel that discretionary fiscal policy should be avoided and that the business cycle should be managed by the Fed (Fuller & Geide-Stevenson, 2003). Just as the new Keynesian approach appears to have won support among most economists, it has become dominant in terms of macroeconomic policy.
Did the experience of the 2007-2009 recession affect the views of economists concerning macroeconomic policy? One source for gauging possible changes in opinions of economists is the National Association For Business Economics twice yearly survey of economic policy (National Association for Business Economics, 2009). According to the August 2010 survey of 242 members of NABE, almost 60% were supportive of monetary policy at that time, which was expansionary and continued to be so at least through 2010. Concerning fiscal policy, there was less agreement. Still, according to the survey taken at the time the 2009 fiscal stimulus was being debated, 22% characterized it as “about right,” another third found it too restrictive, and only one third found it too simulative. In the August 2010 survey, 39% thought fiscal policy “about right,” 24% found it too restrictive, and 37% found it too simulative. Also, nearly 75% ranked promotion of economic growth more important than deficit reduction, roughly two thirds supported the extension of unemployment benefits, and 60% agreed that federal assistance funds to states from the 2009 stimulus package was appropriate. Taken together, the new Keynesian approach still seems to reflect the dominant opinion.
Key Takeaways
• The actions of the Fed starting in late 1979 reflected a strong inflation constraint and a growing recognition of the impact lag for monetary policy.
• Reducing the deficit dominated much of fiscal policy discussion during the 1980s and 1990s.
• The events of the 1980s and early 1990s do not appear to have been consistent with the hypotheses of either the monetarist or new classical schools.
• New Keynesian economists have incorporated major elements of the ideas of the monetarist and new classical schools into their formulation of macroeconomic theory.
Try It!
Show the effect of an expansionary monetary policy on real GDP
1. according to new Keynesian economics
2. according to the rational expectations hypothesis
In both cases, consider both the short-run and the long-run effects.
Case in Point: Steering on a Difficult Course
Figure 32.14
Sean MacEntee – steering wheel – CC BY 2.0.
Imagine that you are driving a test car on a special course. You get to steer, accelerate, and brake, but you cannot be sure whether the car will respond to your commands within a few feet or within a few miles. The windshield and side windows are blackened, so you cannot see where you are going or even where you are. You can only see where you have been with the rear-view mirror. The course is designed so that you will face difficulties you have never experienced. Your job is to get through the course unscathed. Oh, and by the way, you have to observe the speed limit, but you do not know what it is. Have a nice trip.
Now imagine that the welfare of people all over the world will be affected by how well you drive the course. They are watching you. They are giving you a great deal of often-conflicting advice about what you should do. Thinking about the problems you would face driving such a car will give you some idea of the obstacle course fiscal and monetary authorities must negotiate. They cannot know where the economy is going or where it is—economic indicators such as GDP and the CPI only suggest where the economy has been. And the perils through which it must steer can be awesome indeed.
One policy response that most acknowledge as having been successful was how the Fed dealt with the financial crises in Southeast Asia and elsewhere that shook the world economy in 1997 and 1998. There were serious concerns at the time that economic difficulties around the world would bring the high-flying U.S. economy to its knees and worsen an already difficult economic situation in other countries. The Fed had to steer through the pitfalls that global economic crises threw in front of it.
In the fall of 1998, the Fed chose to accelerate to avoid a possible downturn. The Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) engaged in expansionary monetary policy by lowering its target for the federal funds rate. Some critics argued at the time that the Fed’s action was too weak to counter the impact of world economic crisis. Others, though, criticized the Fed for undertaking an expansionary policy when the U.S. economy seemed already to be in an inflationary gap.
In the summer of 1999, the Fed put on the brakes, shifting back to a slightly contractionary policy. It raised the target for the federal funds rate, first to 5.0% and then to 5.25%. These actions reflected concern about speeding when in an inflationary gap.
But was the economy speeding? Was it in an inflationary gap? Certainly, the U.S. unemployment rate of 4.2% in the fall of 1999 stood well below standard estimates of the natural rate of unemployment. There were few, if any, indications that inflation was a problem, but the Fed had to recognize that inflation might not appear for a very long time after the Fed had taken a particular course. As noted in the text, this was also during a time when the once-close relationship between money growth and nominal GDP seemed to break down. The shifts in demand for money created unexplained and unexpected changes in velocity.
The outcome of the Fed’s actions has been judged a success. While with 20/20 hindsight the Fed’s decisions might seem obvious, in fact it was steering a car whose performance seemed less and less predictable over a course that was becoming more and more treacherous.
Since 2008, both the Fed and the government have been again trying to get the economy back on track. In this case, the car is already in the ditch. The Fed has decided on a “no holds barred” approach. It has moved aggressively to lower the federal funds rate target and engaged in a variety of other measures to improve liquidity to the banking system, to lower other interest rates by purchasing longer-term securities (such as 10-year treasuries and those of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac), and, working with the Treasury Department, to provide loans related to consumer and business debt.
The Obama administration for its part advocated and Congress passed a massive spending and tax relief package of about \$800 billion. Besides the members of his economic team, many economists seem to be on board in using discretionary fiscal policy in this instance. Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco President Janet Yellen put it this way: “The new enthusiasm for fiscal stimulus, and particularly government spending, represents a huge evolution in mainstream thinking.” A notable convert to using fiscal policy to deal with this recession was Harvard economist and former adviser to President Ronald Reagan, Martin Feldstein. His spending proposal encouraged increased military spending and he stated, “While good tax policy can contribute to ending the recession, the heavy lifting will have to be done by increased government spending.”
Predictably, not all economists have jumped onto the fiscal policy bandwagon. Concerns included whether so-called shovel-ready projects could really be implemented in time, whether government spending would crowd out private spending, whether monetary policy alone was providing enough stimulus, and whether the spending would flow efficiently to truly worthwhile projects. According to University of California-Berkeley economist Alan J. Auerbach, “We have spent so many years thinking that discretionary fiscal policy was a bad idea, that we have not figured out the right things to do to cure a recession that is scaring all of us.”
Answer to Try It! Problem
Panel (a) shows an expansionary monetary policy according to new Keynesian economics. Aggregate demand increases, with no immediate reduction in short-run aggregate supply. Real GDP rises to Y2. In the long run, nominal wages rise, reducing short-run aggregate supply and returning real GDP to potential. Panel (b) shows what happens with rational expectations. When the Fed increases the money supply, people anticipate the rise in prices. Workers and firms agree to an increase in nominal wages, so that there is a reduction in short-run aggregate supply at the same time there is an increase in aggregate demand. The result is no change in real GDP; it remains at potential. There is, however, an increase in the price level.
Figure 32.15 | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_(LibreTexts)/17%3A_A_Brief_History_of_Macroeconomic_Thought_and_Policy/17.3%3A_32.3%3A._An_Emerging_Consensus%3A_Macroeconomics_for_the_Twenty-First_Century.txt |
Summary
We have surveyed the experience of the United States in light of the economic theories that prevailed or emerged during five decades. We have seen that events in the past century have had significant effects on the ways in which economists look at and interpret macroeconomic ideas.
Before the Great Depression, macroeconomic thought was dominated by the classical school. That body of theory stressed the economy’s ability to reach full employment equilibrium on its own. The severity and duration of the Depression caused many economists to rethink their acceptance of natural equilibrating forces in the economy.
John Maynard Keynes issued the most telling challenge. He argued that wage rigidities and other factors could prevent the economy from closing a recessionary gap on its own. Further, he showed that expansionary fiscal and monetary policies could be used to increase aggregate demand and move the economy to its potential output. Although these ideas did not immediately affect U.S. policy, the increases in aggregate demand brought by the onset of World War II did bring the economy to full employment. Many economists became convinced of the validity of Keynes’s analysis and his prescriptions for macroeconomic policy.
Keynesian economics dominated economic policy in the United States in the 1960s. Fiscal and monetary policies increased aggregate demand and produced what was then the longest expansion in U.S. history. But the economy pushed well beyond full employment in the latter part of the decade, and inflation increased. While Keynesians were dominant, monetarist economists argued that it was monetary policy that accounted for the expansion of the 1960s and that fiscal policy could not affect aggregate demand.
Efforts by the Nixon administration in 1969 and 1970 to cool the economy ran afoul of shifts in the short-run aggregate supply curve. The ensuing decade saw a series of shifts in aggregate supply that contributed to three more recessions by 1982. As economists studied these shifts, they developed further the basic notions we now express in the aggregate demand–aggregate supply model: that changes in aggregate demand and aggregate supply affect income and the price level; that changes in fiscal and monetary policy can affect aggregate demand; and that in the long run, the economy moves to its potential level of output.
The events of the 1980s and beyond raised serious challenges for the monetarist and new classical schools. New Keynesian economists formulated revisions in their theories, incorporating many of the ideas suggested by monetarist and new classical economists. The new, more powerful theory of macroeconomic events has won considerable support among economists today.
Problems
1. “For many years, the hands-off fiscal policies advocated by the classical economists held sway with American government. When times were hard, the prevailing response was to tough it out, awaiting the ‘inevitable’ turnaround. The lessons of the Great Depression and a booming wartime economy have since taught us, however, that government intervention is sometimes necessary and desirable—and that to an extent, we can take charge of our own economic lives.” Evaluate the foregoing quotation based upon the discussion in this chapter. How would you classify the speaker in terms of a school of economic thought?
2. In his 1982 Economic Report of the President, Ronald Reagan said, “We simply cannot blame crop failures and oil price increases for our basic inflation problem. The continuous, underlying cause was poor government policy.” What policies might he have been referring to?
3. Many journalists blamed economic policies of the Reagan administration for the extremely high levels of unemployment in 1982 and 1983. Given the record of the rest of the decade, do you agree that President Reagan’s economic policies were a failure? Why or why not?
4. The day after the U.S. stock market crash of October 19, 1987, Federal Reserve Board Chairman Alan Greenspan issued the following statement: “The Federal Reserve, consistent with its responsibilities as the nation’s central bank, affirmed today its readiness to serve as a source of liquidity to support the economic and financial system.” Evaluate why the Fed chairman might have been prompted to make such a statement.
5. Compare the rationale of the Reagan administration for the 1981 tax reductions with the rationale behind the Kennedy–Johnson tax cut of 1964, the Bush tax cut of 2001, and the Bush tax cut of 2003.
6. If the economy is operating below its potential output, what kind of gap exists? What kinds of fiscal or monetary policies might you use to close this gap? Can you think of any objection to the use of such policies?
7. If the economy is operating above its potential output, what kind of gap exists? What kinds of fiscal or monetary policies might you use to close this gap? Can you think of any objection to the use of such policies?
8. In General Theory, Keynes wrote of the importance of ideas. The world, he said, is ruled by little else. How important do you think his ideas have been for economic policy today?
9. State whether each of the following events appears to be the result of a shift in short-run aggregate supply or aggregate demand, and state the direction of the shift involved.
1. The price level rises sharply while real GDP falls.
2. The price level and real GDP rise.
3. The price level falls while real GDP rises.
4. The price level and real GDP fall.
10. Explain whether each of the following events and policies will affect the aggregate demand curve or the short-run aggregate supply curve, and state what will happen to the price level and real GDP.
1. Oil prices rise
2. The Fed sells bonds
3. Government purchases increase
4. Federal taxes increase
5. The government slashes transfer payment spending
6. Oil prices fall
11. Using the model of aggregate demand and aggregate supply, illustrate an economy with a recessionary gap. Show how a policy of nonintervention would ultimately close the gap. Show the alternative of closing the gap through stabilization policy.
12. Using the model of aggregate demand and aggregate supply, illustrate an economy with an inflationary gap. Show how a policy of nonintervention would ultimately close the gap. Show the alternative of closing the gap through stabilization policy. | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_(LibreTexts)/17%3A_A_Brief_History_of_Macroeconomic_Thought_and_Policy/17.4%3A_Review_and_Practice.txt |
Thumbnail: https://pixabay.com/illustrations/poverty-men-arm-wealth-begging-96293/
18: Inequality Poverty and Discrimination
Learning Objective
1. Explain how the Lorenz curve and the Gini coefficient provide information on a country’s distribution of income.
2. Discuss and evaluate the factors that have been looked at to explain changes in the distribution of income in the United States.
Income inequality in the United States has soared in the last half century. Since 1967, real median household income has risen 30%. For the top 1%, incomes shot up by over 200%. Consider recent experience. Median household-size-adjusted disposable income rose 13% between 1988 and 2004. At the 75th percentile it rose 16%, at the 90th percentile 21%, and at the 95th percentile 27% (Burtless, G., 2007).
Increasingly, education is the key to a better material life. The gap between the average annual incomes of high school graduates and those with a bachelor’s degree increased by nearly a factor of five between 1975 and 2006. Read that sentence again. The gap went from under \$5,000 to over \$23,000 per year. That is a phenomenal change in such a short period of time. A special study by the U.S. Census Bureau estimated that compared to the full-time year-around work-life earnings of a high school graduate, a person with a bachelors degree would earn 75% more, while a person with a professional degree would earn almost four times more over their working lifetime1. Moreover, education is not an equal opportunity employer. A student from a family in the top quarter of the income distribution is six times more likely to get a college degree than a student whose family is in the bottom quarter of the income distribution.
That inequality perpetuates itself. College graduates marry other college graduates and earn higher incomes. Those who do not go to college earn lower incomes. Some may have children out of wedlock—an almost sure route to poverty. That does not, of course, mean that young people who go to college are assured high incomes while those who do not are certain to experience poverty, but the odds certainly push in that direction.
We shall learn in this section how the degree of inequality can be measured. We shall examine the sources of rising inequality and consider what policy measures, if any, are suggested. In this section on inequality we are essentially focusing the way the economic pie is shared, while setting aside the important fact that the size of the economic pie has certainly grown over time.
A Changing Distribution of Income
We have seen that the income distribution has become more unequal. This section describes a graphical approach to measuring the equality, or inequality, of the distribution of income.
Measuring Inequality
The primary evidence of growing inequality is provided by census data. Households are asked to report their income, and they are ranked from the household with the lowest income to the household with the highest income. The Census Bureau then reports the percentage of total income earned by those households ranked among the bottom 20%, the next 20%, and so on, up to the top 20%. Each 20% of households is called a quintile. The bureau also reports the share of income going to the top 5% of households.
Income distribution data can be presented graphically using a Lorenz curve, a curve that shows cumulative shares of income received by individuals or groups. It was developed by economist Max O. Lorenz in 1905. To plot the curve, we begin with the lowest quintile and mark a point to show the percentage of total income those households received. We then add the next quintile and its share and mark a point to show the share of the lowest 40% of households. Then, we add the third quintile, and then the fourth. Since the share of income received by all the quintiles will be 100%, the last point on the curve always shows that 100% of households receive 100% of the income.
If every household in the United States received the same income, the Lorenz curve would coincide with the 45-degree line drawn in Figure 19.1. The bottom 20% of households would receive 20% of income; the bottom 40% would receive 40%, and so on. If the distribution of income were completely unequal, with one household receiving all the income and the rest zero, then the Lorenz curve would be shaped like a backward L, with a horizontal line across the bottom of the graph at 0% of income and a vertical line up the right-hand side. The vertical line would show, as always, that 100% of families still receive 100% of income. Actual Lorenz curves lie between these extremes. The closer a Lorenz curve lies to the 45-degree line, the more equal the distribution. The more bowed out the curve, the less equal the distribution. We see in Figure 19.1 that the Lorenz curve for the United States became more bowed out between 1968 and 2006.
Figure 19.1 The Distribution of U.S. Income, 1968 and 2006
The distribution of income among households in the United States became more unequal from 1968 to 2006. The shares of income received by each of the first four quintiles fell, while the share received by the top 20% rose sharply. The Lorenz curve for 2006 was more bowed out than was the curve for 1968. (Mean income adjusted for inflation and reported in 2006 dollars; percentages do not sum to 100% due to rounding.)
The degree of inequality is often measured with a Gini coefficient, the ratio between the Lorenz curve and the 45° line and the total area under the 45° line. The smaller the Gini coefficient, the more equal the income distribution. Larger Gini coefficients mean more unequal distributions. The Census Bureau reported that the Gini coefficient was 0.397 in 1968 and 0.470 in 2006—the highest ever recorded for the United States (U.S. Census Bureau, 2006).
Mobility and Income Distribution
When we speak of the bottom 20% or the middle 20% of families, we are not speaking of a static group. Some families who are in the bottom quintile one year move up to higher quintiles in subsequent years; some families move down. Because people move up and down the distribution, we get a quite different picture of income change when we look at the incomes of a fixed set of persons over time rather than comparing average incomes for a particular quintile at a particular point in time, as was done in Figure 19.1.
Addressing the question of mobility requires that researchers follow a specific group of families over a long period of time. Since 1968, the Panel Survey of Income Dynamics (PSID) at the University of Michigan has followed more than 5,000 families and their descendents. The effort has produced a much deeper understanding of changes in income inequality than it is possible to obtain from census data, which simply take a snapshot of incomes at a particular time.
Based on the University of Michigan’s data, Federal Reserve Bank of Boston economists Katharine Bradbury and Jane Katz compared mobility in the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s. In the 1970s, just under half the families in the poorest quintile at the start of that decade were still in that quintile at the end of that decade and overall about 32% of families moved up one quintile or more. The mobility figures for the 1980s were about the same as for the 1970s. In the 1990s, however, mobility declined. About 30% of families moved up one quintile or more and 53% of families that started the 1990s in the poorest quintile were still in that quintile at the end of the 1990s. In every decade, some of the movement to higher quintiles results simply from gaining age and experience. The researchers further comment that, for the 1990s, moving across quintiles has become harder to achieve precisely because of the increased income inequality (Bradbury, K. and Jane Katz, 2002).
Explaining Inequality
Everyone agrees that the distribution of income in the United States generally became more equal during the first two decades after World War II and that it has become more unequal since 1968. While some people conclude that this increase in inequality suggests the latter period was unfair, others want to know why the distribution changed. We shall examine some of the explanations.
Family Structure
Clearly an important source of rising inequality since 1968 has been the sharp increase in the number of families headed by women. In 2006, the median income of families headed by married couples was 2.4 times that of families headed by women with no spouse present. The percentage of families headed by women with no spouse present has more than doubled since 1968 and is thus contributing to increased inequality across households.
Technological and Managerial Change
Technological change has affected the demand for labor. One of the most dramatic changes since the late 1970s has been an increase in the demand for skilled labor and a reduction in the demand for unskilled labor.
The result has been an increase in the gap between the wages of skilled and unskilled workers. That has produced a widening gap between college- and high-school-trained workers. As we saw earlier, that gap has quintupled in the last few decades.
Technological change has meant the integration of computers into virtually every aspect of production. And that has increased the demand for workers with the knowledge to put new methods to work—and to adapt to the even more dramatic changes in production likely to come. At the same time, the demand for workers who do not have that knowledge has fallen.
Along with new technologies that require greater technical expertise, firms are adopting new management styles that require stronger communication skills. The use of production teams, for example, shifts decision-making authority to small groups of assembly-line workers. That means those workers need more than the manual dexterity that was required of them in the past. They need strong communication skills. They must write effectively, speak effectively, and interact effectively with other workers. Workers who cannot do so simply are not in demand to the degree they once were.
The “intellectual wage gap” seems likely to widen as we move even further into the twenty-first century. That is likely to lead to an even higher degree of inequality and to pose a challenge to public policy for decades to come. Increasing education and training could lead to reductions in inequality. Indeed, individuals seem to have already begun to respond to this changing market situation, since the percentage who graduate from high school and college is rising.
Tax Policy
Did tax policy contribute to rising inequality over the past four decades? The tax changes most often cited in the fairness debate are the Bush tax cuts introduced in 2001, 2002, and 2003 and the Reagan tax cuts introduced in 1981.
An analysis of the Bush tax cuts by the Tax Foundation combines the three Bush tax cuts and assumes they occurred in 2003. Table 19.1 “Income Tax Liability Before and After the Bush Tax Cuts” gives the share of total income tax liability for each quintile before and after the Bush tax cuts. It also gives the share of the Bush tax cuts received by each quintile.
Table 19.1 Income Tax Liability Before and After the Bush Tax Cuts
Quintile Share of income tax liability before tax cuts Share of income tax liability after tax cuts Share of total tax relief
First quintile 0.5% 0.3% 1.2%
Second quintile 2.3% 1.9% 4.2%
Third quintile 5.9% 5.2% 9.4%
Fourth quintile 12.6% 11.6% 17.5%
Top quintile 78.7% 81.0% 67.7%
The share of total tax relief received by the first four quintiles was modest, while those in the top quintile received more than two-thirds of the total benefits of the three tax cuts. However, the share of income taxes paid by each of the first four quintiles fell as a result of the tax cuts, while the share paid by the top quintile rose.
Tax cuts under George W. Bush were widely criticized as being tilted unfairly toward the rich. And certainly, Figure 19.1 that those in the top quintile received just over half of total income. After the Bush tax cuts, they paid 81% of income taxes. On that basis, one might conclude that the Bush tax cuts contributed to equalizing income. Others are quick to point out that those same tax cuts were accompanied by reductions in expenditures for some social service programs designed to help lower income families. Still others point out that the tax cuts contributed to an increase in the federal deficit and, therefore, are likely to have distributional effects over many years and across several generations. Whether these changes increased or decreased fairness in the society is ultimately a normative question.
Methodology
The method by which the Census Bureau computes income shares has been challenged by some observers. Robert Rector, of the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank, notes three flaws in the Census Bureau approach. First, it ignores taxes. Second, it ignores the \$750 billion in spending for the poor and elderly. Third, each quintile does not contain the same number of people. The top quintile, for example, contains 70% more people than the bottom quintile because households in the lowest quintile tend to have fewer people than those in the highest quintile. Taking the Census Bureau finding that the top quintile receives 50.1% of total income while the bottom quintile receives 3.4% of income implies that people in the top quintile receive \$14.74 for every \$1.00 received by people in the bottom quintile. But, Mr. Rector points out that once one adjusts for taxes, transfers, and the unequal number of people in each quintile, that 14.74:1 gap falls to \$4.21 in the top quintile for every \$1.00 in the bottom. By this accounting, incomes in the United States are not nearly as unequal as reported by the Census Bureau (Rector, R., 2004). This suggests that more precise measurements may provide more insight into explaining inequality.
Key Takeaways
• The distribution of income can be illustrated with a Lorenz curve. If all households had the same income, the Lorenz curve would be a 45° line. In general, the more equal the distribution of income, the closer the Lorenz curve will be to the 45° line. A more bowed out curves shows a less equal distribution. The Gini coefficient is another method for describing the distribution of income.
• The distribution of income has, according to the Census Bureau, become somewhat more unequal in the United States during the past 36 years.
• The degree of mobility up and down the distribution of income appears to have declined in recent years.
• Among the factors explaining increased inequality have been changes in family structure and changes in the demand for labor that have rewarded those with college degrees and have penalized unskilled workers.
Try It!
The accompanying Lorenz curves show the distribution of income in a country before taxes and welfare benefits are taken into account (curve A) and after taxes and welfare benefits are taken into account (curve B). Do taxes and benefits serve to make the distribution of income in the country more equal or more unequal?
Case in Point: Attitudes and Inequality
Figure 19.2
In a fascinating examination of attitudes in the United States and in continental Western Europe, economists Alberto Alesina of Harvard University and George-Marios Angeletos of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology suggest that attitudes about the nature of income earning can lead to quite different economic systems and outcomes concerning the distribution of income.
The economists cite survey evidence from the World Values Survey, which concludes that 71% of Americans, and only 40% of Europeans, agree with the proposition: “The poor could become rich if they worked hard enough.” Further, Americans are much more likely to attribute material success to hard work, while Europeans tend to attribute success to factors such as luck, connections, and even corruption. The result, according to Professors Alesina and Angeletos, is that Americans select a government that is smaller and engages in less redistributive activity than is selected by Europeans. Government in continental Western Europe is 50% larger than in the United States, the tax system in Europe is much more progressive than in the United States, regulation of labor and product markets is more extensive in Europe, and redistributive programs are more extensive in Europe than in the United States. As a result, the income distribution in Europe is much more equal than in the United States.
People get what they expect. The economists derive two sets of equilibria. Equilibrium in a society in which people think incomes are a result of luck, connections, and corruption turns out to be precisely that. And, in a society in which people believe incomes are chiefly the result of effort and skill, they are. In the latter society, people work harder and invest more. In the United States, the average worker works 1,600 hours per year. In Europe, the average worker works 1,200 hours per year.
So, who is right—Americans with their “you get what you deserve” or Europeans with their “you get what luck, connections, and corruption bring you” attitude? The two economists show that people get, in effect, what they expect. European values and beliefs produce societies that are more egalitarian. American values and beliefs produce the American result: a society in which the distribution of income is more unequal, the government smaller, and redistribution relatively minor. Professors Alesina and Angeletos conclude that Europeans tend to underestimate the degree to which people can improve their material well-being through hard work, while Americans tend to overestimate that same phenomenon.
Answer to Try It! Problem
The Lorenz curve showing the distribution of income after taxes and benefits are taken into account is less bowed out than the Lorenz curve showing the distribution of income before taxes and benefits are taken into account. Thus, income is more equally distributed after taking them into account.
Figure 19.3
The 40 year synthetic earnings estimates (in \$millions of 1999 dollars) are: high school dropout, \$1.0; high school graduate, \$1.2; Bachelors degree, \$2.2; Masters degree, \$2.5; Doctoral degree, \$3.4; Professional degree, \$4.4. Jennifer Cheeseman Day and Eric C. Newburger, “The Big Payoff: Education Attainment and Synthetic Estimates of Work-life Earnings,” U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Reports (P23-210, July, 2002). Synthetic earnings estimates represent what a typical person with a certain education level could expect to earn over a 40-year worklife. | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_(LibreTexts)/18%3A_Inequality_Poverty_and_Discrimination/18.1%3A_Income_Inequality.txt |
Learning Objective
1. Distinguish between relative and absolute measures of poverty and discuss the uses and merits of each.
2. Describe the demographics of poverty in the United States.
3. Describe the forms of welfare programs in the United States and the reform of welfare in the mid-1990s.
4. Discuss the factors that have been looked at to explain the persistence of poverty in the United States.
Poverty in the United States is something of a paradox. Per capita incomes in this country are among the highest on earth. Yet, the United States has a greater percentage of its population below the official poverty line than in the other industrialized nations. How can a nation that is so rich have so many people who are poor?
There is no single answer to the question of why so many people are poor. But we shall see that there are economic factors at work that help to explain poverty. We shall also examine the nature of the government’s response to poverty and the impact that response has. First, however, we shall examine the definition of poverty and look at some characteristics of the poor in the United States.
Defining Poverty
Suppose you were asked to determine whether a particular family was poor or not poor. How would you do it?
You might begin by listing the goods and services that would be needed to provide a minimum standard of living and then finding out if the family’s income was enough to purchase those items. If it were not, you might conclude that the family was poor. Alternatively, you might examine the family’s income relative to the incomes of other families in the community or in the nation. If the family was on the low end of the income scale, you might classify it as poor.
These two approaches represent two bases on which poverty is defined. The first is an absolute income test, which sets a specific income level and defines a person as poor if his or her income falls below that level. The second is a relative income test, in which people whose incomes fall at the bottom of the income distribution are considered poor. For example, we could rank households according to income as we did in the previous section on income inequality and define the lowest one-fifth of households as poor. In 2006, any U.S. household with an annual income below \$20,035 fell in this category.
In contrast, to determine who is poor according to the absolute income test, we define a specific level of income, independent of how many households fall above or below it. The federal government defines a household as poor if the household’s annual income falls below a dollar figure called the poverty line. In 2006 the poverty line for a family of four was an income of \$20,614. Figure 19.4 shows the poverty line for various family sizes.
The concept of a poverty line grew out of a Department of Agriculture study in 1955 that found families spending one-third of their incomes on food. With the one-third figure as a guide, the Department then selected four food plans that met the minimum daily nutritional requirements established by the federal government. The cost of the least expensive plan for each household size was multiplied by three to determine the income below which a household would be considered poor. The government used this method to count the number of poor people from 1959 to 1969. The poverty line was adjusted each year as food prices changed. Beginning in 1969, the poverty line was adjusted annually by the average percentage price change for all consumer goods, not just changes in the price of food.
There is little to be said for this methodology for defining poverty. No attempt is made to establish an income at which a household could purchase basic necessities. Indeed, no attempt is made in the definition to establish what such necessities might be. The day has long passed when the average household devoted one-third of its income to food purchases; today such purchases account for less than one-fifth of household income. Still, it is useful to have some threshold that is consistent from one year to the next so that progress—or the lack thereof—in the fight against poverty can be assessed.
The percentage of the population that falls below the poverty line is called the poverty rate. Figure 19.5 shows both the number of people and the percentage of the population that fell below the poverty line each year since 1959.
Despite its shortcomings, measuring poverty using an absolute measure allows for the possibility of progress in reducing it; using a relative measure of poverty does not, since there will always be a lowest 1/5, or 1/10 of the population. But relative measures do make an important point: Poverty is in large measure a relative concept. In the United States, poor people have much higher incomes than most of the world’s people or even than average Americans did as recently as the early 1970s. By international and historical standards, the average poor person in the United States is rich! The material possessions of America’s poor would be considered lavish in another time and in another place. For example, in 2005, 43% of poor households in the United States owned their own homes, nearly 75% owned a car, and 78% owned a VCR. About 80% of poor households had air conditioning. Forty years ago, only 36% of the entire population in the United States had air conditioning. The average poor person in the United States has more living space than the average person in London, Paris, Vienna, or Athens (Rector, R., 2007).
We often think of poverty as meaning that poor people are unable to purchase adequate food. Yet, according to Department of Agriculture surveys, 89% of poor people report that they have adequate food. Only 2% reported that they are hungry most of the time. In short, poor people in the United States enjoy a standard of living that would be considered quite comfortable in many parts of the developed world—and lavish in the less developed world (Ibid).
But people judge their incomes relative to incomes of people around them, not relative to people everywhere on the planet or to people in years past. You may feel poor when you compare yourself to some of your classmates who may have fancier cars or better clothes. And a family of four in a Los Angeles slum with an annual income of \$13,000 surely does not feel rich because its income is many times higher than the average family income in Ethiopia or of Americans of several decades ago. While the material possessions of poor Americans are vast by Ethiopian standards, they are low in comparison to how the average American lives. What we think of as poverty clearly depends more on what people around us are earning than on some absolute measure of income.
Both the absolute and relative income approaches are used in discussions of the poverty problem. When we speak of the number of poor people, we are typically using an absolute income test of poverty. When we speak of the problems of those at the bottom of the income distribution, we are speaking in terms of a relative income test. In the European Union, for example, the poverty line is set at 60% of the median income of each member nation in a particular year. That is an example of a relative measure of poverty. In the rest of this section, we focus on the absolute income test of poverty used in the United States.
The Demographics of Poverty
There is no iron law of poverty that dictates that a household with certain characteristics will be poor. Nonetheless, poverty is much more highly concentrated among some groups than among others. The six characteristics of families that are important for describing who in the United States constitute the poor are whether or not the family is headed by a female, age, the level of education, whether or not the head of the family is working, the race of the household, and geography.
Figure 19.6 shows poverty rates for various groups and for the population as a whole in 2004. What does it tell us?
1. A family headed by a female is more than five times as likely to live in poverty as compared to a family with a husband present. This fact contributes to child poverty.
2. Children under 18 are about two times more likely to be poor than “middle-aged” (45–64) persons.
3. The less education the adults in the family have, the more likely the family is to be poor. A college education is an almost sure ticket out of poverty; the poverty rate for college graduates is just 3.9%.
4. The poverty rate is higher among those who do not work than among those who do. The poverty rate for people who did not work was almost six times the poverty rate of those who worked full time.
5. The prevalence of poverty varies by race and ethnicity. Specifically, the poverty rate in 2006 for whites (non-Hispanic origin) was less than half that for Hispanics or of blacks.
6. The poverty rate in central cities is higher than in other areas of residence.
The incidence of poverty soars when several of these demographic factors associated with poverty are combined. For example, the poverty rate for families with children that are headed by women who lack a high school education is higher than 50%.
Government Policy and Poverty
Consider a young single parent with three small children. The parent is not employed and has no support from other relatives. What does the government provide for the family?
The primary form of cash assistance is likely to come from a program called Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF). This program began with the passage of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996. It replaced Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC). TANF is funded by the federal government but administered through the states. Eligibility is limited to two years of continuous payments and to five years in a person’s lifetime, although 20% of a state’s caseload may be exempted from this requirement.
In addition to this assistance, the family is likely to qualify for food stamps, which are vouchers that can be exchanged for food at the grocery store. The family may also receive rent vouchers, which can be used as payment for private housing. The family may qualify for Medicaid, a program that pays for physician and hospital care as well as for prescription drugs.
A host of other programs provide help ranging from counseling in nutrition to job placement services. The parent may qualify for federal assistance in attending college. The children may participate in the Head Start program, a program of preschool education designed primarily for low-income children. If the poverty rate in the area is unusually high, local public schools the children attend may receive extra federal aid. Welfare programs are the array of programs that government provides to alleviate poverty.
In addition to public sector support, a wide range of help is available from private sector charities. These may provide scholarships for education, employment assistance, and other aid.
Figure 19.7 shows participation rates in the major federal programs to help the poor.
Not all people whose incomes fall below the poverty line received aid. In 2006, a substantial majority of those counted as poor received some form of aid. But as shown by Figure 19.7, the percentages who were helped by individual programs were much lower. Less than 20% of people below the poverty line received some form of cash assistance in 2006. Less than 40% received food stamps and slightly more than half lived in a household in which one or more people received medical services through Medicaid. Only about one-sixth of the people living in poverty received some form of housing aid.
Although for the most part poverty programs are federally funded, individual states set eligibility standards and administer the programs. Allowing states to establish their own programs was a hallmark feature of the 1996 welfare reform. As state budgets have come under greater pressure, many states have tightened standards.
Cash Versus Noncash Assistance
Aid provided to people falls into two broad categories: cash and noncash assistance. Cash assistance is a money payment that a recipient can spend as he or she wishes. Noncash assistance is the provision of specific goods and services, such as food or medical services, job training, or subsidized child care rather than cash.
Noncash assistance is the most important form of aid to the poor. The large share of noncash relative to cash assistance raises two issues. First, since the poor would be better off (that is, reach a higher level of satisfaction) with cash rather than noncash assistance, why is noncash aid such a large percentage of total aid to the poor? Second, the importance of noncash assistance raises an important issue concerning the methodology by which the poverty rate is measured in the United States. We examine these issues in turn.
1. Why Noncash Aid?
Suppose you had a choice between receiving \$515 or a television set worth \$515. Neither gift is taxable. Which would you take?
Given a choice between cash and an equivalent value in merchandise, you would probably take the cash. Unless the television set happened to be exactly what you would purchase with the \$515, you could find some other set of goods and services that you would prefer to the TV set. The same is true of funds that you can spend on anything versus funds whose spending is restricted. Given a choice of \$515 that you could spend on anything and \$515 that you could spend only on food, which would you choose? A given pool of funds allows consumers a greater degree of satisfaction than does a specific set of goods and services.
We can conclude that poor people who receive government aid would be better off from their own perspectives with cash grants than with noncash aid. Why, then, is most government aid given as noncash benefits?
Economists have suggested two explanations. The first is based on the preferences of donors. Recipients might prefer cash, but the preferences of donors matter also. The donors, in this case, are taxpayers. Suppose they want poor people to have specific things—perhaps food, housing, and medical care.
Given such donor preferences, it is not surprising to find aid targeted at providing these basic goods and services. A second explanation has to do with the political clout of the poor. The poor are not likely to be successful competitors in the contest to be at the receiving end of public sector income redistribution efforts; most redistribution goes to people who are not poor. But firms that provide services such as housing or medical care might be highly effective lobbyists for programs that increase the demand for their products. They could be expected to seek more help for the poor in the form of noncash aid that increases their own demand and profits1.
2. Poverty Management and Noncash Aid
Only cash income is counted in determining the official poverty rate. The value of food, medical care, or housing provided through various noncash assistance programs is not included in household income. That is an important omission, because most government aid is noncash aid. Data for the official poverty rate thus do not reflect the full extent to which government programs act to reduce poverty.
The Census Bureau estimates the impact of noncash assistance on poverty. If a typical household would prefer, say, \$515 in cash to \$515 in food stamps, then \$515 worth of food stamps is not valued at \$515 in cash. Economists at the Census Bureau adjust the value of noncash aid downward to reflect an estimate of its lesser value to households. Suppose, for example, that given the choice between \$515 in food stamps and \$475 in cash, a household reports that it is indifferent between the two—either would be equally satisfactory. That implies that \$515 in food stamps generates satisfaction equal to \$475 in cash; the food stamps are thus “worth” \$475 to the household.
Welfare Reform
The welfare system in the United States came under increasing attack in the 1980s and early 1990s. It was perceived to be expensive, and it had clearly failed to eliminate poverty. Many observers worried that welfare was becoming a way of life for people who had withdrawn from the labor force, and that existing welfare programs did not provide an incentive for people to work. President Clinton made welfare reform one of the key issues in the 1992 presidential campaign.
The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 was designed to move people from welfare to work. It eliminated the entitlement aspect of welfare by defining a maximum period of eligibility. It gave states considerable scope in designing their own programs. In the first two years following welfare reform, the number of people on welfare dropped by several million.
Advocates of welfare reform proclaimed victory, while critics pointed to the booming economy, the tight labor market, and the general increase in the number of jobs over the same period. The critics also pointed out that the most employable welfare recipients (those with a high school education, no school-aged children living at home, and/or fewer personal problems) were the first to find jobs. The remaining welfare recipients, the critics argue, will have a harder time doing so. Moreover, having a job is not synonymous with getting out of poverty. Though some cities and states have reported notable successes, more experience is required before a final verdict on welfare reform can be reached. The downturn which started in 2008 and which could be prolonged may provide a real–time test.
Explaining Poverty
Just as the increase in income inequality begs for explanation, so does the question of why poverty seems so persistent. Should not the long periods of economic growth in the 1980s and 1990s and since 2003 have substantially reduced poverty? Have the various government programs been ineffective?
Clearly, some of the same factors that have contributed to rising income inequality have also contributed to the persistence of poverty. In particular, the increases in households headed by females and the growing gaps in wages between skilled and unskilled workers have been major contributors.
Tax policy changes have reduced the extent of poverty. In addition to general reductions in tax rates, the Earned Income Tax Credit, which began in 1975 and was expanded in the 1990s, provides people below a certain income level with a supplement for each dollar of income earned. This supplement, roughly 30 cents for every dollar earned, is received as a tax refund at the end of the year.
Figure 19.8 Percentages of Population in Eight Countries with Disposable Incomes Less Than 1/2 the National Median
Taken together, though, transfer payment and tax programs in the United States are less effective in reducing poverty that are the programs of other developed countries. Figure 19.8 shows the percentage of the population in eight developed countries with a disposable income (income after taxes) less than one-half the national median. The exhibit shows this percentage both before and after tax and transfer payment programs are considered. Clearly, the United States is the least aggressive in seeking to eliminate poverty among the eight countries shown.
Poverty and Work
How does poverty relate to work? Look back at Figure 19.6. Many of the poor are children or adults who do not work. That suggests one explanation for the weak relationship between poverty and economic growth in recent years. A growing economy reduces poverty by creating more jobs and higher incomes. Neither of those will reach those who, for various reasons, are not in the labor force.
Look at Figure 19.9. Of the nation’s 36.5 million poor people in 2006, only about 13.6 million—roughly a third–could be considered available to participate in the labor market. The rest were too young, retired, sick or disabled. Even of the 13.6 million, many were already working part-time or seasonally (3.8 million) and others were college students or people who were unavailable for work because of their family situations, such as responsibility for caring for disabled family members. In sum, most of the nation’s poor people are unlikely to be available for additional work.
Poverty and Welfare Programs
How effective have government programs been in alleviating poverty? Here, it is important to distinguish between the poverty rate and the degree of poverty. Cash programs might reduce the degree of poverty, but might not affect a family’s income enough to actually move that family above the poverty line. Thus, even though the gap between the family’s income and the poverty line is lessened, the family is still classified as poor and would thus still be included in the poverty-rate figures. The data in Figure 19.9 show that significant gains in work participation will be difficult to achieve.
Economist Rebecca M. Blank of the University of Michigan argued that empirical studies prior to federal welfare reform generally showed that welfare payments discouraged work effort, but the effect was fairly small2. On the other hand, she also concluded that, following welfare reform, welfare caseloads fell more and labor force participation increased more than analysts had expected (Blank, R. M., 2002). Evaluation of the effect of the federal welfare reform program on work participation, particularly over the long term, and on poverty continues.
Key Takeaways
• Poverty may be defined according to a relative or an absolute definition.
• Official estimates of the number of people who are “poor” are typically based on an absolute definition of poverty, one that makes very little economic sense.
• Several demographic factors appear to be associated with poverty. Families headed by single women are three times as likely to be poor as are other families. Poverty is also associated with low levels of education and with minority status.
• There is a wide range of welfare programs; the majority of welfare spending is for noncash assistance. Those receiving this aid do not have it counted as income in the official calculations of poverty.
• Welfare reform has focused on requiring recipients to enter the labor force. Many poor people, however, are not candidates for the labor force.
Try It!
The Smiths, a family of four, have an income of \$20,500 in 2006. Using the absolute income test approach and the data given in the chapter, determine if this family is poor. Use the relative income test to determine if this family is poor.
Case in Point: Welfare Reform in Britain and in the United States
Figure 19.10
The governments of the United States and of Great Britain have taken sharply different courses in their welfare reform efforts. In the United States, the primary reform effort was undertaken in 1996, with the declaration to eliminate welfare as an entitlement and the beginning of programs that required recipients to enter the labor force within two years. President Clinton promised to “end welfare as we know it.”
In Britain, the government of Tony Blair took a radically different approach. Prime Minister Blair promised to “make welfare popular again.” His government undertook to establish what he called a “third way” to welfare reform, one that emphasized returning recipients to the workforce but that also sought explicitly to end child poverty.
The British program required recipients to get counseling aimed at encouraging them to return to the labor force. It did not, however, require that they obtain jobs. It also included a program of “making work pay,” the primary feature of which was the creation of a National Minimum Wage, one that was set higher than the minimum wage in the United States. In the United States, the minimum wage equaled 34% of median private sector wages in 2002; the British minimum wage was set at 45% of the median private sector wage in 2002.
The British program, which was called the New Deal, featured tax benefits for poor families with children, whether they worked or not. It also included a Sure Start program of child care for poor people with children under three years old. In short, the Blair program was a more extensive social welfare program than the 1996 act in the United States.
The table below compares results of the two programs in terms of their impact on child poverty, using an “absolute” poverty line and also using a relative poverty line.
Child Poverty Rates in Single-Mother Families, Pre- and Post- Reform
United Kingdom Absolute (percent) Relative (percent)
1997–1998 40 41
2002–2003 15 33
Change −25 −8
United States Absolute (percent) Relative (percent)
1992 44 67
2001 28 59
Change −16 −8
The relative measure of child poverty is the method of measuring poverty adopted by the European Union. It draws the poverty line at 60% of median income. The poverty line is thus a moving target against which it is more difficult to make progress.
Hills and Waldfogel compared the British results to those in the United States in terms of the relative impact on welfare caseloads, employment of women having families, and reduction in child poverty. They note that reduction in welfare caseloads was much greater in the United States, with caseloads falling from 5.5 million to 2.3 million. In Britain, the reduction in caseloads was much smaller. In terms of impact on employment among women, the United States again experienced a much more significant increase. In terms of reduction of child poverty, however, the British approach clearly achieved a greater reduction. The British approach also increased incomes of families in the bottom 10% of the income distribution (i.e., the bottom decile) by more than that achieved in the United States. In Britain, incomes of families in the bottom decile rose 22%, and for families with children they rose 24%. In the United States, those in the bottom decile had more modest gains.
Would the United States ever adopt a New Deal program such as the Blair program in Great Britain? That, according to Hills and Waldfogel, would require a change in attitudes in the United States that they regard as unlikely.
Answer to Try It! Problem
According to the absolute income test, the Smiths are poor because their income of \$20,500 falls below the 2006 poverty threshold of \$20,614. According to the relative income test, they are not poor because their \$20,500 income is above the upper limit of the lowest quintile, \$20,035.
1Students who have studied rent seeking behavior will recognize this argument. It falls within the public choice perspective of public finance theory.
2For a review of the literature, see Rebecca M. Blank, It Takes a Nation (New York: Russell Sage Foundation: 1997). | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_(LibreTexts)/18%3A_Inequality_Poverty_and_Discrimination/18.2%3A_The_Economics_of_Poverty.txt |
Learning Objective
1. Define discrimination, identify some sources of it, and illustrate Becker’s model of discrimination using demand and supply in a hypothetical labor market.
2. Assess the effectiveness of government efforts to reduce discrimination in the United States.
We have seen that being a female head of household or being a member of a racial minority increases the likelihood of being at the low end of the income distribution and of being poor. In the real world, we know that on average women and members of racial minorities receive different wages from white male workers, even though they may have similar qualifications and backgrounds. They might be charged different prices or denied employment opportunities. This section examines the economic forces that create such discrimination, as well as the measures that can be used to address it.
Discrimination in the Marketplace: A Model
Discrimination occurs when people with similar economic characteristics experience different economic outcomes because of their race, sex, or other noneconomic characteristics. A black worker whose skills and experience are identical to those of a white worker but who receives a lower wage is a victim of discrimination. A woman denied a job opportunity solely on the basis of her gender is the victim of discrimination. To the extent that discrimination exists, a country will not be allocating resources efficiently; the economy will be operating inside its production possibilities curve.
Pioneering work on the economics of discrimination was done by Gary S. Becker, an economist at the University of Chicago, who won the Nobel Prize in economics in 1992. He suggested that discrimination occurs because of people’s preferences or attitudes. If enough people have prejudices against certain racial groups, or against women, or against people with any particular characteristic, the market will respond to those preferences.
In Becker’s model, discriminatory preferences drive a wedge between the outcomes experienced by different groups. Discriminatory preferences can make salespeople less willing to sell to one group than to another or make consumers less willing to buy from the members of one group than from another or to make workers of one race or sex or ethnic group less willing to work with those of another race, sex, or ethnic group.
Let us explore Becker’s model by examining labor-market discrimination against black workers. We begin by assuming that no discriminatory preferences or attitudes exist. For simplicity, suppose that the supply curves of black and white workers are identical; they are shown as a single curve in Figure 19.11. Suppose further that all workers have identical marginal products; they are equally productive. In the absence of racial preferences, the demand for workers of both races would be D. Black and white workers would each receive a wage W per unit of labor. A total of L black workers and L white workers would be employed.
Now suppose that employers have discriminatory attitudes that cause them to assume that a black worker is less productive than an otherwise similar white worker. Now employers have a lower demand, DB, for black than for white workers. Employers pay black workers a lower wage, WB, and employ fewer of them, LB instead of L, than they would in the absence of discrimination.
Sources of Discrimination
As illustrated in Figure 19.11, racial prejudices on the part of employers produce discrimination against black workers, who receive lower wages and have fewer employment opportunities than white workers. Discrimination can result from prejudices among other groups in the economy as well.
One source of discriminatory prejudices is other workers. Suppose, for example, that white workers prefer not to work with black workers and require a wage premium for doing so. Such preferences would, in effect, raise the cost to the firm of hiring black workers. Firms would respond by demanding fewer of them, and wages for black workers would fall.
Another source of discrimination against black workers could come from customers. If the buyers of a firm’s product prefer not to deal with black employees, the firm might respond by demanding fewer of them. In effect, prejudice on the part of consumers would lower the revenue that firms can generate from the output of black workers.
Whether discriminatory preferences exist among employers, employees, or consumers, the impact on the group discriminated against will be the same. Fewer members of that group will be employed, and their wages will be lower than the wages of other workers whose skills and experience are otherwise similar.
Race and sex are not the only characteristics that affect hiring and wages. Some studies have found that people who are short, overweight, or physically unattractive also suffer from discrimination, and charges of discrimination have been voiced by disabled people and by homosexuals. Whenever discrimination occurs, it implies that employers, workers, or customers have discriminatory preferences. For the effects of such preferences to be felt in the marketplace, they must be widely shared.
There are, however, market pressures that can serve to lessen discrimination. For example, if some employers hold discriminatory preferences but others do not, it will be profit enhancing for those who do not to hire workers from the group being discriminated against. Because workers from this group are less expensive to hire, costs for non-discriminating firms will be lower. If the market is at least somewhat competitive, firms who continue to discriminate may be driven out of business.
Discrimination in the United States Today
Reacting to demands for social change brought on most notably by the civil rights and women’s movements, the federal government took action against discrimination. In 1954, the U.S. Supreme Court rendered its decision that so-called separate but equal schools for black and white children were inherently unequal, and the Court ordered that racially segregated schools be integrated. The Equal Pay Act of 1963 requires employers to pay the same wages to men and women who do substantially the same work. Federal legislation was passed in 1965 to ensure that minorities were not denied the right to vote.
Congress passed the most important federal legislation against discrimination in 1964. The Civil Rights Act barred discrimination on the basis of race, sex, or ethnicity in pay, promotion, hiring, firing, and training. An Executive Order issued by President Lyndon Johnson in 1967 required federal contractors to implement affirmative action programs to ensure that members of minority groups and women were given equal opportunities in employment. The practical effect of the order was to require that these employers increase the percentage of women and minorities in their work forces. Affirmative action programs for minorities followed at most colleges and universities.
What has been the outcome of these efforts to reduce discrimination? A starting point is to look at wage differences among different groups. Gaps in wages between males and females and between blacks and whites have fallen over time. In 1955, the wages of black men were about 60% of those of white men; in 2005, they were 75% of those of white men. For black men, the reduction in the wage gap occurred primarily between 1965 and 1973. In contrast, the gap between the wages of black women and white men closed more substantially, and progress in closing the gap continued after 1973, albeit at a slower rate. Specifically, the wages of black women were about 35% of those of white men in 1955, 58% in 1975, and 67% in the 2005. For white women, the pattern of gain is still different. The wages of white women were about 65% of those of white men in 1955, and fell to about 60% from the mid-1960s to the late 1970s. The wages of white females relative to white males did improve, however, over the last 40 years. In 2005, white female wages were 80% of white male wages. While there has been improvement in wage gaps between black men, black women, and white women vis-à-vis white men, a substantial gap still remains. Figure 19.12 shows the wage differences for the period 1969–2006.
One question that economists try to answer is the extent to which the gaps are due to discrimination per se and the extent to which they reflect other factors, such as differences in education, job experience, or choices that individuals in particular groups make about labor-force participation. Once these factors are accounted for, the amount of the remaining wage differential due to discrimination is less than the raw differentials presented in Figure 19.12 would seem to indicate.
There is evidence as well that the wage differential due to discrimination against women and blacks, as measured by empirical studies, has declined over time. For example, a number of studies have concluded that black men in the 1980s and 1990s experienced a 12 to 15% loss in earnings due to labor-market discrimination (Darity, W. A., and Patrick L. Mason, 1998). University of Chicago economist James Heckman denies that the entire 12% to 15% differential is due to racial discrimination, pointing to problems inherent in measuring and comparing human capital among individuals. Nevertheless, he reports that the earnings loss due to discrimination similarly measured would have been between 30 and 40% in 1940 and still over 20% in 1970 (Heckman, J. J., 1998).
Can civil rights legislation take credit for the reductions in labor-market discrimination over time? To some extent, yes. A study by Heckman and John J. Donohue III, a law professor at Northwestern University, concluded that the landmark 1964 Civil Rights Act, as well as other civil rights activity leading up to the act, had the greatest positive impact on blacks in the South during the decade following its passage. Evidence of wage gains by black men in other regions of the country was, however, minimal. Most federal activity was directed toward the South, and the civil rights effort shattered an entire way of life that had subjugated black Americans and had separated them from mainstream life (Donohue III, J. J. and James Heckman, 1991).
In recent years, affirmative action programs have been under attack. Proposition 209, passed in California in 1996, and Initiative 200, passed in Washington State in 1998, bar preferential treatment due to race in admission to public colleges and universities in those states. The 1996 Hopwood case against the University of Texas, decided by the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, eliminated the use of race in university admissions, both public and private, in Texas, Louisiana, and Mississippi. Then Supreme Court decisions in 2003 concerning the use of affirmative action at the University of Michigan upheld race conscious admissions, so long as applicants are still considered individually and decisions are based of multiple criteria.
Controversial research by two former Ivy League university presidents, political scientist Derek Bok of Harvard University and economist William G. Bowen of Princeton University, concluded that affirmative action policies have created the backbone of the black middle class and taught white students the value of integration. The study focused on affirmative action at 28 elite colleges and universities. It found that while blacks enter those institutions with lower test scores and grades than those of whites, receive lower grades, and graduate at a lower rate, after graduation blacks earn advanced degrees at rates identical to those of their former white classmates and are more active in civic affairs (Bok, D., and William G. Bowen, 1998).
While stricter enforcement of civil rights laws or new programs designed to reduce labor-market discrimination may serve to further improve earnings of groups that have been historically discriminated against, wage gaps between groups also reflect differences in choices and in “premarket” conditions, such as family environment and early education. Some of these premarket conditions may themselves be the result of discrimination.
The narrowing in wage differentials may reflect the dynamics of the Becker model at work. As people’s preferences change, or are forced to change due to competitive forces and changes in the legal environment, discrimination against various groups will decrease. However, it may be a long time before discrimination disappears from the labor market, not only due to remaining discriminatory preferences but also because the human capital and work characteristics that people bring to the labor market are decades in the making. The election of Barack Obama as president of the United States in 2008 is certainly a hallmark in the long and continued struggle against discrimination.
Key Takeaways
• Discrimination means that people of similar economic characteristics experience unequal economic outcomes as a result of noneconomic factors such as race or sex.
• Discrimination occurs in the marketplace only if employers, employees, or customers have discriminatory preferences and if such preferences are widely shared.
• Competitive markets will tend to reduce discrimination if enough individuals lack such prejudices and take advantage of discrimination practiced by others.
• Government intervention in the form of antidiscrimination laws may have reduced the degree of discrimination in the economy. There is considerable disagreement on this question but wage gaps have declined over time in the United States.
Try It!
Use a production possibilities curve to illustrate the impact of discrimination on the production of goods and services in the economy. Label the horizontal axis as consumer goods per year. Label the vertical axis as capital goods per year. Label a point A that shows an illustrative bundle of the two which can be produced given the existence of discrimination. Label another point B that lies on the production possibilities curve above and to the right of point A. Use these two points to describe the outcome that might be expected if discrimination were eliminated.
Case in Point: Early Intervention Programs
Figure 19.13
Many authors have pointed out that differences in “pre-market” conditions may drive observed differences in market outcomes for people in different groups. Significant inroads to the reduction of poverty may lie in improving the educational opportunities available to minority children and others living in poverty-level households, but at what point in their lives is the pay-off to intervention the largest? Professor James Heckman, in an op-ed essay in The Wall Street Journal, argues that the key to improving student performance and adult competency lies in early intervention in education.
Professor Heckman notes that spending on children after they are already in school has little impact on their later success. Reducing class sizes, for example, does not appear to promote gains in factors such as attending college or earning higher incomes. What does seem to matter is earlier intervention. By the age of eight , differences in learning abilities are essentially fixed. But, early intervention to improve cognitive and especially non-cognitive abilities (the latter include qualities such as perseverance, motivation, and self-restraint) has been shown to produce significant benefits. In an experiment begun several decades ago known as the Perry intervention, four-year-old children from disadvantaged homes were given programs designed to improve their chances for success in school. Evaluations of the program 40 years later found that it had a 15 to 17% rate of return in terms of the higher wages earned by men and women who had participated in the program compared to those from similar backgrounds who did not—the program’s benefit-cost ratio was 8 to 1. Professor Heckman argues that even earlier intervention among disadvantaged groups would be desirable—perhaps as early as six months of age.
Economists Rob Grunewald and Art Rolnick of the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis have gone so far as to argue that, because of the high returns to early childhood development programs, which they estimate at 12% per year to the public, state and local governments, can promote more economic development in their areas by supporting early childhood programs than they currently do by offering public subsidies to attract new businesses to their locales or to build new sports stadiums, none of which offers the prospects of such a high rate of return.
Answer to Try It! Problem
Discrimination leads to an inefficient allocation of resources and results in production levels that lie inside the production possibilities curve (PPC) (point A). If discrimination were eliminated, the economy could increase production to a point on the PPC, such as B.
Figure 19.14 | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_(LibreTexts)/18%3A_Inequality_Poverty_and_Discrimination/18.3%3A_The_Economics_of_Discrimination.txt |
Summary
In this chapter, we looked at three issues related to the question of fairness: income inequality, poverty, and discrimination.
The distribution of income in the United States has become more unequal in the last four decades. Among the factors contributing to increased inequality have been changes in family structure, technological change, and tax policy. While rising inequality can be a concern, there is a good deal of movement of families up and down the distribution of income, though recently mobility may have decreased somewhat.
Poverty can be measured using an absolute or a relative income standard. The official measure of poverty in the United States relies on an absolute standard. This measure tends to overstate the poverty rate because it does not count noncash welfare aid as income. Poverty is concentrated among female-headed households, minorities, people with relatively little education, and people who are not in the labor force. Children have a particularly high poverty rate.
Welfare reform in 1996 focused on moving people off welfare and into work. It limits the number of years that individuals can receive welfare payments and allows states to design the specific parameters of their own welfare programs. Following the reform, the number of people on welfare fell dramatically. The long-term impact on poverty is still under investigation.
Federal legislation bans discrimination. Affirmative action programs, though controversial, are designed to enhance opportunities for minorities and women. Wage gaps between women and white males and between blacks and white males have declined since the 1950s. For black males, however, most of the reduction occurred between 1965 and 1973. Much of the decrease in wage gaps is due to acquisition of human capital by women and blacks, but some of the decrease also reflects a reduction in discrimination.
Concept Problems
1. Explain how rising demand for college-educated workers and falling demand for high-school-educated workers contributes to increased inequality of the distribution of income.
2. Discuss the advantages and disadvantages of the following three alternatives for dealing with the rising inequality of wages.
1. Increase the minimum wage each year so that wages for unskilled workers rise as fast as wages for skilled workers.
2. Subsidize the wages of unskilled workers.
3. Do nothing.
3. How would you define poverty? How would you determine whether a particular family is poor? Is the test you have proposed an absolute or a relative test?
4. Why does the failure to adjust the poverty line for regional differences in living costs lead to an understatement of poverty in some states and an overstatement of poverty in others?
5. The text argues that welfare recipients could achieve higher levels of satisfaction if they received cash rather than in-kind aid. Use the same argument to make a case that gifts given at Christmas should be in cash rather than specific items. Why do you suppose they usually are not?
6. Suppose a welfare program provides a basic grant of \$10,000 per year to poor families but reduces the grant by \$1 for every \$1 of income earned. How would such a program affect a household’s incentive to work?
7. Welfare reform calls for a two-year limit on welfare payments, after which recipients must go to work. Suppose a recipient with children declines work offers. Should aid be cut? What about the children?
8. How would you tackle the welfare problem? State the goals you would seek, and explain how the measures you propose would work to meet those goals.
9. Suppose a common but unfounded belief held that people with blue eyes were not as smart as people with brown eyes. What would we expect to happen to the relative wages of the two groups? Suppose you were an entrepreneur who knew that the common belief was wrong. What could you do to enhance your profits? Suppose other entrepreneurs acted in the same way. How would the wages of people with blue eyes be affected?
10. The Case in Point on Income Inequality in the United States versus continental Western Europe argues that people get, in effect, what they expect. People in the United States attribute success to hard work and skill, while people in Continental Western Europe attribute success to connections, luck, and corruption. With what set of views do you agree? Explain.
11. The Case in Point on welfare reform in Britain versus that in the United States argues that the British system, before it could be adopted in the United States, would require a change in attitudes in the United States. What sort of change would it require? Do you prefer the British approach? Why or why not?
12. James Heckman of the University of Chicago advocates a program of early intervention targeted at low income families. What are the advantages of such an approach? The disadvantages?
13. Give five reasons that the income distribution in the United States has become more unequal in the last several decades. Do you regard this as a problem for society? Why or why not?
14. Suppose that all welfare aid were converted to programs of cash assistance. Total spending on welfare would remain unchanged. How would this affect the poverty rate? Why?
Numerical Problems
1. Here are income distribution data for three countries, from the Human Development Report 2005, table 15. Note that here we report only four data points rather than the five associated with each quintile. These emphasize the distribution at the extremes of the distribution.
Poorest 10% Poorest 20% Richest 20% Richest 10%
Panama 0.7 2.4 60.3 43.3
Sweden 3.6 9.1 36.6 22.2
Singapore 1.9 5.0 49.0 32.8
1. Plot the Lorenz curves for each in a single graph.
2. Compare the degree of inequality for the three countries. (Do not forget to convert the data to cumulative shares; e.g., the lowest 80% of the population in Panama receives 39.7% of total income.)
3. Compare your results to the Lorenz curve given in the text for the United States. Which country in your chart appears closest to the United States in terms of its income distribution?
2. Looking at Figure 19.11 suppose the wage that black workers are receiving in a discriminatory environment, WB, is \$25 per hour, while the wage that white workers receive, W, is \$30 per hour. Now suppose a regulation is imposed that requires that black workers be paid \$30 per hour also.
1. How does this affect the employment of black workers?
2. How does this the wages of black workers?
3. How does this affect their total income? Explain.
3. Suppose the poverty line in the United States was set according to the test required in the European Union: a household is poor if its income is less than 60% of the median household income. Here are annual data for median household income in the United States for the period 1994–2004. The data also give the percentage of the households that fall below 60% of the median household income.
Median Household Income in the U.S. Percent of households with income below 60% of median
1994 40,677 30.1
1995 41,943 30.4
1996 42,544 29.9
1997 43,430 29.1
1998 45,003 27.8
1999 46,129 27.1
2000 46,058 26.4
2001 45,062 27.4
2002 44,546 27.8
2003 44,482 28.3
2004 44,389 28.3
1. Plot the data on a graph.
2. Is this a relative or an absolute definition of poverty?
3. Why do you think the percent of households with incomes below 60% of the median fell from 1994 to 2000 and has risen since?
4. Discuss the measurement issues involved in the data you have presented.
5. Discuss the elements of the system of counting the incomes of low income people in the United States and explain how it relates to your answer in (d).
4. Consider the following model of the labor market in the United States. Suppose that the labor market consists of two parts, a market for skilled workers and the market for unskilled workers, with different demand and supply curves for each as given below. The initial wage for skilled workers is \$20 per hour; the initial wage for unskilled workers is \$7 per hour.
1. Draw the demand and supply curves for the two markets so that they intersect at the wages given above.
2. How does increased demand for skilled workers and a reduced demand for unskilled workers affect the initial solution?
3. How is the Lorenz curve for the United States economy affected by this development? Illustrate the old and the new Lorenz curves.
4. Suppose there is an increase in immigration from Mexico. How will this affect the two markets for labor?
5. Suppose Professor Heckman’s recommendation for early intervention for low income children is followed and that it has the impact he predicts. How will this affect the two markets today? In 20 years? Illustrate and explain how the demand and/or supply curves in each market will be affected.
6. What would the impact of the change in (d) be on the Lorenz curve for the United States 20 years from now? | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_(LibreTexts)/18%3A_Inequality_Poverty_and_Discrimination/18.4%3A_Review_and_Practice.txt |
Thumbnail: https://unsplash.com/photos/P8ZZ0aofrXI
19: Economic Development
Learning Objective
1. Define a developing country and discuss how incomes are compared across countries.
2. State and explain the general characteristics of low-income countries.
3. Discuss what is meant by economic development.
Throughout most of history, poverty has been the human condition. For most people life was, in the words of 17th-century English philosopher Thomas Hobbes, “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.” Only within the past 200 years have a handful or so of countries been able to break the chains of economic deprivation and poverty.
Consider these facts(United Nations Development Program, 2007):
• Over a third of the world’s people live in countries in which total per capita income in 2005 was less than \$610 per year; 85% live in countries in which total per capita income in 2005 was \$2,808 or less. Adjusting for purchasing power, the per capita income levels would be \$2,531 and \$7,416, respectively. The latter numbers compare to per capita income in high-income countries of over \$30,000.
• Babies born in poor countries are 16 times more likely to die in their first five years than are babies born in rich countries.
• About a quarter of the populations of low-income countries is undernourished.
• About 40% (over 50% for women) of the people 15 years old and older in low-income countries are illiterate.
• Roughly one-fourth of the people in low-income countries do not have access to safe drinking water.
Clearly, the high standards of living enjoyed by people in the world’s developed economies are the global exception, not the rule. This chapter looks at the problem of improving the standard of living in poor countries.
Rich and Poor Nations
The World Bank, an international organization designed to support economic development by providing financial assistance, advice, and other resources to poor countries, classifies over 200 countries according to their levels of per capita gross national income. The categories in its 2008 report, as shown in Table 33.1 “World Incomes, Selected Countries”, were as follows:
• Low-income countries: These countries had per capita incomes of \$935 or less in 2007. There were 49 countries in this category. About 20% of the world’s total population of about 6.5 billion people lived in low-income countries in 2007.
• Middle-income countries: There were 95 countries with per capita incomes of more than \$936 but less than \$11,455. Middle-income countries are further subdivided into lower middle-income and upper middle-income countries. Roughly two-thirds of the world’s population lived in middle-income countries in 2007. We should note that the percentage of the world’s population living in middle-income countries increased dramatically (and the percentage living in low-income countries decreased dramatically) when China and India moved from being low-income to middle-income countries.
• High-income countries: There were 65 nations with per capita incomes of \$11,456 or more. Just 16% of the world’s total population lived in high-income countries in 2007.
Countries in the low- and middle-income categories are often called developing countries. A developing country is thus a country that is not among the high-income nations of the world (The World Development Report, 2006). Developing countries are sometimes referred to as third-world countries.
How does the World Bank compare incomes across countries? The World Bank converts gross national income (GNI) figures to dollars in two ways. One is to take GNI in a local currency and convert using the exchange rate, averaged over a three-year period in order to smooth out the effects of currency fluctuations. This type of comparison can, however, be misleading. A country could have a relatively high standard of living but, for a variety of reasons, a low exchange rate. The per capita GNI figure would be quite low; the country would appear to be poorer than it is.
A better approach to comparing incomes converts currencies to dollars on the basis of purchasing power. This measure is reported in what are called international dollars. An international dollar has the same purchasing power as does a U.S. dollar in the United States. This is reported in the column labeled “2007 International \$” in Table 33.1 “World Incomes, Selected Countries”.
Table 33.1 World Incomes, Selected Countries
Gross National Income per Capita, 2007
Low-income countries Middle-income countries High-income countries
Countries 2007 \$ 2007 International \$ Countries 2007 \$ 2007 International \$ Countries 2007 \$ 2007 International \$
Burundi 110 330 India 950 2,740 Czech Republic 14,450 22,020
Sierra Leone 260 660 China 2,360 5,370 Saudi Arabia 15,440 22,910
Mozambique 320 690 Thailand 3,400 7,880 Israel 21,900 25,930
Bangladesh 470 1,340 Iran 3,470 10,800 Greece 29,630 32,330
Haiti 560 1,150 Jamaica 3,710 6,210 Japan 37,670 34,600
Uzbekistan 730 2,430 Costa Rica 5,560 10,700 France 38,500 33,600
Vietnam 790 2,550 Brazil 5,910 9,370 Canada 39,420 35,310
Zambia 800 1,220 Argentina 6,050 12,990 United States 46,040 45,850
Pakistan 870 2,570 Russian Federation 7,560 14,400 Ireland 48,140 37,090
Nigeria 930 1,770 Turkey 8,020 12,350 Norway 76,450 53,320
Average 578 1,494 Average 2,872 5,952 Average 37,566 36,100
Ave., lower middle 1,887 4,543
Ave., upper middle 6,987 11,868
The international dollar estimates typically show higher incomes than estimates based on an exchange rate conversion. For example, in 2007 Mozambique’s per capita GNI, based on exchange rates, was \$320. Its per capita GNI based the international dollars was \$690.
Ranking of countries, both rich and poor, by per capita GNI differs depending on the measure used. According to the per capita GNI figures in Table 33.1 “World Incomes, Selected Countries”, which convert data in domestic currencies to dollars using exchange rates, the United States ranked fifteenth of all countries in 2007. Using the international dollars method, its rank is tenth. China is ranked at 132 when per capita GNI is based on the exchange rate conversion method but rises to 122 based on the international dollar method.
Characteristics of Low-Income Countries
Low incomes are often associated with other characteristics: severe inequality, poor health care and education, high unemployment, heavy reliance on agriculture, and rapid population growth. We will examine most of these problems in this section. Population growth in low-income nations is examined later in the chapter.
Inequality
Not only are incomes in low-income countries quite low; income distribution is often highly unequal. Poverty is far more prevalent than per capita numbers suggest, as illustrated by Lorenz curves, introduced in the chapter on inequality, that show the cumulative shares of income received by individuals or groups.
Consider Costa Rica and Panama, two Latin American countries with roughly equivalent levels of per capita GNI (Costa Rica’s was \$5,560 and Panama’s \$5,510 in 2007). Panama’s income distribution is comparatively less equal, while Costa Rica’s is far more equal. Figure 33.1 compares the 2003 Lorenz curves for Costa Rica and Panama, the most recent year for which the information was available. The 20% of the households with the lowest incomes in Costa Rica had twice as large a share of their country’s total income as did the bottom 20% of households in Panama. That means Costa Rica’s poor were about twice as well off, in material terms, as Panama’s poor.
In general, the greater the degree of inequality, the more desperate is the condition of people at the bottom of an income distribution. Given the high degree of inequality in many low-income countries, it is very important to look at income distributions when we compare living standards in different countries.
Health and Education
Poor nations are typically characterized by low levels of human capital. Where health-care facilities are inadequate, that human capital can be reduced further by disease. Where educational resources are poor, there will be little progress in improving human capital.
One indicator of poor health care appears on the supply side. Low-income countries have fewer doctors, relative to their populations, than high-income countries. For example, the UN estimates that in 2006 about 60% of mothers giving birth in developing countries had access to a skilled health-care provider (doctor, nurse, or midwife). While that is up from 47% in 1990, the lack of access to a health-care provider may explain much of the difference in maternal death rates between developed and developing countries: about nine maternal deaths per 100,000 live births in developed countries compared to about 450 per 100,000 in developing countries (United Nations, 2008).
We can also see the results of poor health care in statistics on health. Among the world’s developing countries, the infant mortality rate, which reports deaths in the first year of life, was 57 per 1,000 live births in 2005. There were six infant deaths per 1,000 live births among the high-income countries that year (United Nations Development Program, 2007).
Another health issue facing the world’s low-income countries is malnutrition. Malnutrition rates in all developing countries in the 2002 to 2004 period averaged 17%, 35% in the least developed countries.
Still another issue is the spread of HIV/AIDS. Here there is some progress. The number of people newly infected declined from 3 million in 2001 to 2.7 million in 2005. Antiretroviral treatments are also leading to a reduction in deaths from 2.2 million in 2005 to 2 million in 2007. Longer survival means that the number of people living with HIV (from just under 30 million in 2001 to about 33 million in 2007) is rising and most of the people living with HIV are in Sub-Saharan Africa (United Nations, 2008).
Education in poor and middle-income nations is improving. In 1991, about 80% of children in developing countries were enrolled in primary schools. In 2005, about 85% were. The comparable numbers in developed countries are about 95%. Enrollment rates taper off for high school (about 53% in 2005 in developing countries compared to 91% in developed countries) (United Nations, 2007).
Unemployment
Unemployment is pervasive in low-income nations. These nations, already faced with low levels of potential output, are producing well below their potential. Unemployment rates in low-income countries vary widely, reaching as high as 15% or more in some countries. If we count discouraged workers, people who have given up looking for work but who would take it if it were available, and people who work less than full time, not by choice but because more work is unavailable, then unemployment in low-income countries soars—often to more than 30%.
Migration within low-income countries often contributes to unemployment in urban areas. Factors such as ethnic violence, poverty, and drought often force people to move from rural areas to cities, where unemployment rates are already high.
Reliance on Agriculture
One of the dominant characteristics of poor nations is the concentration of employment in agriculture. Another is the very low productivity of that employment. Agriculture in low-income countries often employs a majority of the population but produces less than one-third of GDP.
One of the primary forces behind income growth in wealthy countries has been the shift of labor out of agriculture and into more productive sectors such as manufacturing. This shift is also occurring in low-income nations but has lagged far behind.
The solution to these problems lies in economic development, to which we turn next.
Economic Development: A Definition
If the problems of low-income nations are pervasive, the development that helps to solve those problems must transform the very nature of their societies. The late Austrian economist Joseph Schumpeter described economic development as a revolutionary process. Whereas economic growth implies quantitative change in production processes that are already familiar to the society, economic development requires qualitative change in virtually every aspect of life.
Robert Heilbroner, an economist at the New School for Social Research in New York, has argued,
“Economic development is political and social change on a wrenching and tearing scale. … It is a process of institutional birth and institutional death. It is a time when power shifts, often violently and abruptly, a time when old regimes go under and new ones rise in their places. And these are not just the unpleasant side effects of development. They are part and parcel of the process, the very driving force of change itself” (Heilbroner, 1970).
Economic development transforms a nation at its core. But what, precisely, is development? Many definitions follow Heilbroner in noting the massive institutional and cultural changes economic development involves. But whatever the requirements of development, its primary characteristics are rising incomes and improving standards of living. That means output must increase—and it must increase relative to population growth. And because inequality is so serious a problem in low-income nations, development must deliver widespread improvement in living conditions. It therefore seems useful to define economic development as a process that produces sustained and widely shared gains in per capita real GDP.
In recent years, the United Nations has constructed measures incorporating dimensions of economic development that go beyond the level of per capita GDP. The Human Development Index (HDI) includes three dimensions—life expectancy, educational attainment (adult literacy and combined primary, secondary, and post-secondary enrollment), as well as purchasing-power-adjusted per capita real GDP. The Gender Development Index (GDI) uses the same variables as the HDI but adjusts them downward to take into account the extent of gender inequality. A third index, the Human Poverty Index (HPI), measures human deprivation and includes such indicators as the percentage of people expected to die before age 40, the percentage of underweight children under age 5, the percentage of adults who are illiterate, and the percentage of people who live in poverty. The number reported for the HPI shows the percentage of people in the country who suffer these deprivations.
Table 33.2 “Human Development Index, Gender Development Index, and Human Poverty Index” shows the HDI, the GDI rank, and the HPI for selected countries, by HDI rank. The HDI is constructed to have an upper limit of 1. Canada’s HDI is 0.96; the United States’ is 0.95. As the table shows, the HDIs for developing countries range from 0.87 in Argentina to 0.34 in Sierra Leone. The greater the difference between the HDI and the GDI of a country, the greater the disparity in achievement between males and females in the country. Countries can have similar HDIs but different GDIs or HPIs. By looking at a variety of measures, we come closer to examining the extent to which the gains in income growth have been shared or not.
Table 33.2 Human Development Index, Gender Development Index, and Human Poverty Index
HDI rank Country Human Development Index (HDI), 2005 Gender-Related Development Index (GDI) 2005, Rank Human Poverty Index (HPI), % 20051
1 Iceland 0.968 1 NA
2 Norway 0.968 3 6.8
4 Canada 0.961 4 10.9
10 France 0.952 7 11.2
12 United States 0.951 16 15.4
24 Greece 0.926 24 NA
32 Czech Republic 0.891 29 NA
38 Argentina 0.869 36 4.1
48 Costa Rica 0.846 47 4.4
61 Saudi Arabia 0.812 70 NA
67 Russian Federation 0.802 59 NA
70 Brazil 0.8 60 9.7
78 Thailand 0.781 71 10.0
81 China 0.777 73 11.7
84 Turkey 0.775 79 9.2
90 Philippines 0.771 77 15.3
94 Iran 0.759 84 12.9
101 Jamaica 0.736 90 14.3
105 Viet Nam 0.733 91 15.2
114 Mongolia 0.7 100 NA
117 Bolivia 0.695 103 13.6
126 Morocco 0.646 112 33.4
128 India 0.619 113 31.3
135 Ghana 0.553 117 32.3
136 Pakistan 0.551 125 36.2
148 Kenya 0.521 127 30.8
154 Uganda 0.505 132 34.7
156 Senegal 0.499 135 42.9
173 Mali 0.38 151 56.4
177 Sierra Leone 0.336 157 51.7
Key Takeaways
• The World Bank classifies countries as being low-income, middle-income, or high-income. More than 80% of the world’s people live in low- and middle-income countries.
• Among the problems facing low-income nations are low living standards, inequality, inadequate health care and education, high unemployment, and the concentration of the labor force in low-productivity agricultural work.
• Economic development is a process that generates sustained and widely shared gains in per capita real GDP.
Try It!
Provided below is information about two low-income developing countries in Western Africa, Côte d’Ivoire, and Guinea. Use the information to plot their Lorenz curves for consumption, which are similar to Lorenz curves for income distribution, discussed in the chapter on inequality, poverty, and discrimination. Then, based on the material in this section, contrast the concept of economic growth, as discussed in the chapter on that topic, with the concept of economic development, the subject of this chapter. Which of the two countries do you believe fits better the definition of development? Explain.
Average annual growth rate of GNP (%) Average annual growth rate of GNP per capita Percentage Share of Consumption
Lowest 20% Second 20% Third 20% Fourth 20% Highest 20%
Cote d’Ivoire 6.9 4.2 6.8 11.2 15.8 22.2 44.1
Guinea 7.2 4.6 3.0 8.3 14.6 23.9 50.2
Case in Point: (Growth and Development) or (Growth or Development)?
The 1971 Nobel laureate in economics, Simon Kuznets, hypothesized that, at low levels of per capita income, increases in income would lead to increases in income inequality. The Kuznets hypothesis was later extended to include concern that early growth might not be associated with improvements in other aspects of development, such as those measured by the HDI or HPI. The rationale for growth pessimism was that the structural changes that often accompany early growth—such as rural–urban migration, occupational changes, and environmental degradation—disproportionately hurt poorer people.
The passage of time and the availability of more information on developing countries’ experiences allow us to test whether such pessimism is warranted. The results of a recent study of 95 decade-long episodes of economic growth and decline around the world show that the distribution of income can go either way. Clearly, as the table below shows, with the direction of change in the distribution of income split almost 50-50 during periods of growth, there is no longer any reason to think that growth necessarily increases income inequality. As the table also shows, by a ratio of 7 to 1, the income of the poor usually improves during periods of growth. This means that even when inequality increases, the poor usually gain in absolute terms as income grows.
There were only seven periods of income decline included in the study, but, in general, during those periods the distribution of income grew more unequal and the incomes of the poor fell.
Broad-based measures of development, such as the HDI and the HPI, have not been calculated for a long enough period to allow us to see the trend in these social indicators of development, but we can look at various aspects of human development and poverty over time. As shown in the graphs accompanying this case, there have generally been improvements in the percentage of people with access to safe water, in the adult literacy rate, and in the percentage of underweight children under age 5. On this last indicator, the improvement in Sub-Saharan Africa is very small, but keep in mind that the rate of growth of real GNP per capita in this region has been just over 1% per year.
There is no guarantee that economic growth will improve the plight of the world’s poor—there is indeed wide variation in individual countries’ experiences. In general, though, economic growth makes most people, including most poor people, better off. As former World Bank Senior Vice President and Chief Economist Joseph Stiglitz put it, “Aggregate economic growth benefits most of the people most of the time; and it is usually associated with progress in other, social dimensions of development.”
Periods of growth (88) Periods of decline (7)
Indicator Improved Worsened Improved Worsened
Inequality 45 43 2 5
Income of the poor 77 11 2 5
Figure 33.3
Answer to Try It! Problem
Economic growth refers to the process of increasing a country’s potential output. Graphically, this can be represented by rightward shifts in the long-run aggregate supply curve or by the shifting outward of the production possibilities curve. The challenge of economic development, however, is for countries to move toward their level of potential output and to achieve widely shared gains in GDP per capita. This process usually involves widespread structural changes in the way people live—their standards of living, the kinds of jobs they have, their health, and so forth. When comparing Côte d’Ivoire and Guinea, for example, it is clear that the distribution of consumption is much more equal in the former. This implies that Côte d’Ivoire is coming closer to generating widely shared gains in per capita real GDP.
Figure 33.4
1The definition of deprivation for developed countries applies a higher standard than it does for developing countries. | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_(LibreTexts)/19%3A_Economic_Development/19.1%3A_The_Nature_and_Challenge_of_Economic_Development.txt |
Learning Objective
1. Explain the relationship between population growth and the rate of increase in per capita income.
2. Summarize Thomas Malthus’s reasoning that led to the concept of a Malthusian trap, and explain why his dire predictions have not occurred in many countries in modern times.
3. Explain what is meant by a demographic transition, and describe how it has proceeded in very different ways in developed versus developing countries.
It is easy to see why some people have become alarmists when it comes to population growth rates in developing nations. Looking at the world’s low-income countries, they see a population of more than 2 billion growing at a rate that suggests a doubling every 31 years. How will we cope with so many more people? The following statement captures the essence of widely expressed concerns:
“At the end of each day, the world now has over two hundred thousand more mouths to feed than it had the day before; at the end of each week, one and one-half million more; at the close of each year, an additional eighty million. … Humankind, now doubling its numbers every thirty-five years, has fallen into an ambush of its own making; economists call it the “Malthusian trap,” after the man who most forcefully stated our biological predicament: population growth tends to outstrip the supply of food” (Appleman, 1976).
But what are we to make of such a statement? Certainly, if the world’s population continues to increase at the rate that it grew in the past 50 years, economic growth is less likely to be translated into an improvement in the average standard of living. But the rate of population growth is not a constant; it is affected by other economic forces. This section begins with a discussion of the relationship between population growth and income growth, then turns to an explanation of the sources of population growth in low-income countries, and closes with a discussion of the Malthusian warning suggested in the quote above.
Population Growth and Income Growth
On a simplistic level, the relationship between growth in population and growth in per capita income is clear. After all, per capita income equals total income divided by population. The growth rate of per capita income roughly equals the difference between the growth rate of income and the growth rate of population. Kenya’s annual growth rate in real GDP from 1975 to 2005, for example, was 3.3%. Its population growth rate during that period was 3.2%, leaving it a growth rate of per capita GDP of just 0.1%. A slower rate of population growth, together with the same rate of GDP increase, would have left Kenya with more impressive gains in per capita income. The implication is that if the developing countries want to increase their rate of growth of per capita GDP relative to the developed nations, they must limit their population growth.
Figure 33.5 plots growth rates in population versus growth rates in per capita GDP from 1975 to 2005 for more than 100 developing countries. We do not see a simple relationship. Many countries experienced both rapid population growth and negative changes in real per capita GDP. But still others had relatively rapid population growth, yet they had a rapid increase in per capita GDP. Clearly, there is more to achieving gains in per capita income than a simple slowing in population growth. But the challenge raised at the beginning of this section remains: Can the world continue to feed a population that is growing exponentially—that is, doubling over fixed intervals?
The Malthusian Trap and the Demographic Transition
In 1798, Thomas Robert Malthus published his Essay on the Principle of Population. It proved to be one of the most enduring works of the time. Malthus’s fundamental argument was that population growth will inevitably collide with diminishing returns.
Diminishing returns imply that adding more labor to a fixed quantity of land increases output, but by ever smaller amounts. Eventually, Malthus concluded, increases in food production would be too small to sustain the increased number of human beings who consume that output. As the population continued to grow unchecked, the number of people would eventually outstrip the ability of the land to generate enough food. There would be an inevitable Malthusian trapA point at which the world is no longer able to meet the food requirements of the population, and starvation becomes the primary check to population growth., a point at which the world is no longer able to meet the food requirements of the population, and starvation becomes the primary check to population growth.
A Malthusian trap is illustrated in Figure 33.6. We can determine the total amount of food needed by multiplying the population in any period by the amount of food required to keep one person alive. Because population grows exponentially, food requirements rise at an increasing rate, as shown by the curve labeled “Food required.” Food produced, according to Malthus, rises by a constant amount each period; its increase is shown by an upward-sloping straight line labeled “Food produced.” Food required eventually exceeds food produced, and the Malthusian trap is reached at time t1. The faster the rate of population growth, the sooner t1 is reached.
What happens at the Malthusian trap? Clearly, there is not enough food to support the population growth implied by the “Food required” curve. Instead, people starve, and population begins rising arithmetically, held in check by the “Food produced” curve. Starvation becomes the limiting force for population; the population lives at the margin of subsistence. For Malthus, the long-run fate of human beings was a standard of living barely sufficient to keep them alive. As he put it, “the view has a melancholy hue.”
Happily, Malthus’s predictions do not match the experience of Western societies in the 19th and 20th centuries. One weakness of his argument is that he failed to take into account the gains in output that could be achieved through increased use of physical capital and new technologies in agriculture. Increases in the amount of capital per worker in the form of machines, improved seed, irrigation, and fertilization have made possible huge increases in agricultural output at the same time as the supply of labor was rising. Agricultural productivity rose rapidly in the United States over the last two centuries, just the opposite of the fall in productivity expected by Malthus. Productivity has continued to expand.
Malthus was wrong as well about the relationship between population growth and income. He believed that any increase in income would boost population growth. But the law of demand tells us that the opposite may be true: higher incomes tend to reduce population growth. The primary cost of having children is the opportunity cost of the parents’ time in raising them—higher incomes increase this opportunity cost. Higher incomes increase the cost of having children and tend to reduce the number of children people want and thus to slow population growth.
Panel (a) of Figure 33.7 shows the birth rates of low-, middle-, and high-income countries for the period 2000–2005. We see that the higher the income level, the lower the birth rate. Fewer births translate into slower population growth. In Panel (b), we see that high-income nations had much slower rates of population growth than did middle- and low-income nations over the last 30 years.
An increase in a nation’s income can be expected to slow its rate of population growth. Hong Kong, for example, has enjoyed dramatic gains in income since the 1960s. Its birth rate and rate of population growth have fallen by over half during that time.
But if economic development can slow population growth, it can also increase it. One of the first gains a developing nation can achieve is improvements in such basics as the provision of clean drinking water, improved sanitation, and public health measures such as vaccination against childhood diseases. Such gains can dramatically reduce disease and death rates. As desirable as such gains are, they also boost the rate of population growth. Nations are likely to enjoy sharp reductions in death rates before they achieve gains in per capita income. That can accelerate population growth early in the development process. Demographers have identified a process of demographic transitionSituation in which population growth rises with a fall in death rates and then falls with a reduction in birth rates. in which population growth rises with a fall in death rates and then falls with a reduction in birth rates.
The process of demographic transition has unfolded in a strikingly different manner in developed versus less developed nations over the past two centuries. In 1800, birth rates barely exceeded death rates in both developed and less developed countries. The result was a rate of population growth of only about 0.5% per year worldwide. By 1900, the death rate in developed nations had fallen by about 25%, with little change in the birth rate. Among developing nations, the birth rate was unchanged, while the death rate was down only slightly. The combined result was a modest increase in the rate of world population growth.
Changes were much more rapid in the 20th century. By 1965, the death rate among developed nations had plunged to about one-quarter of its 1800 level, while the birth rate had fallen by half. In developing nations, death rates took a similarly dramatic drop, while birth rates showed little change. The result was dramatic world population growth.
The world’s high-income economies have completed the demographic transition. Less developed nations have begun to make progress, with birth rates falling by a slightly greater percentage than death rates. The results have been a sharp slowing in the rate of population growth among high-income nations and a more modest slowing among low-income nations. Continued slowing in population growth at all income levels is suggested in Figure 33.8.
Between 1965 and 1980, the world population grew at an annual rate of 2%, suggesting a doubling time of 36 years. For the world as a whole, it is predicted that population growth will slow to a 1.1% rate during the 2005–2015 period, a rate that would imply a doubling time of 65 years.
Key Takeaways
• The rate of increase in per capita income roughly equals the rate of increase in income minus the rate of increase in population. High rates of population growth do not necessarily imply low rates of growth in per capita income.
• Malthus’s prediction of a world in which production would be barely sufficient to keep people alive has proven incorrect because of gains generated by increased physical and human capital, advances in technology, and the tendency of higher incomes to slow population growth.
• A demographic transition is achieved when rising incomes begin to reduce birth rates and bring population growth in check.
Try It!
The text gives two main reasons why the Malthusian trap did not occur: (1) increased use of physical capital and human capital and technological improvements in agriculture and (2) higher income leading to fewer children. How do these two reasons alter Figure 33.6?
Case in Point: China Curtails Population Growth
Figure 33.9
M M – China – CC BY-SA 2.0.
China is an example of a country that has achieved a very low rate of population growth and a very high rate of growth in per capita GNP.
China’s low rate of population growth represents a dramatic shift. As recently as the early 1970s, China had a relatively high rate of population growth; its population expanded at an annual rate of 2.7% from 1965 to 1973. By the 1980s, that rate had plunged to 1.5%. The World Bank reports a growth rate in China’s population of about 1% in the early part of the 21st century.
This dramatic drop in the population growth rate was brought about by a strict government policy by which couples are allowed to have only one child. Disincentives have been known to include fines, loss of employment, confiscation of property, demolition of homes, forced abortions, and sterilization. While the Chinese government has denied that forced abortions and sterilizations are part of its strategy, policies are administered locally, and all of the above means of coercion seem to have been employed at one time or another. If a woman who already has one child becomes pregnant, she will most likely be forced to have an abortion.
Although the policy has achieved its desired result—reduced population growth—it has had some horrible side effects. Given a strong cultural tradition favoring having a son, some couples resort to infanticide as a means of eliminating newborn daughters. When the sex of an unborn baby is determined to be female, abortion is common.
The coercive aspects of China’s policies and their undesirable side effects have been condemned by many governments around the world, as well as by nongovernmental organizations. Declarations from United Nations’ conferences—the UN Conference on Population in Cairo in 1994 and the UN Conference on Women in Beijing in 1995—have emphasized that birth rates are linked to the economic conditions of women and that improving health, education, and employment opportunities for women constitutes a better and more humane way of reducing birth rates. Fearful that pro-democracy and human rights activists from other countries might stir up those movements locally, the Chinese government actually designed the 1995 Beijing Conference so as to minimize contact between Chinese and foreigners.
There are signs, though, that Chinese officials may have heard the message. In a number of counties in China, experimental programs with slogans such as “Carry out Contraception and Family Planning Measures Voluntarily” are underway. The new approach to family planning emphasizes health care, education, and reduction in poverty to encourage women to have fewer children.
International pressures may only be part of the reason for the emerging Chinese change of heart. In the late 1980s, Chinese officials discovered that the number of births in China was being underreported by about 30%. The aggressive policies may not have been as successful as they were cracked up to be.
Answer to Try It! Problem
The first reason raises the curve labeled “Food produced” and suggests that it is exponential rather than linear. The second reason lowers the curve labeled “Food required.” The result is that the time t1, when the amount of food required exceeds the amount produced, is pushed further into the future, perhaps indefinitely if the “Food produced” stays above the “Food required” curve. The latter seems to have been the experience of today’s rich countries. | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_(LibreTexts)/19%3A_Economic_Development/19.2%3A_Population_Growth_and_Economic_Development.txt |
Learning Objective
1. List and discuss domestic policies that contribute to economic growth.
2. State the dependency theory view of trade and developing nations, relate this theory to the strategy of import substitution, and evaluate that strategy.
3. Outline some of the factors underlying the successes of newly industrialized countries.
What are the keys to economic development? Clearly, each nation’s experience is unique; we cannot isolate the sources of development success in the laboratory. We can, however, identify some factors that appear to have played an important role in successful economic development. We will look separately at policies that relate to the domestic economy and at policies in international trade.
Domestic Policy and Economic Development
What domestic policies contribute to development? Looking at successful economies, those that have achieved high and sustained increases in per capita output, we can see some clear tendencies. They include a market economy, a high saving rate, and investment in infrastructure and in human capital.
Market Economies and Development
There can be no clearer lesson than that a market-oriented economy is a necessary condition for economic development. We saw in the chapter that introduced the production possibilities model that economic systems can be categorized as market capitalist, command socialist, or as mixed economic systems. There are no examples of development success among command socialist systems, although some people still believe that the former Soviet Union experienced some development advances in its early years.
One of the most dramatic examples is provided by China. Its shift in the late 1970s to a more market-based economy has ushered in a period of phenomenal growth. China, which has shifted from a command socialist to what could most nearly be categorized as a mixed economy, has been among the fastest-growing economies in the world for the past 20 years. Its growth has catapulted China from being one of the world’s poorest countries a few decades ago to being a middle-income country today.
The experience of other economies reinforces the general observation that markets matter. South Korea, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Singapore, and Chile—all have achieved gigantic gains with a market-based approach to economic growth.
We should not conclude, however, that growth has been independent of any public sector activity. China, for example, remains a nominally socialist state; its government continues to play a major role. The governments of South Korea, Taiwan, and Singapore all targeted specific sectors for growth and provided government help to those sectors. Even Hong Kong, which became part of China in 1997, has a high degree of government involvement in the provision of housing, health care, and education. A market economy is not a nongovernment economy. But those countries that have left the task of resource allocation primarily to the market have achieved dramatic gains. Hong Kong and Singapore, in fact, are now included in the World Bank’s list of high-income economies.
The Rule of Law and Development
If a market is to thrive, individuals must be secure in their property. If crime or government corruption makes it likely that individuals will regularly be subjected to a loss of property, then exchange will be difficult and little investment will occur. Also, the rule of law is necessary for contracts; that is, the rule of law is necessary to provide an institutional framework within which an economy can operate.
We will see in the chapter on socialist economies in transition, for example, that Russia’s effort to achieve economic development through the adoption of a market economy has been hampered by widespread lawlessness. An important difficulty of economies with extensive regulation is that the power they grant to government officials inevitably results in widespread corruption that saps entrepreneurial effort and economic growth.
Investment and Saving
Saving is a key to growth and the achievement of high incomes. All other things equal, higher saving allows more resources to be devoted to increases in physical and human capital and to technological improvement. In other words, saving, which is income not spent on consumption, promotes economic growth by making available resources that can be channeled into growth-enhancing uses.
High saving rates generally accompany high levels of investment. The productivity of this investment, however, can be quite variable. Government efforts to invest in human capital by promoting education, for example, may or may not be successful in actually achieving education. Development projects sponsored by international relief agencies may or may not foster development.
However, investment in infrastructure, such as transportation and communication, clearly plays an important role in economic development. Investment in improved infrastructure facilitates the exchange of goods and services and thus fosters development.
International Economic Issues in Development
In 1974, the poorest nations among the developing nations introduced into the United Nations a Declaration on the Establishment of a New International Economic Order. The program called upon the rich nations to help them reduce the growing gap in real per capita income levels between the developed and developing nations. The declaration has come to be known as the New International Economic Order or NIEO for short.
NIEO called for different and special treatment of the developing nations in the international arena in areas such as trade policy and control over multinational corporations. NIEO reflected a widely held view of international relations known as dependency theory.
Dependency Theory and Trade Policy
Conventional economic theory concerning international trade is based on the idea of comparative advantage. As we have seen in other chapters, the principle of comparative advantage suggests that free trade between two countries will benefit both and, in general, the freer the trade the better. But some economists have proposed a doctrine that challenges this idea. Dependency theory concludes that poverty in developing nations is the result of their dependence on high-income nations.
Dependency theory holds that the industrialized nations control the destiny of the developing nations, particularly in terms of being the ultimate markets for their exports, serving as the source of capital required for development, and controlling the relative prices and exchange rates at which market transactions occur. In addition, export industries in a developing nation are assumed to have small multiplier effects throughout the rest of the economy, severely limiting any positive role than an expanded export sector might play. Specifically, limited transportation, a poorly developed financial sector, and an uneducated work force stand in the way of “multiplying” any positive effects of export expansion. A poor country thus may not experience the kind of development and growth enjoyed by the rich country pursuing free trade. Also, increased trade makes the poor country more dependent on the rich country and its export service firms. In short, the benefits of trade between a rich country and a poor country will go almost entirely to the rich country.
The development strategy that this line of argument suggests is that developing countries would need to become independent of the already developed nations in order to achieve economic development. In relative terms, free trade would leave the poor country poorer and the rich country richer. Some dependency theorists even argued that trade is likely to make poor countries poorer in absolute terms.
Tanzania’s president, Julius Nyerere, speaking before the United Nations in 1975, put it bluntly, “I am poor because you are rich.”
Import Substitution Strategies and Export-Led Development
If free trade widens the gap between rich and poor nations and makes poor nations poorer, it follows that a poor country should avoid free trade. Many developing countries, particularly in Latin America, attempted to overcome the implications of dependency theory by adopting a strategy of import substitution, a strategy of blocking most imports and substituting domestic production of those goods.
The import substitution strategy calls for rapidly increasing industrialization by mimicking the already industrialized nations. The intent is to reduce the dependence of the developing country on imports of consumer and capital goods from the industrialized countries by manufacturing these goods at home. But in order to protect these relatively high-cost industries at home, the developing country must establish very high protective tariffs. Moreover, the types of industries that produce the previously imported consumer goods and capital goods are unlikely to increase the demand for unskilled labor. Yet unskilled labor is the most abundant resource in the poor countries. Adopting the import substitution strategy raises the demand for expensive capital, managerial talent, and skilled labor—resources in short supply.
High tariffs insulate domestic firms from competition, but that tends to increase their monopoly power. Recognizing that some imported goods, particularly spare parts for industrial equipment, will be needed, countries can establish complex permit systems through which firms can import vital parts and other equipment. But that leaves a company’s fortunes in the hands of the government bureaucrats issuing the permits. A highly corrupt system quickly evolves in which a few firms bribe their way to easy access to foreign markets, reducing competition still further. Instead of the jobs expected to result from import substitution, countries implementing the import substitution strategy get the high prices, reduced production, and poor quality that come from reduced competition.
No country that has relied on a general strategy of import substitution has been successful in its development efforts. It is an idea whose time has not come. In contrast, more successful economies in Asia and elsewhere have kept their economies fairly open to both imports and exports. They have shown the greatest ability to move the development process along.
Development and International Financial Markets
Successful development in the developing nations requires more than just redirecting labor and capital resources into newly emerging sectors of the economy. That could be accomplished by both domestic firms and international firms located within the economy. But to complement the reorientation of traditional production processes, economic infrastructure such as roads, schools, communication facilities, ports, warehouses, and many other prerequisites to growth must be put into place. Paying for the projects requires a high level of saving.
The sources of saving are private saving, government saving, and foreign saving. Grants in the form of foreign aid from the developed nations supplement these sources, but they form a relatively small part of the total.
Private domestic saving is an important source of funds. But even high rates of private saving cannot guarantee sufficient funds in a poor economy, where the bulk of the population lives close to the subsistence level. Government saving in the form of tax revenues in excess of government expenditures is almost universally negative. If the required investments are to take place, the developing nations have to borrow the money from foreign savers.
The problem for developing nations borrowing funds from foreigners is the same potential difficulty any borrower faces: the debt can be difficult to repay. Unlike, say, the national debt of the United States government, whose obligations are in its own currency, developing nations typically commit to make loan payments in the currency of the lending institution. Money borrowed by Brazil from a U.S. bank, for example, must generally be paid back in U.S. dollars.
Many developing nations borrowed heavily during the 1970s, only to find themselves in trouble in the 1980s. Countries such as Brazil suspended payments on their debt when required payments exceeded net exports. Much foreign debt was simply written off as bad debt by lending institutions. While foreign debts created a major crisis in the 1980s, subsequent growth appeared to make these payments more manageable.
A somewhat different international financial crisis emerged in the late 1990s. It started in Thailand in the summer of 1997. Thailand had experienced 20 years of impressive economic growth and rising living standards. One element of its development strategy was to maintain a fixed exchange rate between its currency, the baht, and the dollar. The slowing of Japanese growth, which reduced demand for Thai exports, and weaknesses in the Thai banking sector were putting downward pressure on the baht, which Thailand’s central bank initially tried to counteract. As discussed there, this effort was abandoned, and the value of the currency declined.
The Thai government, in an effort to keep its exchange rate somewhat stable, appealed to the International Monetary Fund (IMF) for support. The IMF is an international agency that makes financial assistance available to member countries experiencing problems in their international balance of payments in order to support adjustment and reform in those countries. In an agreement between Thailand and the IMF, Thailand’s central bank tightened monetary policy, thereby raising interest rates there. The logic behind this move was that higher interest rates in Thailand would make the baht more attractive to both Thai and foreign financial investors, who could thus earn more on Thai bonds and on other Thai financial assets. This would increase the demand for baht and help to keep the currency from falling further. Thailand also agreed to tighten fiscal policy, the rationale for which was to prepare for the anticipated future costs of restructuring its banking system. As we have learned throughout macroeconomics, however, contractionary monetary and fiscal policies will reduce real GDP in the short run. The hope was that growth would resume once the immediate currency crisis was over and plans had been put into place for correcting other imbalances in the Thai economy.
Other countries, such as South Korea and Brazil, soon experienced similar currency disturbances and entered into similar IMF programs to put their domestic houses in order in exchange for financial assistance from the IMF. For some of the other countries that went through similar experiences, notably Indonesia and Malaysia, the situation in 1999 was very unstable. Malaysia decided to forgo IMF assistance and to impose massive currency controls. In Indonesia, the financial crisis and the ensuing economic crisis led to political unrest. It held its first free elections in June 1999, but violence erupted in late 1999, when the overwhelming majority of people in East Timor voted against an Indonesian proposal that the province have limited autonomy within Indonesia and voted for independence from Indonesia.
Remarkably, in the early 2000s, the economies of most of these countries rebounded, though they are now caught up in the global economic downturn.
Development Successes
As we have seen throughout this chapter, the greatest success stories are found among the newly industrializing economies (NIEs) in East Asia. These economies, including Hong Kong, South Korea, Singapore, and Taiwan, share two common traits. First, they have allowed their economies to develop through an emphasis on export-based, market capitalist strategies. The NIEs achieved higher per capita income and output by entering and competing in the global market for products such as computers, automobiles, plastics, chemicals, steel, shipbuilding, and sporting goods. These countries have succeeded largely by linking standardized production technologies with low-cost labor.
Second, the role of government was relatively limited in the NIEs, which made less use of regulation and bureaucratic controls. Governments were clearly involved in some strategic industries, and, in the wake of recent financial crises, in some cases it appears that this involvement led to some decisions in those industries being made on political rather than on economic grounds. But the principal contribution of governments in the Far Eastern NIEs has been to create a modern infrastructure (especially up-to-date communications facilities essential for the development of a strong financial sector), to provide a stable incentive system (including stable exchange rates), and to ensure that government bureaucracy will help rather than hinder exports (especially by not regulating export trade, labor markets, and capital markets) (Balassa, 1988).
Chile adopted sweeping market reforms in the late 1970s, creating the freest economy in Latin America. Chile’s growth has accelerated sharply, and the country has moved to the upper-middle-income group of nations. Perhaps more dramatic, the dictator who instituted market reforms, General Augusto Pinochet, agreed to democratic elections that removed him from power in 1989. Chile now has a greatly increased degree of political as well as economic freedom—and has emerged as the most prosperous country in Latin America.
Over the last decade, Mexico also shifted from a strategy of import substitution and began to follow more free-trade-oriented policies. The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) turned all of North America into a free trade zone. This could not have occurred had Mexico not undergone such a dramatic shift in its development strategy. Mexico’s commitment to the new strategy was tested in 1994, when the country underwent a currency crisis, similar to that experienced in many Asian countries in 1997 and 1998. At that time, Mexico, too, entered into an agreement with the IMF to address economic imbalances in return for financial assistance. The U.S. government also provided support to help Mexico at that time. By 1996, the Mexican economy was growing again, and Mexican commitment to more open policies has endured. Only with the passage of time will we know for sure whether the changed strategy worked in Mexico as well, but the early signs are that it is working.
Although the trend in developing countries toward market reforms has been less heralded than the collapse of communism, it is surely significant. Will market reforms translate into development success? The jury is still out. Market reform requires that many wealthy—and powerful—interests be swept aside. Whether that can be achieved, and whether poor people who lack human capital can be included in the development effort, remain open questions. But some dramatic success stories have shown that economic development can be achieved. The fate of billions of desperately poor people rests in the ability of their countries to match that success.
Key Takeaways
• A market economy, perhaps with a substantial role for government, appears to be one key to economic growth. A system in which laws and property rights are well established and enforced also promotes growth.
• High rates of saving and investment can boost economic growth.
• Dependency theory suggests that poor countries should seek to insulate themselves from international trade. The import substitution strategies suggested by dependency theory have not been successful in generating economic growth, and a number of countries have moved away from this strategy.
Case in Point: Democracy and Economic Development
Figure 33.10
Ryan – South India street scene 1 – CC BY 2.0.
Democracy as an economic institution has typically received mixed notices from economists. While virtually all the world’s rich nations have democratic systems of government, it isn’t clear that democracy is necessary for development.
India long provided the strongest counterexample to the idea that democracy promotes development. It has long been a democracy, yet its per capita income has kept it among the world’s poor countries. India’s government has traditionally opted for extensive regulation that has curtailed development. Countries such as China, with no democracy and a repressive government, have managed to generate very high rates of economic growth. China’s per capita income now exceeds that of India by about 50%. Lee Kuan Yew, Singapore’s former prime minister, put it this way: “I believe what a country needs to develop is discipline more than democracy. The exuberance of democracy leads to indiscipline and disorderly conduct which are inimical to development.”
Many economists have reached the conclusion that countries are likely to become democratic once they achieve a high degree of economic development. Political freedom, they argue, is a normal good. The demand for freedom thus increases as incomes rise, making the creation of democratic institutions a product of economic growth, not a cause of it.
Two recent studies—one by economists John Mukum Mbaku and Mwangi S. Kimenyi and the other by economists Michael A. Nelson and Ram D. Singh—challenge the conventional view, arguing instead that democracy and economic growth are compatible. Using statistical models that control for a variety of factors that affect economic growth, such as investment and population growth, both studies concluded that there is a positive relationship between political freedom and economic growth. In the latter study, the authors separately tested the direction of causality: does growth cause democracy or does democracy cause growth? They conclude that the direction of causality goes from democracy to economic growth. They also controlled for the level of economic freedom (an index of price stability, government size, discriminatory taxation, and trade restrictions), which many studies have concluded is critical for development. As argued in this chapter, more economic freedom does lead to higher economic growth, but so does more political freedom.
Just as pessimism that economic growth has a negative impact on the poor is dissipating, likewise the notion that developing countries must wait until they are developed in order for their citizens to experience political freedom is also falling by the wayside. | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_(LibreTexts)/19%3A_Economic_Development/19.3%3A_Keys_to_Economic_Development.txt |
Summary
Developing nations face a host of problems: low incomes; unequal distributions of income; inadequate health care and education; high unemployment; and a concentration of workers in agriculture, where productivity is low. Economic development, the process that generates widely shared gains in income, can alleviate these problems.
The sources of economic growth in developing countries are not substantially different from those that apply to the developed countries. Market economies with legal systems that provide for the reliable protection of property rights and enforcement of contracts tend to promote economic growth. Saving and investment, particularly investment in appropriate technologies and human capital, appear to be critical. So, too, does the ability of developing nations to match their population growth rate with the ability of the economy to increase real output.
Dependency theory, the notion that developing countries are in the grip of the industrialized countries, led to import substitution schemes that proved detrimental to the long-run growth prospects of developing nations. The movement of Latin American countries such as Mexico and Chile to market systems is a rejection of dependency theory. There is a general movement toward market-based strategies to support economic development in the future. But even market-based strategies will work only if efforts are made to ensure an adequate infrastructure, including the development of financial institutions capable of providing the required signals to guide individual decision making.
Concept Problems
1. What is the difference between economic development and economic growth?
2. Look at the Case in Point on the relationship between growth and development. Why do you think that the distribution of income is more likely to become more unequal during economic downturns?
3. What are the implications for the long-run development of a society that is unable to reduce its population growth rate below, say, 4% per year?
4. Explain how technological progress averts the Malthusian trap.
5. China reduced its rate of population growth by force (see the Case in Point). Given the likely effects of population growth on living standards, do you think such a policy is reasonable? Are there other ways a government might seek to limit population growth?
6. On what basis might a poor country argue that its poverty is a result of high incomes in another country? Do you think Mexico’s poverty contributed to U.S. wealth?
7. Given the arguments presented in the text, what do you think the United States should do to assist Mexico in its development efforts?
Numerical Problems
1. Consider two economies, one with an initial per capita income of \$16,000 (about the income of Israel) growing at a rate of 1.8% per year, the other with an initial per capita income of \$600 (about the income of Guinea) growing twice as fast (that is, at a rate of 3.6% per year). Using the rule of 72 from the chapter on economic growth, calculate how long it will take for the lower-income country to achieve the per capita income enjoyed by the richer one. How long will it take to literally “catch up” to the richer nation, assuming that the growth rates continue unchanged in the future?
2. Use the most recent copy of the World Development Report available in your library (or at www.worldbank.org) to determine the five poorest countries in the world. Look up data on the distribution of income, education, health and nutrition, and demography for each country (information on some of these variables will not be available for every country). Do you think that low incomes cause the observations you have made, or do you think that low levels of education, health, and nutrition and high rates of population growth tend to cause poverty?
3. A country’s rate of GDP growth is 3% per year. Its population is growing 4% per year. At what rate is its GDP per capita changing? | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_(LibreTexts)/19%3A_Economic_Development/19.4%3A_Review_and_Practice.txt |
Thumbnail: https://unsplash.com/photos/StV6G2GURA8
20: Socialist Economies in Transition
Learning Objective
1. Discuss and assess Karl Marx’s theory of capitalism, including mention of the labor theory of value, the concept of surplus value, periodic capitalist crises, and worker solidarity.
Socialism has a very long history. The earliest recorded socialist society is described in the Book of Acts in the Bible. Following the crucifixion of Jesus, Christians in Jerusalem established a system in which all property was owned in common.
There have been other socialist experiments in which all property was held in common, effectively creating socialist societies. Early in the nineteenth century, such reformers as Robert Owen, Count Claude-Henri de Rouvroy de Saint-Simon, and Charles Fourier established almost 200 communities in which workers shared in the proceeds of their labor. These men, while operating independently, shared a common ideal—that in the appropriate economic environment, people will strive for the good of the community rather than for their own self-interest. Although some of these communities enjoyed a degree of early success, none survived.
Socialism as the organizing principle for a national economy is in large part the product of the revolutionary ideas of one man, Karl Marx. His analysis of what he saw as the inevitable collapse of market capitalist economies provided a rallying spark for the national socialist movements of the twentieth century. Another important contributor to socialist thought was Vladimir Ilyich Lenin, who modified many of Marx’s theories for application to the Soviet Union. Lenin put his ideas into practice as dictator of that country from 1917 until his death in 1924. It fell to Joseph Stalin to actually implement the Soviet system. We shall examine the ideas of Marx, Lenin, and Stalin and investigate the operation of the economic systems based upon them.
The Economics of Karl Marx
Marx is perhaps best known for the revolutionary ideas expressed in the ringing phrases of the Communist Manifesto, such as those shown in the Case in Point. Written with Friedrich Engels in 1848, the Manifesto was a call to arms. But it was Marx’s exhaustive, detailed theoretical analysis of market capitalism, Das Kapital (Capital), that was his most important effort. This four-volume work, most of which was published after Marx’s death, examines a theoretical economy that we would now describe as perfect competition. In this context, Marx outlined a dynamic process that would, he argued, inevitably result in the collapse of capitalism.
Marx stressed a historical approach to the analysis of economics. Indeed, he was sharply critical of his contemporaries, complaining that their work was wholly lacking in historical perspective. To Marx, capitalism was merely a stage in the development of economic systems. He explained how feudalism would tend to give way to capitalism and how capitalism would give way to socialism. Marx’s conclusions stemmed from his labor theory of value and from his perception of the role of profit in a capitalist economy.
The Labor Theory of Value and Surplus Value
In The Wealth of Nations, Adam Smith proposed the idea of the labor theory of value, which states that the relative values of different goods are ultimately determined by the relative amounts of labor used in their production. This idea was widely accepted at the time Marx was writing. Economists recognized the roles of demand and supply but argued that these would affect prices only in the short run. In the long run, it was labor that determined value.
Marx attached normative implications to the ideas of the labor theory of value. Not only was labor the ultimate determinant of value, it was the only legitimate determinant of value. The price of a good in Marx’s system equaled the sum of the labor and capital costs of its production, plus profit to the capitalist. Marx argued that capital costs were determined by the amount of labor used to produce the capital, so the price of a good equaled a return to labor plus profit. Marx defined profit as surplus value, the difference between the price of a good or service and the labor cost of producing it. Marx insisted that surplus value was unjustified and represented exploitation of workers.
Marx accepted another piece of conventional economic wisdom of the nineteenth century, the concept of subsistence wages. This idea held that wages would, in the long run, tend toward their subsistence level, a level just sufficient to keep workers alive. Any increase in wages above their subsistence level would simply attract more workers—or induce an increase in population, forcing wages back down. Marx suggested that unemployed workers were important in this process; they represented a surplus of labor that acted to push wages down.
Capital Accumulation and Capitalist Crises
The concepts of surplus value and subsistence wages provide the essential dynamics of Marx’s system. He said that capitalists, in an effort to increase surplus value, would seek to acquire more capital. But as they expanded capital, their profit rates, expressed as a percentage of the capital they held, would fall. In a desperate effort to push profit rates up, capitalists would acquire still more capital, which would only push their rate of return down further.
A further implication of Marx’s scheme was that as capitalists increased their use of capital, the wages received by workers would become a smaller share of the total value of goods. Marx assumed that capitalists used all their funds to acquire more capital. Only workers, then, could be counted on for consumption. But their wages equaled only a fraction of the value of the output they produced—they could not possibly buy all of it. The result, Marx said, would be a series of crises in which capitalists throughout the economy, unable to sell their output, would cut back production. This would cause still more reductions in demand, exacerbating the downturn in economic activity. Crises would drive the weakest capitalists out of business; they would become unemployed and thus push wages down further. The economy could recover from such crises, but each one would weaken the capitalist system.
Faced with declining surplus values and reeling from occasional crises, capitalists would seek out markets in other countries. As they extended their reach throughout the world, Marx said, the scope of their exploitation of workers would expand. Although capitalists could make temporary gains by opening up international markets, their continuing acquisition of capital meant that profit rates would resume their downward trend. Capitalist crises would now become global affairs.
According to Marx, another result of capitalists’ doomed efforts to boost surplus value would be increased solidarity among the working class. At home, capitalist acquisition of capital meant workers would be crowded into factories, building their sense of class identity. As capitalists extended their exploitation worldwide, workers would gain a sense of solidarity with fellow workers all over the planet. Marx argued that workers would recognize that they were the victims of exploitation by capitalists.
Marx was not clear about precisely what forces would combine to bring about the downfall of capitalism. He suggested other theories of crisis in addition to the one based on insufficient demand for the goods and services produced by capitalists. Indeed, modern theories of the business cycle owe much to Marx’s discussion of the possible sources of economic downturns. Although Marx spoke sometimes of bloody revolution, it is not clear that this was the mechanism he thought would bring on the demise of capitalism. Whatever the precise mechanism, Marx was confident that capitalism would fall, that its collapse would be worldwide, and that socialism would replace it.
Marx’s Theory: An Assessment
To a large degree, Marx’s analysis of a capitalist economy was a logical outgrowth of widely accepted economic doctrines of his time. As we have seen, the labor theory of value was conventional wisdom, as was the notion that workers would receive only a subsistence wage. The notion that profit rates would fall over time was widely accepted. Doctrines similar to Marx’s notion of recurring crises had been developed by several economists of the period.
What was different about Marx was his tracing of the dynamics of a system in which values would be determined by the quantity of labor, wages would tend toward the subsistence level, profit rates would fall, and crises would occur from time to time. Marx saw these forces as leading inevitably to the fall of capitalism and its replacement with a socialist economic system. Other economists of the period generally argued that economies would stagnate; they did not anticipate the collapse predicted by Marx.
Marx’s predictions have turned out to be wildly off the mark. Profit rates have not declined; they have remained relatively stable over the long run. Wages have not tended downward toward their subsistence level; they have risen. Labor’s share of total income in market economies has not fallen; it has increased. Most important, the predicted collapse of capitalist economies has not occurred.
Revolutions aimed at establishing socialism have been rare. Perhaps most important, none has occurred in a market capitalist economy. The Cuban economy, for example, had some elements of market capitalism before Castro but also had features of command systems as well1. In other cases where socialism has been established through revolution it has replaced systems that could best be described as feudal. The Russian Revolution of 1917 that established the Soviet Union and the revolution that established the People’s Republic of China in 1949 are the most important examples of this form of revolution. In the countries of Eastern Europe, socialism was imposed by the former Soviet Union in the wake of World War II. In the early 2000s, a number of Latin American countries, such as Venezuela and Bolivia, seemed to be moving towards nationalizing, rather than privatizing assets, but it is too early to know the long-term direction of these economies.
Whatever the shortcomings of Marx’s economic prognostications, his ideas have had enormous influence. Politically, his concept of the inevitable emergence of socialism promoted the proliferation of socialist-leaning governments during the middle third of the twentieth century. Before socialist systems began collapsing in 1989, fully one-third of the earth’s population lived in countries that had adopted Marx’s ideas. Ideologically, his vision of a market capitalist system in which one class exploits another has had enormous influence.
Key Takeaways
• Marx’s theory, based on the labor theory of value and the presumption that wages would approach the subsistence level, predicted the inevitable collapse of capitalism and its replacement by socialist regimes.
• Lenin modified many of Marx’s theories for application to the Soviet Union and put his ideas into practice as dictator of that country from 1917 until his death in 1924.
• Before socialist systems began collapsing in 1989, fully one-third of the earth’s population lived in countries that had adopted Marx’s ideas.
Try It!
Briefly explain how each of the following would contribute to the downfall of capitalism: 1) capital accumulation, 2) subsistence wages, and 3) the factory system.
Case in Point: The Powerful Images in the Communist Manifesto
Figure 34.1
The Communist Manifesto by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels was originally published in London in 1848, a year in which there were a number of uprisings across Europe that at the time could have been interpreted as the beginning of the end of capitalism. This relatively short (12,000 words) document was thus more than an analysis of the process of historical change, in which class struggles propel societies from one type of economic system to the next, and a prediction about how capitalism would evolve and why it would end. It was also a call to action. It contains powerful images that cannot be easily forgotten. It begins,
A specter is haunting Europe—the specter of communism. All the Powers of old Europe have entered into a holy alliance to exorcise this specter: Pope and Czar, Metternich and Guizot, French Radicals and German police-spies.”
Its description of history begins,
The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles. Freeman and slave, patrician and plebeian, lord and serf, guild-master and journeyman, in a word, oppressor and oppressed, stood in constant opposition to one another …
In capitalism, the divisions are yet more stark:
Society as a whole is more and more splitting up into two great hostile camps, into two great classes directly facing each other: Bourgeoisie and Proletariat.”
Foreshadowing the globalization of capitalism, Marx and Engels wrote,
The bourgeoisie, by the rapid improvement of all instruments of production, by the immensely facilitated means of communication, draws all, even the most barbarian, nations into civilization. The cheap prices of its commodities are the heavy artillery with which it batters down all Chinese walls, with which it forces the barbarians’ intensely obstinate hatred of foreigners to capitulate. It compels all nations, on pain of extinction, to adopt the bourgeois mode of production: it compels them to introduce what it calls civilization into their midst. … In one word, it creates a world after its own image.”
But the system, like all other class-based systems before it, brings about its own demise:
The weapons with which the bourgeoisie felled feudalism to the ground are now turned against the bourgeoisie itself. … Masses of laborers, crowded into the factory, are organized like soldiers. … It was just this contact that was needed to centralize the numerous local struggles, all of the same character, into one national struggle between classes.”
The national struggles eventually become an international struggle in which:
What the bourgeoisie, therefore, produces, above all, is its own gravediggers.”
The Manifesto ends,
Let the ruling classes tremble at a Communistic revolution. The proletarians have nothing to lose but their chains. They have a world to win. WORKING MEN OF ALL COUNTRIES, UNITE!
Answer to Try It!
Marx predicted that capital accumulation would lead to falling profit rates over the long term. Subsistence wages meant that workers would not be able to consume enough of what was produced and this would lead to ever larger economic downturns. Because of the factory system, worker solidarity would grow and workers would come to understand that they were being exploited by capitalists.
1While resources in Cuba were generally privately owned, the government had broad powers to dictate their use. | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_(LibreTexts)/20%3A_Socialist_Economies_in_Transition/20.1%3A_The_Theory_and_Practice_of_Socialism.txt |
Learning Objective
1. Describe the operation of the command socialist system in the Soviet Union, including its major problems.
2. Explain how Yugoslavian-style socialism differed from that of the Soviet Union.
3. Discuss the factors that brought an end to command socialist systems in much of the world.
The most important example of socialism was the economy of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, the Soviet Union. The Russian Revolution succeeded in 1917 in overthrowing the czarist regime that had ruled the Russian Empire for centuries. Leaders of the revolution created the Soviet Union in its place and sought to establish a socialist state based on the ideas of Karl Marx.
The leaders of the Soviet Union faced a difficulty in using Marx’s writings as a foundation for a socialist system. He had sought to explain why capitalism would collapse; he had little to say about how the socialist system that would replace it would function. He did suggest the utopian notion that, over time, there would be less and less need for a government and the state would wither away. But his writings did not provide much of a blueprint for running a socialist economic system.
Lacking a guide for establishing a socialist economy, the leaders of the new regime in Russia struggled to invent one. In 1917, Lenin attempted to establish what he called “war communism.” The national government declared its ownership of most firms and forced peasants to turn over a share of their output to the government. The program sought to eliminate the market as an allocative mechanism; government would control production and distribution. The program of war communism devastated the economy. In 1921, Lenin declared a New Economic Policy. It returned private ownership to some sectors of the economy and reinstituted the market as an allocative mechanism.
Lenin’s death in 1924 precipitated a power struggle from which Joseph Stalin emerged victorious. It was under Stalin that the Soviet economic system was created. Because that system served as a model for most of the other command socialist systems that emerged, we shall examine it in some detail. We shall also examine an intriguing alternative version of socialism that was created in Yugoslavia after World War II.
Command Socialism in the Soviet Union
Stalin began by seizing virtually all remaining privately-owned capital and natural resources in the country. The seizure was a brutal affair; he eliminated opposition to his measures through mass executions, forced starvation of whole regions, and deportation of political opponents to prison camps. Estimates of the number of people killed during Stalin’s centralization of power range in the tens of millions. With the state in control of the means of production, Stalin established a rigid system in which a central administration in Moscow determined what would be produced.
The justification for the brutality of Soviet rule lay in the quest to develop “socialist man.” Leaders of the Soviet Union argued that the tendency of people to behave in their own self-interest was a by-product of capitalism, not an inherent characteristic of human beings. A successful socialist state required that the preferences of people be transformed so that they would be motivated by the collective interests of society, not their own self-interest. Propaganda was widely used to reinforce a collective identity. Those individuals who were deemed beyond reform were likely to be locked up or executed.
The political arm of command socialism was the Communist party. Party officials participated in every aspect of Soviet life in an effort to promote the concept of socialist man and to control individual behavior. Party leaders were represented in every firm and in every government agency. Party officials charted the general course for the economy as well.
A planning agency, Gosplan, determined the quantities of output that key firms would produce each year and the prices that would be charged. Other government agencies set output levels for smaller firms. These determinations were made in a series of plans. A 1-year plan specified production targets for that year. Soviet planners also developed 5-year and 20-year plans.
Managers of state-owned firms were rewarded on the basis of their ability to meet the annual quotas set by the Gosplan. The system of quotas and rewards created inefficiency in several ways. First, no central planning agency could incorporate preferences of consumers and costs of factors of production in its decisions concerning the quantity of each good to produce. Decisions about what to produce were made by political leaders; they were not a response to market forces. Further, planners could not select prices at which quantities produced would clear their respective markets. In a market economy, prices adjust to changes in demand and supply. Given that demand and supply are always changing, it is inconceivable that central planners could ever select market-clearing prices. Soviet central planners typically selected prices for consumer goods that were below market-clearing levels, causing shortages throughout the economy. Changes in prices were rare.
Plant managers had a powerful incentive for meeting their quotas; they could expect bonuses equal to about 35% of their base salary for producing the quantities required of their firms. Those who exceeded their quotas could boost this to 50%. In addition, successful managers were given vacations, better apartments, better medical care, and a host of other perquisites. Managers thus had a direct interest in meeting their quotas; they had no incentive to select efficient production techniques or to reduce costs.
Perhaps most important, there was no incentive for plant managers to adopt new technologies. A plant implementing a new technology risked start-up delays that could cause it to fall short of its quota. If a plant did succeed in boosting output, it was likely to be forced to accept even larger quotas in the future. A plant manager who introduced a successful technology would only be slapped with tougher quotas; if the technology failed, he or she would lose a bonus. With little to gain and a great deal to lose, Soviet plant managers were extremely reluctant to adopt new technologies. Soviet production was, as a result, characterized by outdated technologies. When the system fell in 1991, Soviet manufacturers were using production methods that had been obsolete for decades in other countries.
Centrally controlled systems often generated impressive numbers for total output but failed in satisfying consumer demands. Gosplan officials, recognizing that Soviet capital was not very productive, ordered up a lot of it. The result was a heavy emphasis on unproductive capital goods and relatively little production of consumer goods. On the eve of the collapse of the Soviet Union, Soviet economists estimated that per capita consumption was less than one-sixth of the U.S. level.
The Soviet system also generated severe environmental problems. In principle, a socialist system should have an advantage over a capitalist system in allocating environmental resources for which private property rights are difficult to define. Because a socialist government owns all capital and natural resources, the ownership problem is solved. The problem in the Soviet system, however, came from the labor theory of value. Since natural resources are not produced by labor, the value assigned to them was zero. Soviet plant managers thus had no incentive to limit their exploitation of environmental resources, and terrible environmental tragedies were common.
Systems similar to that created in the Soviet Union were established in other Soviet bloc countries as well. The most important exceptions were Yugoslavia, which is discussed in the next section, and China, which started with a Soviet-style system and then moved away from it. The Chinese case is examined later in this chapter.
Yugoslavia: Another Socialist Experiment
Although the Soviet Union was able to impose a system of command socialism on nearly all the Eastern European countries it controlled after World War II, Yugoslavia managed to forge its own path. Yugoslavia’s communist leader, Marshal Tito, charted an independent course, accepting aid from Western nations such as the United States and establishing a unique form of socialism that made greater use of markets than the Soviet-style systems did. Most important, however, Tito quickly moved away from the centralized management style of the Soviet Union to a decentralized system in which workers exercised considerable autonomy.
In the Yugoslav system, firms with five or more employees were owned by the state but made their own decisions concerning what to produce and what prices to charge. Workers in these firms elected their managers and established their own systems for sharing revenues. Each firm paid a fee for the use of its state-owned capital. In effect, firms operated as labor cooperatives. Firms with fewer than five employees could be privately owned and operated.
Economic performance in Yugoslavia was impressive. Living standards there were generally higher than those in other Soviet bloc countries. The distribution of income was similar to that of command socialist economies; it was generally more equal than distributions achieved in market capitalist economies. The Yugoslav economy was plagued, however, by persistent unemployment, high inflation, and increasing disparities in regional income levels.
Yugoslavia began breaking up shortly after command socialist systems began falling in Eastern Europe. It had been a country of republics and provinces with uneasy relationships among them. Tito had been the glue that held them together. After his death, the groups began to move apart and a number of countries have formed out of what was once Yugoslavia, in several cases accompanied by war. They all seem to be moving in the market capitalist direction, with Slovenia and Macedonia leading the way. Over time, the others—Croatia, Bosnia, and Herzegovina, and even Serbia and Montenegra–have been following suit.
Evaluating Economic Performance Under Socialism
Soviet leaders placed great emphasis on Marx’s concept of the inevitable collapse of capitalism. While they downplayed the likelihood of a global revolution, they argued that the inherent superiority of socialism would gradually become apparent. Countries would adopt the socialist model in order to improve their living standards, and socialism would gradually assert itself as the dominant world system.
One key to achieving the goal of a socialist world was to outperform the United States economically. Stalin promised in the 1930s that the Soviet economy would surpass that of the United States within a few decades. The goal was clearly not achieved. Indeed, it was the gradual realization that the command socialist system could not deliver high living standards that led to the collapse of the old system.
Figure 34.2 shows the World Bank’s estimates of per capita output, measured in dollars of 1995 purchasing power, for the republics that made up the Soviet Union, for the Warsaw Pact nations of Eastern Europe for which data are available, and for the United States in 1995. Nations that had operated within the old Soviet system had quite low levels of per capita output. Living standards were lower still, given that these nations devoted much higher shares of total output to investment and to defense than did the United States.
Ultimately, it was the failure of the Soviet system to deliver living standards on a par with those achieved by market capitalist economies that brought the system down. Market capitalist economic systems create incentives to allocate resources efficiently; socialist systems do not. Of course, a society may decide that other attributes of a socialist system make it worth retaining. But the lesson of the 1980s was that few that had lived under command socialist systems wanted to continue to do so.
Key Takeaways
• In the Soviet Union a central planning agency, Gosplan, set output quotas for enterprises and determined prices.
• The Soviet central planning system was highly inefficient. Sources of this inefficiency included failure to incorporate consumer preferences into decisions about what to produce, failure to take into account costs of factors of production, setting of prices without regard to market equilibrium, lack of incentives for incorporating new technologies, overemphasis on capital goods production, and inattention to environmental problems.
• Yugoslavia developed an alternative system of socialism in which firms were run by their workers as labor cooperatives.
• It was the realization that command socialist systems could not deliver high living standards that contributed to their collapse.
Try It!
What specific problem of a command socialist system does each of the cartoons in the Case in Point parodying that system highlight?
Case in Point: Socialist Cartoons
These cartoons came from the Soviet press. Soviet citizens were clearly aware of many of the problems of their planned system.
Answer to Try It!
The first cartoon shows the inefficiency that resulted because of the failure to take into account the costs of factors of production. The second cartoon shows the difficulty involved in getting business to incorporate new technologies. The third shows the system’s failure to respond to consumers’ demands.
“Why are they sending us new technology when the old still works?” | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_(LibreTexts)/20%3A_Socialist_Economies_in_Transition/20.2%3A_Socialist_Systems_in_Action.txt |
Learning Objective
1. Discuss the major problems in transitioning from a command socialist economy to a market capitalist one.
2. Compare the approaches to economic transition taken in China and Russia.
Just as leaders of the Soviet Union had to create their own command socialist systems, leaders of the economies making the transition to market capitalist economies must find their own paths to new economic systems. It is a task without historical precedent.
In this section we will examine two countries and the strategies they have chosen for the transition. China was the first socialist nation to begin the process, and in many ways it has been the most successful. Russia was the dominant republic in the old Soviet Union; whether its transition is successful will be crucially important. Before turning to the transition process in these two countries, we will consider some general problems common to all countries seeking to establish market capitalism in the wake of command socialism.
Problems in Transition
Establishing a system of market capitalism in a command socialist economy is a daunting task. The nations making the attempt must invent the process as they go along. Each of them, though, faces similar problems. Former command socialist economies must establish systems of property rights, establish banking systems, deal with the problem of inflation, and work through a long tradition of ideological antipathy toward the basic nature of a capitalist system.
Property Rights
A market system requires property rights before it can function. A property right details what one can and cannot do with a particular asset. A market system requires laws that specify the actions that are permitted and those that are proscribed, and it also requires institutions for the enforcement of agreements dealing with property rights. These include a court system and lawyers trained in property law and contract law. For the system to work effectively, there must be widespread understanding of the basic nature of private property and of the transactions through which it is allocated.
Command socialist economies possess virtually none of these prerequisites for market capitalism. When the state owned virtually all capital and natural resources, there was little need to develop a legal system that would spell out individual property rights. Governments were largely free to do as they wished.
Countries seeking a transition from command socialism to market capitalism must develop a legal system comparable to those that have evolved in market capitalist countries over centuries. The problem of creating a system of property rights and the institutions necessary to support it is a large hurdle for economies making the transition to a market economy.
One manifestation of the difficulties inherent in establishing clear and widely recognized property rights in formerly socialist countries is widespread criminal activity. Newly established private firms must contend with racketeers who offer protection at a price. Firms that refuse to pay the price may find their property destroyed or some of their managers killed. Criminal activity has been rampant in economies struggling toward a market capitalist system.
Banking
Banks in command socialist countries were operated by the state. There was no tradition of banking practices as they are understood in market capitalist countries.
In a market capitalist economy, a privately owned bank accepts deposits from customers and lends these deposits to borrowers. These borrowers are typically firms or consumers. Banks in command socialist economies generally accepted saving deposits, but checking accounts for private individuals were virtually unknown. Decisions to advance money to firms were made through the economic planning process, not by individual banks. Banks did not have an opportunity to assess the profitability of individual enterprises; such considerations were irrelevant in the old command socialist systems. Bankers in these economies were thus unaccustomed to the roles that would be required of them in a market capitalist system.
Inflation
One particularly vexing problem facing transitional economies is inflation. Under command socialist systems, the government set prices; it could abolish inflation by decree. But such systems were characterized by chronic shortages of consumer goods. Consumers, unable to find the goods they wanted to buy, simply accumulated money. As command socialist economies began their transitions, there was typically a very large quantity of money available for consumers to spend. A first step in transitions was the freeing of prices. Because the old state-determined prices were generally below equilibrium levels, prices typically surged in the early stages of transition. Prices in Poland, for example, shot up 400% within a few months of price decontrol. Prices in Russia went up tenfold within six months.
One dilemma facing transitional economies has been the plight of bankrupt state enterprises. In a market capitalist economy, firms unable to generate revenues that exceed their costs go out of business. In command socialist economies, the central bank simply wrote checks to cover their deficits. As these economies have begun the transition toward market capitalism, they have generally declared their intention to end these bailouts and to let failing firms fail. But the phenomenon of state firms earning negative profits is so pervasive that allowing all of them to fail at once could cause massive disruption.
The practical alternative to allowing firms to fail has been continued bailouts. But in transitional economies, that has meant issuing money to failed firms. This practice increases the money supply and contributes to continuing inflation. Most transition economies experienced high inflation in the initial transition years, but were subsequently able to reduce it.
Ideology
Soviet citizens, and their counterparts in other command socialist economies, were told for decades that market capitalism is an evil institution, that it fosters greed and human misery. They were told that some people become rich in the system, but that they do so only at the expense of others who become poorer.
In the context of a competitive market, this view of market processes as a zero-sum game—one in which the gains for one person come only as a result of losses for another—is wrong. In market transactions, one person gains only by making others better off. But the zero-sum view runs deep, and it is a source of lingering hostility toward market forces.
Countries seeking to transform their economies from command socialist to more market-oriented systems face daunting challenges. Given these challenges, it is remarkable that they have persisted in the effort. There are a thousand reasons for economic reform to fail, but the reform effort has, in general, continued to move forward.
China: A Gradual Transition
China is a giant by virtually any standard. Larger than the continental United States, it is home to more than 1.3 billion people—more than one-fifth of the earth’s population. Although China is poor, its economy has been among the fastest growing in the world since 1980. That rapid growth is the result of a gradual shift toward a market capitalist economy. The Chinese have pursued their transition in a manner quite different from the paths taken by former Soviet bloc nations.
Recent History
China was invaded by Japan during World War II. After Japan’s defeat, civil war broke out between Chinese communists, led by Mao Zedong, and nationalists. The communists prevailed, and the People’s Republic of China was proclaimed in 1949.
Mao set about immediately to create a socialist state in China. He nationalized many firms and redistributed land to peasants. Many of those who had owned land under the old regime were executed. China’s entry into the Korean War in 1950 led to much closer ties to the Soviet Union, which helped China to establish a command socialist economy.
China’s first five-year plan, launched in 1953, followed the tradition of Soviet economic development. It stressed capital-intensive production and the development of heavy industry. But China had far less capital and a great many more people than did the Soviet Union. Capital-intensive development made little sense. In 1958, Mao declared a uniquely Chinese approach to development, which he dubbed the Great Leap Forward. It focused on labor-intensive development and the organization of small productive units to quickly turn China into an industrialized country. Indeed, households were encouraged to form their own productive units under the slogan “An iron and steel foundry in every backyard.” The Great Leap repudiated the bonuses and other material incentives stressed by the Soviets; motivation was to come from revolutionary zeal, not self-interest.
In agriculture, the new plan placed greater emphasis on collectivization. Farmers were organized into communes containing several thousand households each. Small private plots of land, which had been permitted earlier, were abolished. China’s adoption of the plan was a victory for radical leaders in the government.
The Great Leap was an economic disaster. Output plunged and a large-scale famine ensued. Moderate leaders then took over, and the economy got back to its 1957 level of output by the mid-1960s.
Then, again in the mid-1960s, power shifted back towards the radicals with the launching of the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution. During that time, students formed groups called “red guards” and were encouraged to expose “capitalist roaders.” A group dubbed the “Gang of Four,” led by Mao’s wife Jiang Qing, tried to steer Chinese society towards an ever more revolutionary course until Mao’s death in 1976.
China’s Reforms
Following Mao’s death, pragmatists within the Communist Party, led by Deng Xiaoping, embarked on a course of reform that promoted a more market-oriented economy coupled with retention of political power by the Communists. This policy combination was challenged in 1989 by a large demonstration in Beijing’s Tiananmen Square. The authorities ordered the military to remove the demonstrators, resulting in the deaths of several hundred civilians. A period of retrenchment in the reform process followed and lasted for several years. Then, in 1992, Deng ushered in a period of reinvigorated economic reform in a highly publicized trip to southern China, where reforms had progressed farther. Through several leadership changes since then, the path of economic reform, managed by the Communist Party, has continued. The result has been a decades-long period of phenomenal economic growth.
What were some of the major elements of the economic reform? Beginning in 1979, many Chinese provincial leaders instituted a system called bao gan dao hu—“contracting all decisions to the household.” Under the system, provincial officials contracted the responsibility for operating collectively owned farmland to individual households. Government officials gave households production quotas they were required to meet and purchased that output at prices set by central planners. But farmers were free to sell any additional output they could produce at whatever prices they could get in the marketplace and to keep the profits for themselves.
By 1984, 93% of China’s agricultural land had been contracted to individual households and the rate of growth in agricultural output had soared.
At the industrial level, state-owned enterprises (SOEs) were told to meet their quotas and then were free to engage in additional production for sale in free markets. Over time, even those production directives were discontinued. More importantly, manufacturing boomed with the development of township and village enterprises, as well as various types of private endeavors, with much participation from foreign firms. Most price controls were abolished. The entry of China into the World Trade Organization in 2001 symbolized a commitment towards moving even further down the road of economic reform.
In effect, China’s economy is increasingly directed by market forces. Even though five-year plans are still announced, they are largely advisory rather than commanding in nature. Recognizing the incomplete nature of the reforms, Chinese authorities continue to work on making the SOEs more competitive, as well as privatizing them, creating a social security system in which social benefits are not tied to a worker’s place of employment, and reforming the banking sector.
How well has the gradual approach to transition worked? Between 1980 and 2006, China had one of the fastest-growing economies in the world. Its per capita output, measured in dollars of constant purchasing power, more than quadrupled. The country, which as late as 1997 was one of the poorest of the 59 low-income-countries in the world, is now situated comfortably among the more prosperous lower-middle-income countries, according to the World Bank. Figure 34.6 compares growth rates in China to those achieved by Japan and the United States and to the average annual growth rate of all world economies between 1985 and 2006.
Where will China’s reforms lead? While the Chinese leadership has continued to be repressive politically, it has generally supported the reform process. The result has been continued expansion of the free economy and a relative shrinking of the state-run sector. Given the rapid progress China has achieved with its gradual approach to reform, it is hard to imagine that the country would reverse course. Given the course it is on, China seems likely to become a market capitalist economy—and a prosperous one—within a few decades.
Russia: An Uncertain Path to Reform
Russia dominated the former Soviet Union. It contained more than half the Soviet people and more than three-fourths of the nation’s land area. Russia’s capital, Moscow, was the capital and center of power for the entire country.
Today, Russia retains control over the bulk of the military power that had been accumulated by the former Soviet Union. While it is now an ally of the United States, Russia still possesses the nuclear capability to destroy life on earth. Its success in making the transition to market capitalism and joining as a full partner in the world community thus has special significance for peace.
Recent History
Russia’s shift toward market capitalism has its roots in a reform process initiated during the final years of the existence of the Soviet Union. That effort presaged many of the difficulties that have continued to plague Russia.
The Soviet Union, as we have already seen, had a well-established system of command socialism. Leading Soviet economists, however, began arguing as early as the 1970s that the old system could never deliver living standards comparable to those achieved in market capitalist economies. The first political leader to embrace the idea of radical reform was Mikhail Gorbachev, who became General Secretary of the Communist party—the highest leadership post in the Soviet Union—in 1985.
Mr. Gorbachev instituted political reforms that allowed Soviet citizens to speak out, and even to demonstrate, against their government. This policy was dubbed glasnost, or “openness.” Economically, he called for much greater autonomy for state enterprises and a system in which workers’ wages would be tied to productivity. The new policy, dubbed perestroika, or “restructuring,” appeared to be an effort to move the system toward a mixed economy.
But Mr. Gorbachev’s economic advisers wanted to go much further. A small group of economists, which included his top economic adviser, met in August 1990 to draft a radical plan to transform the economy to a market capitalist system—and to do it in 500 days. Stanislav Shatalin, a Soviet economist, led the group. Mr. Gorbachev endorsed the Shatalin plan the following month, and it appeared that the Soviet Union was on its way to a new system. The new plan, however, threatened the Soviet power elite. It called for sharply reduced funding for the military and for the Soviet Union’s secret police force, the KGB. It would have stripped central planners, who were very powerful, of their authority. The new plan called for nothing less than the destruction of the old system—and the elimination of the power base of most government officials.
Top Soviet bureaucrats and military leaders reacted to the Shatalin plan with predictable rage. They delivered an ultimatum to Mr. Gorbachev: dump the Shatalin plan or be kicked out.
Caught between advisers who had persuaded him of the necessity for radical reform and Communist party leaders who would have none of it, Mr. Gorbachev chose to leave the command system in place and to seek modest reforms. He announced a new plan that retained control over most prices and he left in place the state’s ownership of enterprises. In an effort to deal with shortages of other goods, he ordered sharp price increases early in 1991.
These measures, however, accomplished little. Black market prices for basic consumer goods were typically 10 to 20 times the level of state prices. Those prices, which respond to demand and supply, may be taken as a rough gauge of equilibrium prices. People were willing to pay the higher black market prices because they simply could not find goods at the state-decreed prices. Mr. Gorbachev’s order to double and even triple some state prices narrowed the gap between official and equilibrium prices, but did not close it. Table 34.1 “Official Versus Black Market Prices in the Soviet Union, 1991” shows some of the price changes imposed and compares them to black market prices.
Table 34.1 Official Versus Black Market Prices in the Soviet Union, 1991
Item Old price New price Black market price
Children’s shoes 2–10 rubles 10–50 rubles 50–300 rubles
Toilet paper 32–40 kopeks 60–75 kopeks 2–3 rubles
Compact car 7,000 rubles 35,000 rubles 70,000–100,000 rubles
Bottle of vodka 10.5 rubles 10.5 rubles 30–35 rubles
Mikhail Gorbachev ordered sharp increases in the prices of most consumer goods early in 1991 in an effort to eliminate shortages. As the table shows, however, a large gap remained between official and black market prices.
Perhaps the most important problem for Mr. Gorbachev’s price hikes was that there was no reason for state-owned firms to respond to them by increasing their output. The managers and workers in these firms, after all, were government employees receiving government-determined salaries. There was no mechanism through which they would gain from higher prices. A private firm could be expected to increase its quantity supplied in response to a higher price. State-owned firms did not.
The Soviet people faced the worst of economic worlds in 1991. Soviet output plunged sharply, prices were up dramatically, and there was no relief from severe shortages. A small group of government officials opposed to economic reform staged a coup in the fall of 1991, putting Mr. Gorbachev under house arrest. The coup produced massive protests throughout the country and failed within a few days. Chaos within the central government created an opportunity for the republics of the Soviet Union to declare their independence, and they did. These defections resulted in the collapse of the Soviet Union late in 1991, with Russia as one of 15 countries that emerged.
The Reform Effort
Boris Yeltsin, the first elected president of Russia, had been a leading proponent of market capitalism even before the Soviet Union collapsed. He had supported the Shatalin plan and had been sharply critical of Mr. Gorbachev’s failure to implement it. Once Russia became an independent republic, Mr. Yeltsin sought a rapid transition to market capitalism.
Mr. Yeltsin’s reform efforts, however, were slowed by Russian legislators, most of them former Communist officials who were appointed to their posts under the old regime. They fought reform and repeatedly sought to impeach Mr. Yeltsin. Citing health reasons, he abruptly resigned from the presidency in 1999, and appointed Vladimir Putin, who had only recently been appointed as Yeltsin’s prime minister, as acting president. Mr. Putin has since been elected and re-elected, though many observers have questioned the fairness of those elections as well as Mr. Putin’s commitment to democracy. Barred constitutionally from re-election in 2008, Putin became prime minister. Dimitry Medvedev, Putin’s close ally, became president.
Despite the hurdles, Russian reformers have accomplished a great deal. Prices of most goods have been freed from state controls. Most state-owned firms have been privatized, and most of Russia’s output of goods and services is now produced by the private sector.
To privatize state firms, Russian citizens were issued vouchers that could be used to purchase state enterprises. Under this plan, state enterprises were auctioned off. Individuals, or groups of individuals, could use their vouchers to bid on them. By 1995 most state enterprises in Russia had been privatized.
While Russia has taken major steps toward transforming itself into a market economy, it has not been able to institute its reforms in a coherent manner. For example, despite privatization, restructuring of Russian firms to increase efficiency has been slow. Establishment and enforcement of rules and laws that undergird modern, market-based systems have been lacking in Russia. Corruption has become endemic.
While the quality of the data is suspect, there is no doubt that output and the standard of living fell through the first half of the 1990s. Despite a financial crisis in 1998, when the Russian government defaulted on its debt, output recovered through the last half of the 1990s and Russia has seen substantial growth in the early years of the twenty-first century. In addition, government finances have improved following a major tax reform and inflation has come down from near hyperinflation levels. Despite these gains, there is uneasiness about the long-term sustainability of this progress because of the over-importance of oil and high oil prices in the recovery. Mr. Putin’s fight, whether justified or not, with several of Russia’s so-called oligarchs, a small group of people who were able to amass large fortunes during the early years of privatization, creates unease for domestic and foreign investors.
To be fair, overcoming the legacy of the Soviet Union would have been difficult at best. Overall, though, most would argue that Russian transition policies have made a difficult situation worse. Why has the transition in Russia been so difficult? One reason may be that Russians lived with command socialism longer than did any other country. In addition, Russia had no historical experience with market capitalism. In countries that did have it, such as the Czech Republic, the switch back to capitalism has gone far more smoothly and has met with far more success.
Try It!
Table 34.1 “Official Versus Black Market Prices in the Soviet Union, 1991” shows three prices for various goods in the Soviet Union in 1991. Illustrate the market for compact cars using a demand and supply diagram. On your diagram, show the old price, the new price, and the black market price.
Case in Point: Eastern Germany’s Surprisingly Difficult Transition Experience
Figure 34.7
The transition of eastern Germany was supposed to be the easiest of them all. Quickly merged with western Germany, given its new “Big Brother’s” deep pockets, the ease with which it could simply adopt the rules and laws and policies of western Germany, and its automatic entry into the European Union, how could it not do well? And yet, eastern Germany seems to be languishing while some other central European countries that had also been part of the Soviet bloc are doing much better. Specifically, growth in real GDP in eastern Germany was 6% to 8% in the early 1990s, but since then has mostly been around 1%, with three years of negative growth in the early 2000s. In the early 1990s, the Polish economy grew at less than half east Germany’s rate, but since then has averaged more than 4% per year. Why the reversal of fortunes?
Most observers point to the quick rise of wages to western German levels, despite the low productivity in the east. Initially, Germans from both east and west supported the move. East Germans obviously liked the idea of huge wage increases while west German workers thought that prolonged low wages in the eastern part of the country would cause companies to relocate there and saw the higher east German wages as protecting their own jobs. While the German government offered subsidies and tax breaks to firms that would move to the east despite the high wages, companies were by and large still reluctant to move their factories there. Instead they chose to relocate in other central European countries, such as the Czech Republic, Slovakia, and Poland. As a result, unemployment in eastern Germany has remained stubbornly high at about 15% and transfer payments to east Germans have totaled \$1.65 trillion with no end in sight. “East Germany had the wrong prices: Labor was too expensive, and capital was too cheap,” commented Klaus Deutsch, an economist at Deutsche Bank.
While the flow of labor has primarily been from Poland to Germany since the break-up of the Soviet bloc, with mostly senior managers moving from Germany to Poland, there are some less-skilled, unemployed east Germans who are starting to look for jobs in Poland. Tassilo Schlicht is an east German who repaired bicycles and washing machines at a Soviet-era factory and lost his job in 1990. He then worked for a short time at a gas station in his town for no pay with the hope that the experience would be helpful, but he was never hired. He undertook some government-sponsored retraining but still could not find a job. Finally, he was hired at a gas station across the border in Poland. The pay is far less than what employed Germans make for doing similar jobs but it is twice what he had been receiving in unemployment benefits. “These days, a job is a job, wherever it is.”
Try It!
There is a shortage of cars at both the old price of 7,000 rubles and at the new price of 35,000, although the shortage is less at the new price. Equilibrium price is assumed to be 70,000 rubles.
Figure 34.8 | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_(LibreTexts)/20%3A_Socialist_Economies_in_Transition/20.3%3A_Economies_in_Transition%3A_China_and_Russia.txt |
Summary
Socialism, a system in which factors of production are owned in common or by the public sector, is a very old idea. The impetus for installing it as a national economic system came from the writings of Karl Marx.
Marx argued that capitalism would inevitably collapse and give way to socialism. He argued that under capitalism workers would receive only a subsistence wage. Capitalists would extract the difference between what workers receive and what they produce as surplus value, a concept roughly equivalent to profit. As capitalists struggled to maintain surplus value, the degree and extent of exploitation of workers would rise. Capitalist systems would suffer through a series of crises in which firms cut back their output. The suffering of workers would increase, and the capitalist class would be weakened. Ultimately, workers would overthrow the market capitalist system and establish socialism in its place.
Marx’s predictions about capitalist development have not come to fruition, but his ideas have been enormously influential. By the 1980s, roughly one-third of the world’s people lived in economies built on the basis of his ideas.
The most important command socialist economy was the Soviet Union. In this economy, central planners determined what would be produced and at what price. Quotas were given to each state-owned firm. The system, which was emulated in most socialist nations, failed to deliver living standards on a par with those achieved by market economies. This failure ultimately brought down the system.
A very different approach to socialism was pioneered by Yugoslavia. State-owned firms were managed by their workers, who shared in their profits. Yugoslavia’s economic system fell apart as the country broke up and suffered from ethnic strife and civil war.
As the governments of command socialist nations fell in 1989 and early in the 1990s, new governments launched efforts to achieve transition to market capitalism. We examined two cases of transition. China’s gradual strategy has produced rapid growth, but in a politically repressive regime. As this book went to press, China continued to be one of the fastest growing economies in the world.
Russia’s transition has been much more difficult. Although its growth rate has improved in the last decade, there is still concern over the coherence of its reform efforts and the sustainability of recent improvements
Concept Problems
1. There is a gap between what workers receive and the value of what workers produce in a market capitalist system. Why? Does this constitute exploitation? Does it create the kinds of crises Marx anticipated? Why or why not?
2. What is meant by the labor theory of value? What are the shortcomings of the theory?
3. What would you say is the theory of value offered in this book? How does it differ from the labor theory of value?
4. In what ways does reliance on the labor theory of value create a problem for the allocation of natural resources?
5. What do you think would be the advantages of labor-managed firms of the kind that operated in the former Yugoslavia? The disadvantages?
6. Suppose you were the manager of a Soviet enterprise under the old command system. You have been given a quota and the promise of a big bonus if your firm meets it. How might your production choices differ from those of the management of a profit-maximizing firm in a market capitalist economy?
7. What are some government-operated enterprises in the United States? Do you see any parallels between the problems command economies faced with the production of goods and services and problems in the United States with state-run enterprises?
8. A Chinese firm operating as a state-owned enterprise had an incentive to produce the efficient level of output, even though some of its output was claimed by the state at state-determined prices. Why is that the case?
9. Given that market capitalist systems generate much higher standards of living than do command socialist systems, why do you think many Russian government officials have opposed the adoption of a market system?
10. How does widespread criminal activity sap economic growth?
Appendix A: Graphs in Economics
Thumbnail: https://unsplash.com/photos/PcDGGex9-jA
Appendix B: Extensions of the Aggregate Expenditures Model
Thumbnail: https://pixabay.com/illustrations/statistics-graph-chart-data-3411473/ | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_(LibreTexts)/20%3A_Socialist_Economies_in_Transition/20.4%3A_Review_and_Practice.txt |
Figure 1.1 Do You Use Facebook? Economics is greatly impacted by how well information travels through society. Today, social media giants Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram are major forces on the information super highway. (Credit: modification of "Social Media Mixed Icons - Banner" by Blogtrepreneur/Flickr, CC BY 2.0)
Chapter Objectives
In this chapter, you will learn about:
• What Is Economics, and Why Is It Important?
• Microeconomics and Macroeconomics
• How Economists Use Theories and Models to Understand Economic Issues
• How Economies Can Be Organized: An Overview of Economic Systems
Bring It Home
Information Overload in the Information Age
To post or not to post? Every day we are faced with a myriad of decisions, from what to have for breakfast, to which show to stream, to the more complex—“Should I double major and add possibly another semester of study to my education?” Our response to these choices depends on the information we have available at any given moment. Economists call this “imperfect” because we rarely have all the data we need to make perfect decisions. Despite the lack of perfect information, we still make hundreds of decisions a day.
Streams, sponsors, and social media are altering the process by which we make choices, how we spend our time, which movies we see, which products we buy, and more. Whether they read the reviews or just check the ratings, it's unlikely for Americans to make many significant decisions without these information streams.
As you will see in this course, what happens in economics is affected by how well and how fast information disseminates through a society, such as how quickly information travels through Facebook. “Economists love nothing better than when deep and liquid markets operate under conditions of perfect information,” says Jessica Irvine, National Economics Editor for News Corp Australia.
This leads us to the topic of this chapter, an introduction to the world of making decisions, processing information, and understanding behavior in markets —the world of economics. Each chapter in this book will start with a discussion about current (or sometimes past) events and revisit it at chapter’s end—to “bring home” the concepts in play.
What is economics and why should you spend your time learning it? After all, there are other disciplines you could be studying, and other ways you could be spending your time. As the Bring it Home feature just mentioned, making choices is at the heart of what economists study, and your decision to take this course is as much as economic decision as anything else.
Economics is probably not what you think. It is not primarily about money or finance. It is not primarily about business. It is not mathematics. What is it then? It is both a subject area and a way of viewing the world.
1.02: What Economics Is and Why is it Important
Learning Objectives
By the end of this section, you will be able to:
• Discuss the importance of studying economics
• Explain the relationship between production and division of labor
• Evaluate the significance of scarcity
Economics is the study of how humans make decisions in the face of scarcity. These can be individual decisions, family decisions, business decisions or societal decisions. If you look around carefully, you will see that scarcity is a fact of life. Scarcity means that human wants for goods, services and resources exceed what is available. Resources, such as labor, tools, land, and raw materials are necessary to produce the goods and services we want but they exist in limited supply. Of course, the ultimate scarce resource is time- everyone, rich or poor, has just 24 expendable hours in the day to earn income to acquire goods and services, for leisure time, or for sleep. At any point in time, there is only a finite amount of resources available.
Think about it this way: In 2015 the labor force in the United States contained over 158 million workers, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. The total land area was 3,794,101 square miles. While these are certainly large numbers, they are not infinite. Because these resources are limited, so are the numbers of goods and services we produce with them. Combine this with the fact that human wants seem to be virtually infinite, and you can see why scarcity is a problem.
Introduction to FRED
Data is very important in economics because it describes and measures the issues and problems that economics seek to understand. A variety of government agencies publish economic and social data. For this course, we will generally use data from the St. Louis Federal Reserve Bank's FRED database. FRED is very user friendly. It allows you to display data in tables or charts, and you can easily download it into spreadsheet form if you want to use the data for other purposes. The FRED website includes data on nearly 400,000 domestic and international variables over time, in the following broad categories:
• Money, Banking & Finance
• Population, Employment, & Labor Markets (including Income Distribution)
• National Accounts (Gross Domestic Product & its components), Flow of Funds, and International Accounts
• Production & Business Activity (including Business Cycles)
• Prices & Inflation (including the Consumer Price Index, the Producer Price Index, and the Employment Cost Index)
• International Data from other nations
• U.S. Regional Data
• Academic Data (including Penn World Tables & NBER Macrohistory database)
For more information about how to use FRED, see the variety of videos on YouTube starting with this introduction.
Figure 1.2 Scarcity of Resources People experiencing homelessness are a stark reminder that scarcity of resources is real. (Credit: "Pittsburgh Homeless" by "daveyinn"/Flickr Creative Commons, CC BY 2.0)
If you still do not believe that scarcity is a problem, consider the following: Does everyone require food to eat? Does everyone need a decent place to live? Does everyone have access to healthcare? In every country in the world, there are people who are hungry, homeless (for example, those who call park benches their beds, as Figure 1.2 shows), and in need of healthcare, just to focus on a few critical goods and services. Why is this the case? It is because of scarcity. Let’s delve into the concept of scarcity a little deeper, because it is crucial to understanding economics.
The Problem of Scarcity
Think about all the things you consume: food, shelter, clothing, transportation, healthcare, and entertainment. How do you acquire those items? You do not produce them yourself. You buy them. How do you afford the things you buy? You work for pay. If you do not, someone else does on your behalf. Yet most of us never have enough income to buy all the things we want. This is because of scarcity. So how do we solve it?
Link It Up
Visit this website to read about how the United States is dealing with scarcity in resources.
Every society, at every level, must make choices about how to use its resources. Families must decide whether to spend their money on a new car or a fancy vacation. Towns must choose whether to put more of the budget into police and fire protection or into the school system. Nations must decide whether to devote more funds to national defense or to protecting the environment. In most cases, there just isn’t enough money in the budget to do everything. How do we use our limited resources the best way possible, that is, to obtain the most goods and services we can? There are a couple of options. First, we could each produce everything we each consume. Alternatively, we could each produce some of what we want to consume, and “trade” for the rest of what we want. Let’s explore these options. Why do we not each just produce all of the things we consume? Think back to pioneer days, when individuals knew how to do so much more than we do today, from building their homes, to growing their crops, to hunting for food, to repairing their equipment. Most of us do not know how to do all—or any—of those things, but it is not because we could not learn. Rather, we do not have to. The reason why is something called the division and specialization of labor, a production innovation first put forth by Adam Smith (Figure 1.3) in his book, The Wealth of Nations.
Figure 1.3 Adam Smith Adam Smith introduced the idea of dividing labor into discrete tasks. (Credit: "Adam Smith" by Cadell and Davies (1811), John Horsburgh (1828), or R.C. Bell (1872)/Wikimedia Commons, Public Domain)
The Division of and Specialization of Labor
The formal study of economics began when Adam Smith (1723–1790) published his famous book The Wealth of Nations in 1776. Many authors had written on economics in the centuries before Smith, but he was the first to address the subject in a comprehensive way. In the first chapter, Smith introduces the concept of division of labor, which means that the way one produces a good or service is divided into a number of tasks that different workers perform, instead of all the tasks being done by the same person.
To illustrate division of labor, Smith counted how many tasks went into making a pin: drawing out a piece of wire, cutting it to the right length, straightening it, putting a head on one end and a point on the other, and packaging pins for sale, to name just a few. Smith counted 18 distinct tasks that different people performed—all for a pin, believe it or not!
Modern businesses divide tasks as well. Even a relatively simple business like a restaurant divides the task of serving meals into a range of jobs like top chef, sous chefs, less-skilled kitchen help, servers to wait on the tables, a greeter at the door, janitors to clean up, and a business manager to handle paychecks and bills—not to mention the economic connections a restaurant has with suppliers of food, furniture, kitchen equipment, and the building where it is located. A complex business like a large manufacturing factory, such as the shoe factory (Figure 1.4), or a hospital can have hundreds of job classifications.
Figure 1.4 Division of Labor Workers on an assembly line are an example of the divisions of labor. (Credit: "Red Wing Shoe Factory Tour" by Nina Hale/Flickr Creative Commons, CC BY 2.0)
Why the Division of Labor Increases Production
When we divide and subdivide the tasks involved with producing a good or service, workers and businesses can produce a greater quantity of output. In his observations of pin factories, Smith noticed that one worker alone might make 20 pins in a day, but that a small business of 10 workers (some of whom would need to complete two or three of the 18 tasks involved with pin-making), could make 48,000 pins in a day. How can a group of workers, each specializing in certain tasks, produce so much more than the same number of workers who try to produce the entire good or service by themselves? Smith offered three reasons.
First, specialization in a particular small job allows workers to focus on the parts of the production process where they have an advantage. (In later chapters, we will develop this idea by discussing comparative advantage.) People have different skills, talents, and interests, so they will be better at some jobs than at others. The particular advantages may be based on educational choices, which are in turn shaped by interests and talents. Only those with medical degrees qualify to become doctors, for instance. For some goods, geography affects specialization. For example, it is easier to be a wheat farmer in North Dakota than in Florida, but easier to run a tourist hotel in Florida than in North Dakota. If you live in or near a big city, it is easier to attract enough customers to operate a successful dry cleaning business or movie theater than if you live in a sparsely populated rural area. Whatever the reason, if people specialize in the production of what they do best, they will be more effective than if they produce a combination of things, some of which they are good at and some of which they are not.
Second, workers who specialize in certain tasks often learn to produce more quickly and with higher quality. This pattern holds true for many workers, including assembly line laborers who build cars, stylists who cut hair, and doctors who perform heart surgery. In fact, specialized workers often know their jobs well enough to suggest innovative ways to do their work faster and better.
A similar pattern often operates within businesses. In many cases, a business that focuses on one or a few products (sometimes called its “core competency”) is more successful than firms that try to make a wide range of products.
Third, specialization allows businesses to take advantage of economies of scale, which means that for many goods, as the level of production increases, the average cost of producing each individual unit declines. For example, if a factory produces only 100 cars per year, each car will be quite expensive to make on average. However, if a factory produces 50,000 cars each year, then it can set up an assembly line with huge machines and workers performing specialized tasks, and the average cost of production per car will be lower. The ultimate result of workers who can focus on their preferences and talents, learn to do their specialized jobs better, and work in larger organizations is that society as a whole can produce and consume far more than if each person tried to produce all of their own goods and services. The division and specialization of labor has been a force against the problem of scarcity.
Trade and Markets
Specialization only makes sense, though, if workers can use the pay they receive for doing their jobs to purchase the other goods and services that they need. In short, specialization requires trade.
You do not have to know anything about electronics or sound systems to play music—you just buy an iPod or MP3 player, download the music, and listen. You do not have to know anything about artificial fibers or the construction of sewing machines if you need a jacket—you just buy the jacket and wear it. You do not need to know anything about internal combustion engines to operate a car—you just get in and drive. Instead of trying to acquire all the knowledge and skills involved in producing all of the goods and services that you wish to consume, the market allows you to learn a specialized set of skills and then use the pay you receive to buy the goods and services you need or want. This is how our modern society has evolved into a strong economy.
Why Study Economics?
Figure 1.5 Esther Duflo, Abhijit Banerjee, and Michael Kremer Esther Duflo, Abhijit Banerjee (both from Massachusetts Institute of Technology), and Michael Kremer (University of Chicago) were awarded the Nobel Prize for groundbreaking work in which they established experimental methods to understand poverty and outcomes of initiatives to address it. (Credit: modification of work by U.S. Embassy Sweden/Wikimedia Commons, CC BY 2.0; Financial Times/Wikimedia Commons, CC BY 2.0; U.S. Embassy Sweden/Flickr Creative Commons, CC BY 2.0)
Now that you have an overview on what economics studies, let’s quickly discuss why you are right to study it. Economics is not primarily a collection of facts to memorize, although there are plenty of important concepts to learn. Instead, think of economics as a collection of questions to answer or puzzles to work. Most importantly, economics provides the tools to solve those puzzles.
Consider the complex and critical issue of education barriers on national and regional levels, which affect millions of people and result in widespread poverty and inequality. Governments, aid organizations, and wealthy individuals spend billions of dollars each year trying to address these issues. Nations announce the revitalization of their education programs; tech companies donate devices and infrastructure, and celebrities and charities build schools and sponsor students. Yet the problems remain, sometimes almost as pronounced as they were before the intervention. Why is that the case? In 2019, three economists—Esther Duflo, Abhijit Banerjee, and Michael Kremer—were awarded the Nobel Prize for their work to answer those questions. They worked diligently to break the widespread problems into smaller pieces, and experimented with small interventions to test success. The award citation credited their work with giving the world better tools and information to address poverty and improve education. Esther Duflo, who is the youngest person and second woman to win the Nobel Prize in Economics, said, "We believed that like the war on cancer, the war on poverty was not going to be won in one major battle, but in a series of small triumphs. . . . This work and the culture of learning that it fostered in governments has led to real improvement in the lives of hundreds of millions of poor people.”
As you can see, economics affects far more than business. For example:
• Virtually every major problem facing the world today, from global warming, to world poverty, to the conflicts in Syria, Afghanistan, and Somalia, has an economic dimension. If you are going to be part of solving those problems, you need to be able to understand them. Economics is crucial.
• It is hard to overstate the importance of economics to good citizenship. You need to be able to vote intelligently on budgets, regulations, and laws in general. When the U.S. government came close to a standstill at the end of 2012 due to the “fiscal cliff,” what were the issues? Did you know?
• A basic understanding of economics makes you a well-rounded thinker. When you read articles about economic issues, you will understand and be able to evaluate the writer’s argument. When you hear classmates, co-workers, or political candidates talking about economics, you will be able to distinguish between common sense and nonsense. You will find new ways of thinking about current events and about personal and business decisions, as well as current events and politics.
The study of economics does not dictate the answers, but it can illuminate the different choices. | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_3e_(OpenStax)/01%3A_Welcome_to_Economics/1.01%3A_Introduction.txt |
Learning Objectives
By the end of this section, you will be able to:
• Describe microeconomics
• Describe macroeconomics
• Contrast monetary policy and fiscal policy
Economics is concerned with the well-being of all people, including those with jobs and those without jobs, as well as those with high incomes and those with low incomes. Economics acknowledges that production of useful goods and services can create problems of environmental pollution. It explores the question of how investing in education helps to develop workers’ skills. It probes questions like how to tell when big businesses or big labor unions are operating in a way that benefits society as a whole and when they are operating in a way that benefits their owners or members at the expense of others. It looks at how government spending, taxes, and regulations affect decisions about production and consumption.
It should be clear by now that economics covers considerable ground. We can divide that ground into two parts: Microeconomics focuses on the actions of individual agents within the economy, like households, workers, and businesses. Macroeconomics looks at the economy as a whole. It focuses on broad issues such as growth of production, the number of unemployed people, the inflationary increase in prices, government deficits, and levels of exports and imports. Microeconomics and macroeconomics are not separate subjects, but rather complementary perspectives on the overall subject of the economy.
To understand why both microeconomic and macroeconomic perspectives are useful, consider the problem of studying a biological ecosystem like a lake. One person who sets out to study the lake might focus on specific topics: certain kinds of algae or plant life; the characteristics of particular fish or snails; or the trees surrounding the lake. Another person might take an overall view and instead consider the lake's ecosystem from top to bottom; what eats what, how the system stays in a rough balance, and what environmental stresses affect this balance. Both approaches are useful, and both examine the same lake, but the viewpoints are different. In a similar way, both microeconomics and macroeconomics study the same economy, but each has a different viewpoint.
Whether you are scrutinizing lakes or economics, the micro and the macro insights should blend with each other. In studying a lake, the micro insights about particular plants and animals help to understand the overall food chain, while the macro insights about the overall food chain help to explain the environment in which individual plants and animals live.
In economics, the micro decisions of individual businesses are influenced by whether the macroeconomy is healthy. For example, firms will be more likely to hire workers if the overall economy is growing. In turn, macroeconomy's performance ultimately depends on the microeconomic decisions that individual households and businesses make.
Microeconomics
What determines how households and individuals spend their budgets? What combination of goods and services will best fit their needs and wants, given the budget they have to spend? How do people decide whether to work, and if so, whether to work full time or part time? How do people decide how much to save for the future, or whether they should borrow to spend beyond their current means?
What determines the products, and how many of each, a firm will produce and sell? What determines the prices a firm will charge? What determines how a firm will produce its products? What determines how many workers it will hire? How will a firm finance its business? When will a firm decide to expand, downsize, or even close? In the microeconomics part of this book, we will learn about the theory of consumer behavior, the theory of the firm, how markets for labor and other resources work, and how markets sometimes fail to work properly.
Macroeconomics
What determines the level of economic activity in a society? In other words, what determines how many goods and services a nation actually produces? What determines how many jobs are available in an economy? What determines a nation’s standard of living? What causes the economy to speed up or slow down? What causes firms to hire more workers or to lay them off? Finally, what causes the economy to grow over the long term?
We can determine an economy's macroeconomic health by examining a number of goals: growth in the standard of living, low unemployment, and low inflation, to name the most important. How can we use government macroeconomic policy to pursue these goals? A nation's central bank conducts monetary policy, which involves policies that affect bank lending, interest rates, and financial capital markets. For the United States, this is the Federal Reserve. A nation's legislative body determines fiscal policy, which involves government spending and taxes. For the United States, this is the Congress and the executive branch, which originates the federal budget. These are the government's main tools. Americans tend to expect that government can fix whatever economic problems we encounter, but to what extent is that expectation realistic? These are just some of the issues that we will explore in the macroeconomic chapters of this book. | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_3e_(OpenStax)/01%3A_Welcome_to_Economics/1.03%3A_Microeconomics_and_Macroeconomics.txt |
Learning Objectives
By the end of this section, you will be able to:
• Interpret a circular flow diagram
• Explain the importance of economic theories and models
• Describe goods and services markets and labor markets
Figure 1.6 John Maynard Keynes One of the most influential economists in modern times was John Maynard Keynes. (Credit: “John Maynard Keynes” by IMF/Wikimedia Commons, Public Domain)
John Maynard Keynes (1883–1946), one of the greatest economists of the twentieth century, pointed out that economics is not just a subject area but also a way of thinking. Keynes (Figure 1.6) famously wrote in the introduction to a fellow economist’s book: “[Economics] is a method rather than a doctrine, an apparatus of the mind, a technique of thinking, which helps its possessor to draw correct conclusions.” In other words, economics teaches you how to think, not what to think.
Link It Up
Watch this video about John Maynard Keynes and his influence on economics.
Economists see the world through a different lens than anthropologists, biologists, classicists, or practitioners of any other discipline. They analyze issues and problems using economic theories that are based on particular assumptions about human behavior. These assumptions tend to be different than the assumptions an anthropologist or psychologist might use. A theory is a simplified representation of how two or more variables interact with each other. The purpose of a theory is to take a complex, real-world issue and simplify it down to its essentials. If done well, this enables the analyst to understand the issue and any problems around it. A good theory is simple enough to understand, while complex enough to capture the key features of the object or situation you are studying.
Sometimes economists use the term model instead of theory. Strictly speaking, a theory is a more abstract representation, while a model is a more applied or empirical representation. We use models to test theories, but for this course we will use the terms interchangeably.
For example, an architect who is planning a major office building will often build a physical model that sits on a tabletop to show how the entire city block will look after the new building is constructed. Companies often build models of their new products, which are more rough and unfinished than the final product, but can still demonstrate how the new product will work.
A good model to start with in economics is the circular flow diagram (Figure 1.7). It pictures the economy as consisting of two groups—households and firms—that interact in two markets: the goods and services market in which firms sell and households buy and the labor market in which households sell labor to business firms or other employees.
Figure 1.7 The Circular Flow Diagram The circular flow diagram shows how households and firms interact in the goods and services market, and in the labor market. The direction of the arrows shows that in the goods and services market, households receive goods and services and pay firms for them. In the labor market, households provide labor and receive payment from firms through wages, salaries, and benefits.
Firms produce and sell goods and services to households in the market for goods and services (or product market). Arrow “A” indicates this. Households pay for goods and services, which becomes the revenues to firms. Arrow “B” indicates this. Arrows A and B represent the two sides of the product market. Where do households obtain the income to buy goods and services? They provide the labor and other resources (e.g., land, capital, raw materials) firms need to produce goods and services in the market for inputs (or factors of production). Arrow “C” indicates this. In return, firms pay for the inputs (or resources) they use in the form of wages and other factor payments. Arrow “D” indicates this. Arrows “C” and “D” represent the two sides of the factor market.
Of course, in the real world, there are many different markets for goods and services and markets for many different types of labor. The circular flow diagram simplifies this to make the picture easier to grasp. In the diagram, firms produce goods and services, which they sell to households in return for revenues. The outer circle shows this, and represents the two sides of the product market (for example, the market for goods and services) in which households demand and firms supply. Households sell their labor as workers to firms in return for wages, salaries, and benefits. The inner circle shows this and represents the two sides of the labor market in which households supply and firms demand.
This version of the circular flow model is stripped down to the essentials, but it has enough features to explain how the product and labor markets work in the economy. We could easily add details to this basic model if we wanted to introduce more real-world elements, like financial markets, governments, and interactions with the rest of the globe (imports and exports).
Economists carry a set of theories in their heads like a carpenter carries around a toolkit. When they see an economic issue or problem, they go through the theories they know to see if they can find one that fits. Then they use the theory to derive insights about the issue or problem. Economists express theories as diagrams, graphs, or even as mathematical equations. (Do not worry. In this course, we will mostly use graphs.) Economists do not figure out the answer to the problem first and then draw the graph to illustrate. Rather, they use the graph of the theory to help them figure out the answer. Although at the introductory level, you can sometimes figure out the right answer without applying a model, if you keep studying economics, before too long you will run into issues and problems that you will need to graph to solve. We explain both micro and macroeconomics in terms of theories and models. The most well-known theories are probably those of supply and demand, but you will learn a number of others. | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_3e_(OpenStax)/01%3A_Welcome_to_Economics/1.04%3A_How_Economists_Use_Theories_and_Models_to_Understand_Economic_Issues.txt |
Learning Objectives
By the end of this section, you will be able to:
• Contrast traditional economies, command economies, and market economies
• Explain gross domestic product (GDP)
• Assess the importance and effects of globalization
Think about what a complex system a modern economy is. It includes all production of goods and services, all buying and selling, all employment. The economic life of every individual is interrelated, at least to a small extent, with the economic lives of thousands or even millions of other individuals. Who organizes and coordinates this system? Who ensures that, for example, the number of televisions a society provides is the same as the amount it needs and wants? Who ensures that the right number of employees work in the electronics industry? Who ensures that televisions are produced in the best way possible? How does it all get done?
There are at least three ways that societies organize an economy. The first is the traditional economy, which is the oldest economic system and is used in parts of Asia, Africa, and South America. Traditional economies organize their economic affairs the way they have always done (i.e., tradition). Occupations stay in the family. Most families are farmers who grow the crops using traditional methods. What you produce is what you consume. Because tradition drives the way of life, there is little economic progress or development.
Figure 1.8 A Command Economy Ancient Egypt was an example of a command economy. (Credit: "Pyramids at Giza" by Jay Bergesen/Flickr Creative Commons, CC BY 2.0)
Command economies are very different. In a command economy, economic effort is devoted to goals passed down from a ruler or ruling class. Ancient Egypt was a good example: a large part of economic life was devoted to building pyramids, like those in Figure 1.8, for the pharaohs. Medieval manor life is another example: the lord provided the land for growing crops and protection in the event of war. In return, vassals provided labor and soldiers to do the lord’s bidding. In the last century, communism emphasized command economies.
In a command economy, the government decides what goods and services will be produced and what prices it will charge for them. The government decides what methods of production to use and sets wages for workers. The government provides many necessities like healthcare and education for free. Currently, Cuba and North Korea have command economies.
Figure 1.9 A Market Economy Nothing says “market” more than The New York Stock Exchange. (Credit: work by Erik Drost/Flickr Creative Commons, CC BY 2.0)
Although command economies have a very centralized structure for economic decisions, market economies have a very decentralized structure. A market is an institution that brings together buyers and sellers of goods or services, who may be either individuals or businesses. The New York Stock Exchange (Figure 1.9) is a prime example of a market which brings buyers and sellers together. In a market economy, decision-making is decentralized. Market economies are based on private enterprise: the private individuals or groups of private individuals own and operate the means of production (resources and businesses). Businesses supply goods and services based on demand. (In a command economy, by contrast, the government owns resources and businesses.) Supply of goods and services depends on what the demands are. A person’s income is based on their ability to convert resources (especially labor) into something that society values. The more society values the person’s output, the higher the income (think Lady Gaga or LeBron James). In this scenario, market forces, not governments, determine economic decisions.
Most economies in the real world are mixed. They combine elements of command and market (and even traditional) systems. The U.S. economy is positioned toward the market-oriented end of the spectrum. Many countries in Europe and Latin America, while primarily market-oriented, have a greater degree of government involvement in economic decisions than the U.S. economy. China and Russia, while over the past several decades have moved more in the direction of having a market-oriented system, remain closer to the command economy end of the spectrum. The Heritage Foundation provides perspective on countries’ economic freedom, as the following Clear It Up feature discusses.
Clear It Up
What countries are considered economically free?
Who is in control of economic decisions? Are people free to do what they want and to work where they want? Are businesses free to produce when they want and what they choose, and to hire and fire as they wish? Are banks free to choose who will receive loans, or does the government control these kinds of choices? Each year, researchers at the Heritage Foundation and the Wall Street Journal look at 50 different categories of economic freedom for countries around the world. They give each nation a score based on the extent of economic freedom in each category. Note that while the Heritage Foundation/WSJ index is widely cited by an array of scholars and publications, it should be regarded as only one viewpoint. Some experts indicate that the index’s category choices and scores are politically biased. However, the index and others like it provide a useful resource for critical discussion of economic freedom.
The 2016 Heritage Foundation’s Index of Economic Freedom report ranked 178 countries around the world: Table 1.1 lists some examples of the most free and the least free countries. Although technically not a separate country, Hong Kong has been granted a degree of autonomy such that, for purposes of measuring economic statistics, it is often treated as a separate country. Several additional countries were not ranked because of extreme instability that made judgments about economic freedom impossible. These countries include Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Somalia, and Yemen.
The assigned rankings are inevitably based on estimates, yet even these rough measures can be useful for discerning trends. In 2015, 101 of the 178 included countries shifted toward greater economic freedom, although 77 of the countries shifted toward less economic freedom. In recent decades, the overall trend has been a higher level of economic freedom around the world.
Most Economic Freedom Least Economic Freedom
1. Hong Kong 167. Timor-Leste
2. Singapore 168. Democratic Republic of Congo
3. New Zealand 169. Argentina
4. Switzerland 170. Equatorial Guinea
5. Australia 171. Iran
6. Canada 172. Republic of Congo
7. Chile 173. Eritrea
8. Ireland 174. Turkmenistan
9. Estonia 175. Zimbabwe
10. United Kingdom 176. Venezuela
11. United States 177. Cuba
12. Denmark 178. North Korea
Table 1.1 Economic Freedoms, 2016 (Source: The Heritage Foundation, 2016 Index of Economic Freedom, Country Rankings, http://www.heritage.org/index/ranking)
Regulations: The Rules of the Game
Markets and government regulations are always entangled. There is no such thing as an absolutely free market. Regulations always define the “rules of the game” in the economy. Economies that are primarily market-oriented have fewer regulations—ideally just enough to maintain an even playing field for participants. At a minimum, these laws govern matters like safeguarding private property against theft, protecting people from violence, enforcing legal contracts, preventing fraud, and collecting taxes. Conversely, even the most command-oriented economies operate using markets. How else would buying and selling occur? The government heavily regulates decisions of what to produce and prices to charge. Heavily regulated economies often have underground economies (or black markets), which are markets where the buyers and sellers make transactions without the government’s approval.
The question of how to organize economic institutions is typically not a straightforward choice between all market or all government, but instead involves a balancing act over the appropriate combination of market freedom and government rules.
Figure 1.10 Globalization Cargo ships are one mode of transportation for shipping goods in the global economy. (Credit: "Cargo Ship" by Raul Valdez/Flickr Creative Commons, CC BY 2.0)
The Rise of Globalization
Recent decades have seen a trend toward globalization, which is the expanding cultural, political, and economic connections between people around the world. One measure of this is the increased buying and selling of goods, services, and assets across national borders—in other words, international trade and financial capital flows.
Globalization has occurred for a number of reasons. Improvements in shipping, as illustrated by the container ship in Figure 1.10, and air cargo have driven down transportation costs. Innovations in computing and telecommunications have made it easier and cheaper to manage long-distance economic connections of production and sales. Many valuable products and services in the modern economy can take the form of information—for example: computer software; financial advice; travel planning; music, books and movies; and blueprints for designing a building. These products and many others can be transported over telephones and computer networks at ever-lower costs. Finally, international agreements and treaties between countries have encouraged greater trade.
Table 1.2 presents one measure of globalization. It shows the percentage of domestic economic production that was exported for a selection of countries from 2010 to 2015, according to an entity known as The World Bank. Exports are the goods and services that one produces domestically and sells abroad. Imports are the goods and services that one produces abroad and then sells domestically. Gross domestic product (GDP) measures the size of total production in an economy. Thus, the ratio of exports divided by GDP measures what share of a country’s total economic production is sold in other countries.
Country 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Higher Income Countries
United States 12.4 13.6 13.6 13.5 13.5 12.6
Belgium 76.2 81.4 82.2 82.8 84.0 84.4
Canada 29.1 30.7 30.0 30.1 31.7 31.5
France 26.0 27.8 28.1 28.3 29.0 30.0
Middle Income Countries
Brazil 10.9 11.9 12.6 12.6 11.2 13.0
Mexico 29.9 31.2 32.6 31.7 32.3 35.3
South Korea 49.4 55.7 56.3 53.9 50.3 45.9
Lower Income Countries
Chad 36.8 38.9 36.9 32.2 34.2 29.8
China 29.4 28.5 27.3 26.4 23.9 22.4
India 22.0 23.9 24.0 24.8 22.9 -
Nigeria 25.3 31.3 31.4 18.0 18.4 -
Table 1.2 The Extent of Globalization (exports/GDP) (Source: http://databank.worldbank.org/data/)
In recent decades, the export/GDP ratio has generally risen, both worldwide and for the U.S. economy. Interestingly, the share of U.S. exports in proportion to the U.S. economy is well below the global average, in part because large economies like the United States can contain more of the division of labor inside their national borders. However, smaller economies like Belgium, Korea, and Canada need to trade across their borders with other countries to take full advantage of division of labor, specialization, and economies of scale. In this sense, the enormous U.S. economy is less affected by globalization than most other countries.
Table 1.2 indicates that many medium and low income countries around the world, like Mexico and China, have also experienced a surge of globalization in recent decades. If an astronaut in orbit could put on special glasses that make all economic transactions visible as brightly colored lines and look down at Earth, the astronaut would see the planet covered with connections.
Despite the rise in globalization over the last few decades, in recent years we've seen significant pushback against globalization from people across the world concerned about loss of jobs, loss of political sovereignty, and increased economic inequality. Prominent examples of this pushback include the 2016 vote in Great Britain to exit the European Union (i.e. Brexit), and the election of Donald J. Trump for President of the United States.
Hopefully, you now have an idea about economics. Before you move to any other chapter of study, be sure to read the very important appendix to this chapter called The Use of Mathematics in Principles of Economics. It is essential that you learn more about how to read and use models in economics.
Bring It Home
Information Overload in the Information Age
The world provides nearly instant access to a wealth of information. Consider that as recently as the late 1970s, the Farmer’s Almanac, along with the Weather Bureau of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, were the primary sources American farmers used to determine when to plant and harvest their crops. Today, these decisions are driven by data. Farmers access detailed data streams driven by global positioning systems, historical rainfall patterns, and complex weather monitoring services. They combine this information with crop yield data and soil quality measurements from prior years. Maximizing production efficiently can mean the difference between a farm that remains profitable and one that may need to sell its land, and data helps eliminate guesswork.
Information helps us make decisions as simple as what to wear today to how many reporters the media should send to cover an event. Each of these decisions is an economic decision. After all, resources are scarce. If the media send ten reporters to cover an announcement, they are not available to cover other stories or complete other tasks. Information provides the necessary knowledge to make the best possible decisions on how to utilize scarce resources. Welcome to the world of economics! | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_3e_(OpenStax)/01%3A_Welcome_to_Economics/1.05%3A_How_Economies_Can_Be_Organized-_An_Overview_of_Economic_Systems.txt |
circular flow diagram
a diagram that views the economy as consisting of households and firms interacting in a goods and services market and a labor market
command economy
an economy where economic decisions are passed down from government authority and where the government owns the resources
division of labor
the way in which different workers divide required tasks to produce a good or service
economics
the study of how humans make choices under conditions of scarcity
economies of scale
when the average cost of producing each individual unit declines as total output increases
exports
products (goods and services) made domestically and sold abroad
fiscal policy
economic policies that involve government spending and taxes
globalization
the trend in which buying and selling in markets have increasingly crossed national borders
goods and services market
a market in which firms are sellers of what they produce and households are buyers
gross domestic product (GDP)
measure of the size of total production in an economy
imports
products (goods and services) made abroad and then sold domestically
labor market
the market in which households sell their labor as workers to business firms or other employers
macroeconomics
the branch of economics that focuses on broad issues such as growth, unemployment, inflation, and trade balance
market
interaction between potential buyers and sellers; a combination of demand and supply
market economy
an economy where economic decisions are decentralized, private individuals own resources, and businesses supply goods and services based on demand
microeconomics
the branch of economics that focuses on actions of particular agents within the economy, like households, workers, and business firms
model
see theory
monetary policy
policy that involves altering the level of interest rates, the availability of credit in the economy, and the extent of borrowing
private enterprise
system where private individuals or groups of private individuals own and operate the means of production (resources and businesses)
scarcity
when human wants for goods and services exceed the available supply
specialization
when workers or firms focus on particular tasks for which they are well-suited within the overall production process
theory
a representation of an object or situation that is simplified while including enough of the key features to help us understand the object or situation
traditional economy
typically an agricultural economy where things are done the same as they have always been done
underground economy
a market where the buyers and sellers make transactions in violation of one or more government regulations
1.07: Key Concepts and Summary
1.1 What Is Economics, and Why Is It Important?
Economics seeks to solve the problem of scarcity, which is when human wants for goods and services exceed the available supply. A modern economy displays a division of labor, in which people earn income by specializing in what they produce and then use that income to purchase the products they need or want. The division of labor allows individuals and firms to specialize and to produce more for several reasons: a) It allows the agents to focus on areas of advantage due to natural factors and skill levels; b) It encourages the agents to learn and invent; c) It allows agents to take advantage of economies of scale. Division and specialization of labor only work when individuals can purchase what they do not produce in markets. Learning about economics helps you understand the major problems facing the world today, prepares you to be a good citizen, and helps you become a well-rounded thinker.
1.2 Microeconomics and Macroeconomics
Microeconomics and macroeconomics are two different perspectives on the economy. The microeconomic perspective focuses on parts of the economy: individuals, firms, and industries. The macroeconomic perspective looks at the economy as a whole, focusing on goals like growth in the standard of living, unemployment, and inflation. Macroeconomics has two types of policies for pursuing these goals: monetary policy and fiscal policy.
1.3 How Economists Use Theories and Models to Understand Economic Issues
Economists analyze problems differently than do other disciplinary experts. The main tools economists use are economic theories or models. A theory is not an illustration of the answer to a problem. Rather, a theory is a tool for determining the answer.
1.4 How To Organize Economies: An Overview of Economic Systems
We can organize societies as traditional, command, or market-oriented economies. Most societies are a mix. The last few decades have seen globalization evolve as a result of growth in commercial and financial networks that cross national borders, making businesses and workers from different economies increasingly interdependent. | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_3e_(OpenStax)/01%3A_Welcome_to_Economics/1.06%3A_Key_Terms.txt |
1.
What is scarcity? Can you think of two causes of scarcity?
2.
Residents of the town of Smithfield like to consume hams, but each ham requires 10 people to produce it and takes a month. If the town has a total of 100 people, what is the maximum amount of ham the residents can consume in a month?
3.
A consultant works for \$200 per hour. She likes to eat vegetables, but is not very good at growing them. Why does it make more economic sense for her to spend her time at the consulting job and shop for her vegetables?
4.
A computer systems engineer could paint her house, but it makes more sense for her to hire a painter to do it. Explain why.
5.
What would be another example of a “system” in the real world that could serve as a metaphor for micro and macroeconomics?
6.
Suppose we extend the circular flow model to add imports and exports. Copy the circular flow diagram onto a sheet of paper and then add a foreign country as a third agent. Draw a rough sketch of the flows of imports, exports, and the payments for each on your diagram.
7.
What is an example of a problem in the world today, not mentioned in the chapter, that has an economic dimension?
8.
The chapter defines private enterprise as a characteristic of market-oriented economies. What would public enterprise be? Hint: It is a characteristic of command economies.
9.
Why might Belgium, France, Italy, and Sweden have a higher export to GDP ratio than the United States?
1.09: Review Questions
10.
Give the three reasons that explain why the division of labor increases an economy’s level of production.
11.
What are three reasons to study economics?
12.
What is the difference between microeconomics and macroeconomics?
13.
What are examples of individual economic agents?
14.
What are the three main goals of macroeconomics?
15.
How did John Maynard Keynes define economics?
16.
Are households primarily buyers or sellers in the goods and services market? In the labor market?
17.
Are firms primarily buyers or sellers in the goods and services market? In the labor market?
18.
What are the three ways that societies can organize themselves economically?
19.
What is globalization? How do you think it might have affected the economy over the past decade?
1.10: Critical Thinking Questions
20.
Suppose you have a team of two workers: one is a baker and one is a chef. Explain why the kitchen can produce more meals in a given period of time if each worker specializes in what they do best than if each worker tries to do everything from appetizer to dessert.
21.
Why would division of labor without trade not work?
22.
Can you think of any examples of free goods, that is, goods or services that are not scarce?
23.
A balanced federal budget and a balance of trade are secondary goals of macroeconomics, while growth in the standard of living (for example) is a primary goal. Why do you think that is so?
24.
Macroeconomics is an aggregate of what happens at the microeconomic level. Would it be possible for what happens at the macro level to differ from how economic agents would react to some stimulus at the micro level? Hint: Think about the behavior of crowds.
25.
Why is it unfair or meaningless to criticize a theory as “unrealistic?”
26.
Suppose, as an economist, you are asked to analyze an issue unlike anything you have ever done before. Also, suppose you do not have a specific model for analyzing that issue. What should you do? Hint: What would a carpenter do in a similar situation?
27.
Why do you think that most modern countries’ economies are a mix of command and market types?
28.
Can you think of ways that globalization has helped you economically? Can you think of ways that it has not? | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_3e_(OpenStax)/01%3A_Welcome_to_Economics/1.08%3A_Self-Check_Questions.txt |
This chapter will continue our discussion of scarcity and the economic way of thinking by first introducing three critical concepts: opportunity cost, marginal decision making, and diminishing returns. Later, it will consider whether the economic way of thinking accurately describes either how choices are made or how they should be made.
02: Choice in a World of Scarcity
Figure 2.1 Choices and Tradeoffs In general, the higher the degree, the higher the salary, so why aren’t more people pursuing higher degrees? The short answer: choices and tradeoffs. (Credit: modification of "College of DuPage Commencement 2018 107" by COD Newsroom/Flickr, CC BY 2.0)
Chapter Objectives
In this chapter, you will learn about:
• How Individuals Make Choices Based on Their Budget Constraint
• The Production Possibilities Frontier and Social Choices
• Confronting Objections to the Economic Approach
Bring It Home
Choices ... to What Degree?
Does your level of education impact earning? Let’s look at some data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). In 2020, among full-time wage and salary workers, median weekly earnings for those with a master’s degree were \$1,545. Multiply this average by 52 weeks, and you get average annual earnings of \$80,340. Compare that to the median weekly earnings for full-time workers aged 25 and over with just a bachelor’s degree: \$1,305 weekly and \$67,860 a year. What about those with no higher than a high school diploma in 2020? They earn an average of just \$781 weekly and \$40,612 over 12 months. In other words, data from the BLS indicates that receiving a bachelor’s degree boosts earnings by 67% over what workers would have earned if they only obtained a high school diploma, and a master’s degree yields average earnings that are nearly double those of workers with a high school diploma.
Given these statistics, we might expect many people to choose to go to college and at least earn a bachelor’s degree. Assuming that people want to improve their material well-being, it seems like they would make those choices that provide them with the greatest opportunity to consume goods and services. As it turns out, the analysis is not nearly as simple as this. In fact, in 2019, the BLS reported that while just over 90% of the population aged 25 and over in the United States had a high school diploma, only 36% of those aged 25 and over had a bachelor's or higher degree, and only 13.5% had earned a master's or higher degree.
This brings us to the subject of this chapter: why people make the choices they make and how economists explain those choices.
You will learn quickly when you examine the relationship between economics and scarcity that choices involve tradeoffs. Every choice has a cost.
In 1968, the Rolling Stones recorded “You Can’t Always Get What You Want.” Economists chuckled, because they had been singing a similar tune for decades. English economist Lionel Robbins (1898–1984), in his Essay on the Nature and Significance of Economic Science in 1932, described not always getting what you want in this way:
The time at our disposal is limited. There are only twenty-four hours in the day. We have to choose between the different uses to which they may be put. ... Everywhere we turn, if we choose one thing we must relinquish others which, in different circumstances, we would wish not to have relinquished. Scarcity of means to satisfy given ends is an almost ubiquitous condition of human nature.
Because people live in a world of scarcity, they cannot have all the time, money, possessions, and experiences they wish. Neither can society.
This chapter will continue our discussion of scarcity and the economic way of thinking by first introducing three critical concepts: opportunity cost, marginal decision making, and diminishing returns. Later, it will consider whether the economic way of thinking accurately describes either how we make choices and how we should make them. | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_3e_(OpenStax)/02%3A_Choice_in_a_World_of_Scarcity/2.01%3A_Introduction_to_Choice_in_a_World_of_Scarcity.txt |
Learning Objectives
By the end of this section, you will be able to:
• Calculate and graph budget constraints
• Explain opportunity sets and opportunity costs
• Evaluate the law of diminishing marginal utility
• Explain how marginal analysis and utility influence choices
Consider the typical consumer’s budget problem. Consumers have a limited amount of income to spend on the things they need and want. Suppose Alphonso has \$10 in spending money each week that he can allocate between bus tickets for getting to work and the burgers that he eats for lunch. Burgers cost \$2 each, and bus tickets are 50 cents each. We can see Alphonso's budget problem in Figure 2.2.
Figure 2.2 The Budget Constraint: Alphonso’s Consumption Choice Opportunity Frontier Each point on the budget constraint represents a combination of burgers and bus tickets whose total cost adds up to Alphonso’s budget of \$10. The relative price of burgers and bus tickets determines the slope of the budget constraint. All along the budget set, giving up one burger means gaining four bus tickets.
The vertical axis in the figure shows burger purchases and the horizontal axis shows bus ticket purchases. If Alphonso spends all his money on burgers, he can afford five per week. (\$10 per week/\$2 per burger = 5 burgers per week.) However, if he does this, he will not be able to afford any bus tickets. Point A in the figure shows the choice (zero bus tickets and five burgers). Alternatively, if Alphonso spends all his money on bus tickets, he can afford 20 per week. (\$10 per week/\$0.50 per bus ticket = 20 bus tickets per week.) Then, however, he will not be able to afford any burgers. Point F shows this alternative choice (20 bus tickets and zero burgers).
If we connect all the points between A and F, we get Alphonso's budget constraint. This indicates all the combination of burgers and bus tickets Alphonso can afford, given the price of the two goods and his budget amount.
If Alphonso is like most people, he will choose some combination that includes both bus tickets and burgers. That is, he will choose some combination on the budget constraint that is between points A and F. Every point on (or inside) the constraint shows a combination of burgers and bus tickets that Alphonso can afford. Any point outside the constraint is not affordable, because it would cost more money than Alphonso has in his budget.
The budget constraint clearly shows the tradeoff Alphonso faces in choosing between burgers and bus tickets. Suppose he is currently at point D, where he can afford 12 bus tickets and two burgers. What would it cost Alphonso for one more burger? It would be natural to answer \$2, but that’s not the way economists think. Instead they ask, how many bus tickets would Alphonso have to give up to get one more burger, while staying within his budget? Since bus tickets cost 50 cents, Alphonso would have to give up four to afford one more burger. That is the true cost to Alphonso.
The Concept of Opportunity Cost
Economists use the term opportunity cost to indicate what people must give up to obtain what they desire. The idea behind opportunity cost is that the cost of one item is the lost opportunity to do or consume something else. In short, opportunity cost is the value of the next best alternative. For Alphonso, the opportunity cost of a burger is the four bus tickets he would have to give up. He would decide whether or not to choose the burger depending on whether the value of the burger exceeds the value of the forgone alternative—in this case, bus tickets. Since people must choose, they inevitably face tradeoffs in which they have to give up things they desire to obtain other things they desire more.
Link It Up
View this website for an example of opportunity cost—paying someone else to wait in line for you.
A fundamental principle of economics is that every choice has an opportunity cost. If you sleep through your economics class, the opportunity cost is the learning you miss from not attending class. If you spend your income on video games, you cannot spend it on movies. If you choose to marry one person, you give up the opportunity to marry anyone else. In short, opportunity cost is all around us and part of human existence.
The following Work It Out feature shows a step-by-step analysis of a budget constraint calculation. Read through it to understand another important concept—slope—that we further explain in the appendix The Use of Mathematics in Principles of Economics.
Work It Out
Understanding Budget Constraints
Budget constraints are easy to understand if you apply a little math. The appendix The Use of Mathematics in Principles of Economics explains all the math you are likely to need in this book. Therefore, if math is not your strength, you might want to take a look at the appendix.
Step 1: The equation for any budget constraint is:
$Budget=P1 × Q1 + P2× Q2Budget=P1 × Q1 + P2× Q2$
where P and Q are the price and quantity of items purchased (which we assume here to be two items) and Budget is the amount of income one has to spend.
Step 2. Apply the budget constraint equation to the scenario. In Alphonso’s case, this works out to be:
$Budget= P1 × Q1 + P2× Q2 10 budget=2 per burger × quantity of burgers + 0.50 per bus ticket × quantity of bus tickets10=2 × Qburgers + 0.50 × Qbus ticketsBudget= P1 × Q1 + P2× Q2 10 budget=2 per burger × quantity of burgers + 0.50 per bus ticket × quantity of bus tickets10=2 × Qburgers + 0.50 × Qbus tickets$
Step 3. Using a little algebra, we can turn this into the familiar equation of a line:
$y = b + mxy = b + mx$
For Alphonso, this is:
$10 = 2 × Qburgers + 0.50 × Qbus tickets10 = 2 × Qburgers + 0.50 × Qbus tickets$
Step 4. Simplify the equation. Begin by multiplying both sides of the equation by 2:
$2 × 10 = 2 × 2 × Qburgers + 2 × 0.5 × Qbus tickets 20 = 4 × Qburgers + 1 × Qbus tickets2 × 10 = 2 × 2 × Qburgers + 2 × 0.5 × Qbus tickets 20 = 4 × Qburgers + 1 × Qbus tickets$
Step 5. Subtract one bus ticket from both sides:
$20 – Qbus tickets = 4 × Qburgers20 – Qbus tickets = 4 × Qburgers$
Divide each side by 4 to yield the answer:
$5 – 0.25 × Qbus tickets = QburgersorQburgers = 5 – 0.25 × Qbus tickets5 – 0.25 × Qbus tickets = QburgersorQburgers = 5 – 0.25 × Qbus tickets$
Step 6. Notice that this equation fits the budget constraint in Figure 2.2. The vertical intercept is 5 and the slope is –0.25, just as the equation says. If you plug 20 bus tickets into the equation, you get 0 burgers. If you plug other numbers of bus tickets into the equation, you get the results (see Table 2.1), which are the points on Alphonso’s budget constraint.
Point Quantity of Burgers (at \$2) Quantity of Bus Tickets (at 50 cents)
A 5 0
B 4 4
C 3 8
D 2 12
E 1 16
F 0 20
Table 2.1
Step 7. Notice that the slope of a budget constraint always shows the opportunity cost of the good which is on the horizontal axis. For Alphonso, the slope is −0.25, indicating that for every bus ticket he buys, he must give up 1/4 burger. To phrase it differently, for every four tickets he buys, Alphonso must give up 1 burger.
There are two important observations here. First, the algebraic sign of the slope is negative, which means that the only way to get more of one good is to give up some of the other. Second, we define the slope as the price of bus tickets (whatever is on the horizontal axis in the graph) divided by the price of burgers (whatever is on the vertical axis), in this case \$0.50/\$2 = 0.25. If you want to determine the opportunity cost quickly, just divide the two prices.
Identifying Opportunity Cost
In many cases, it is reasonable to refer to the opportunity cost as the price. If your cousin buys a new bicycle for \$300, then \$300 measures the amount of “other consumption” that he has forsaken. For practical purposes, there may be no special need to identify the specific alternative product or products that he could have bought with that \$300, but sometimes the price as measured in dollars may not accurately capture the true opportunity cost. This problem can loom especially large when costs of time are involved.
For example, consider a boss who decides that all employees will attend a two-day retreat to “build team spirit.” The out-of-pocket monetary cost of the event may involve hiring an outside consulting firm to run the retreat, as well as room and board for all participants. However, an opportunity cost exists as well: during the two days of the retreat, none of the employees are doing any other work.
Attending college is another case where the opportunity cost exceeds the monetary cost. The out-of-pocket costs of attending college include tuition, books, room and board, and other expenses. However, in addition, during the hours that you are attending class and studying, it is impossible to work at a paying job. Thus, college imposes both an out-of-pocket cost and an opportunity cost of lost earnings.
Clear It Up
What is the opportunity cost associated with increased airport security measures?
After the terrorist plane hijackings on September 11, 2001, many steps were proposed to improve air travel safety. For example, the federal government could provide armed “sky marshals” who would travel inconspicuously with the rest of the passengers. The cost of having a sky marshal on every flight would be roughly \$3 billion per year. Retrofitting all U.S. planes with reinforced cockpit doors to make it harder for terrorists to take over the plane would have a price tag of \$450 million. Buying more sophisticated security equipment for airports, like three-dimensional baggage scanners and cameras linked to face recognition software, could cost another \$2 billion.
However, the single biggest cost of greater airline security does not involve spending money. It is the opportunity cost of additional waiting time at the airport. According to the United States Department of Transportation (DOT), there were 895.5 million systemwide (domestic and international) scheduled service passengers in 2015. Since the 9/11 hijackings, security screening has become more intensive, and consequently, the procedure takes longer than in the past. Say that, on average, each air passenger spends an extra 30 minutes in the airport per trip. Economists commonly place a value on time to convert an opportunity cost in time into a monetary figure. Because many air travelers are relatively high-paid business people, conservative estimates set the average price of time for air travelers at \$20 per hour. By these back-of-the-envelope calculations, the opportunity cost of delays in airports could be as much as 800 million × 0.5 hours × \$20/hour, or \$8 billion per year. Clearly, the opportunity costs of waiting time can be just as important as costs that involve direct spending.
In some cases, realizing the opportunity cost can alter behavior. Imagine, for example, that you spend \$8 on lunch every day at work. You may know perfectly well that bringing a lunch from home would cost only \$3 a day, so the opportunity cost of buying lunch at the restaurant is \$5 each day (that is, the \$8 buying lunch costs minus the \$3 your lunch from home would cost). Five dollars each day does not seem to be that much. However, if you project what that adds up to in a year—250 days a year × \$5 per day equals \$1,250, the cost, perhaps, of a decent vacation. If you describe the opportunity cost as “a nice vacation” instead of “\$5 a day,” you might make different choices.
Marginal Decision-Making and Diminishing Marginal Utility
The budget constraint framework helps to emphasize that most choices in the real world are not about getting all of one thing or all of another; that is, they are not about choosing either the point at one end of the budget constraint or else the point all the way at the other end. Instead, most choices involve marginal analysis, which means examining the benefits and costs of choosing a little more or a little less of a good. People naturally compare costs and benefits, but often we look at total costs and total benefits, when the optimal choice necessitates comparing how costs and benefits change from one option to another. You might think of marginal analysis as “change analysis.” Marginal analysis is used throughout economics.
We now turn to the notion of utility. People desire goods and services for the satisfaction or utility those goods and services provide. Utility, as we will see in the chapter on Consumer Choices, is subjective but that does not make it less real. Economists typically assume that the more of some good one consumes (for example, slices of pizza), the more utility one obtains. At the same time, the utility a person receives from consuming the first unit of a good is typically more than the utility received from consuming the fifth or the tenth unit of that same good. When Alphonso chooses between burgers and bus tickets, for example, the first few bus rides that he chooses might provide him with a great deal of utility—perhaps they help him get to a job interview or a doctor’s appointment. However, later bus rides might provide much less utility—they may only serve to kill time on a rainy day. Similarly, the first burger that Alphonso chooses to buy may be on a day when he missed breakfast and is ravenously hungry. However, if Alphonso has multiple burgers every day, the last few burgers may taste pretty boring. The general pattern that consumption of the first few units of any good tends to bring a higher level of utility to a person than consumption of later units is a common pattern. Economists refer to this pattern as the law of diminishing marginal utility, which means that as a person receives more of a good, the additional (or marginal) utility from each additional unit of the good declines. In other words, the first slice of pizza brings more satisfaction than the sixth.
The law of diminishing marginal utility explains why people and societies rarely make all-or-nothing choices. You would not say, “My favorite food is ice cream, so I will eat nothing but ice cream from now on.” Instead, even if you get a very high level of utility from your favorite food, if you ate it exclusively, the additional or marginal utility from those last few servings would not be very high. Similarly, most workers do not say: “I enjoy leisure, so I’ll never work.” Instead, workers recognize that even though some leisure is very nice, a combination of all leisure and no income is not so attractive. The budget constraint framework suggests that when people make choices in a world of scarcity, they will use marginal analysis and think about whether they would prefer a little more or a little less.
A rational consumer would only purchase additional units of some product as long as the marginal utility exceeds the opportunity cost. Suppose Alphonso moves down his budget constraint from Point A to Point B to Point C and further. As he consumes more bus tickets, the marginal utility of bus tickets will diminish, while the opportunity cost, that is, the marginal utility of foregone burgers, will increase. Eventually, the opportunity cost will exceed the marginal utility of an additional bus ticket. If Alphonso is rational, he won’t purchase more bus tickets once the marginal utility just equals the opportunity cost. While we can’t (yet) say exactly how many bus tickets Alphonso will buy, that number is unlikely to be the most he can afford, 20.
Sunk Costs
In the budget constraint framework, all decisions involve what will happen next: that is, what quantities of goods will you consume, how many hours will you work, or how much will you save. These decisions do not look back to past choices. Thus, the budget constraint framework assumes that sunk costs, which are costs that were incurred in the past and cannot be recovered, should not affect the current decision.
Consider the case of Selena, who pays \$8 to see a movie, but after watching the film for 30 minutes, she knows that it is truly terrible. Should she stay and watch the rest of the movie because she paid for the ticket, or should she leave? The money she spent is a sunk cost, and unless the theater manager is sympathetic, Selena will not get a refund. However, staying in the movie still means paying an opportunity cost in time. Her choice is whether to spend the next 90 minutes suffering through a cinematic disaster or to do something—anything—else. The lesson of sunk costs is to forget about the money and time that is irretrievably gone and instead to focus on the marginal costs and benefits of current and future options.
For people and firms alike, dealing with sunk costs can be frustrating. It often means admitting an earlier error in judgment. Many firms, for example, find it hard to give up on a new product that is doing poorly because they spent so much money in creating and launching the product. However, the lesson of sunk costs is to ignore them and make decisions based on what will happen in the future.
From a Model with Two Goods to One of Many Goods
The budget constraint diagram containing just two goods, like most models used in this book, is not realistic. After all, in a modern economy people choose from thousands of goods. However, thinking about a model with many goods is a straightforward extension of what we discussed here. Instead of drawing just one budget constraint, showing the tradeoff between two goods, you can draw multiple budget constraints, showing the possible tradeoffs between many different pairs of goods. In more advanced classes in economics, you would use mathematical equations that include many possible goods and services that can be purchased, together with their quantities and prices, and show how the total spending on all goods and services is limited to the overall budget available. The graph with two goods that we presented here clearly illustrates that every choice has an opportunity cost, which is the point that does carry over to the real world. | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_3e_(OpenStax)/02%3A_Choice_in_a_World_of_Scarcity/2.02%3A_How_Individuals_Make_Choices_Based_on_Their_Budget_Constraint.txt |
Learning Objectives
By the end of this section, you will be able to:
• Interpret production possibilities frontier graphs
• Contrast a budget constraint and a production possibilities frontier
• Explain the relationship between a production possibilities frontier and the law of diminishing returns
• Contrast productive efficiency and allocative efficiency
• Define comparative advantage
Just as individuals cannot have everything they want and must instead make choices, society as a whole cannot have everything it might want, either. This section of the chapter will explain the constraints society faces, using a model called the production possibilities frontier (PPF). There are more similarities than differences between individual choice and social choice. As you read this section, focus on the similarities.
Because society has limited resources (e.g., labor, land, capital, raw materials) at any point in time, there is a limit to the quantities of goods and services it can produce. Suppose a society desires two products, healthcare and education. The production possibilities frontier in Figure 2.3 illustrates this situation.
Figure 2.3 A Healthcare vs. Education Production Possibilities Frontier This production possibilities frontier shows a tradeoff between devoting social resources to healthcare and devoting them to education. At A all resources go to healthcare and at B, most go to healthcare. At D most resources go to education, and at F, all go to education.
Figure 2.3 shows healthcare on the vertical axis and education on the horizontal axis. If the society were to allocate all of its resources to healthcare, it could produce at point A. However, it would not have any resources to produce education. If it were to allocate all of its resources to education, it could produce at point F. Alternatively, the society could choose to produce any combination of healthcare and education on the production possibilities frontier. In effect, the production possibilities frontier plays the same role for society as the budget constraint plays for Alphonso. Society can choose any combination of the two goods on or inside the PPF. However, it does not have enough resources to produce outside the PPF.
Most importantly, the production possibilities frontier clearly shows the tradeoff between healthcare and education. Suppose society has chosen to operate at point B, and it is considering producing more education. Because the PPF is downward sloping from left to right, the only way society can obtain more education is by giving up some healthcare. That is the tradeoff society faces. Suppose it considers moving from point B to point C. What would the opportunity cost be for the additional education? The opportunity cost would be the healthcare society has to forgo. Just as with Alphonso’s budget constraint, the slope of the production possibilities frontier shows the opportunity cost. By now you might be saying, “Hey, this PPF is sounding like the budget constraint.” If so, read the following Clear It Up feature.
Clear It Up
What’s the difference between a budget constraint and a PPF?
There are two major differences between a budget constraint and a production possibilities frontier. The first is the fact that the budget constraint is a straight line. This is because its slope is given by the relative prices of the two goods, which from the point of view of an individual consumer, are fixed, so the slope doesn't change. In contrast, the PPF has a curved shape because of the law of the diminishing returns. Thus, the slope is different at various points on the PPF. The second major difference is the absence of specific numbers on the axes of the PPF. There are no specific numbers because we do not know the exact amount of resources this imaginary economy has, nor do we know how many resources it takes to produce healthcare and how many resources it takes to produce education. If this were a real world example, that data would be available.
Whether or not we have specific numbers, conceptually we can measure the opportunity cost of additional education as society moves from point B to point C on the PPF. We measure the additional education by the horizontal distance between B and C. The foregone healthcare is given by the vertical distance between B and C. The slope of the PPF between B and C is (approximately) the vertical distance (the “rise”) over the horizontal distance (the “run”). This is the opportunity cost of the additional education.
The PPF and the Law of Increasing Opportunity Cost
The budget constraints that we presented earlier in this chapter, showing individual choices about what quantities of goods to consume, were all straight lines. The reason for these straight lines was that the relative prices of the two goods in the consumption budget constraint determined the slope of the budget constraint. However, we drew the production possibilities frontier for healthcare and education as a curved line. Why does the PPF have a different shape?
To understand why the PPF is curved, start by considering point A at the top left-hand side of the PPF. At point A, all available resources are devoted to healthcare and none are left for education. This situation would be extreme and even ridiculous. For example, children are seeing a doctor every day, whether they are sick or not, but not attending school. People are having cosmetic surgery on every part of their bodies, but no high school or college education exists. Now imagine that some of these resources are diverted from healthcare to education, so that the economy is at point B instead of point A. Diverting some resources away from A to B causes relatively little reduction in health because the last few marginal dollars going into healthcare services are not producing much additional gain in health. However, putting those marginal dollars into education, which is completely without resources at point A, can produce relatively large gains. For this reason, the shape of the PPF from A to B is relatively flat, representing a relatively small drop-off in health and a relatively large gain in education.
Now consider the other end, at the lower right, of the production possibilities frontier. Imagine that society starts at choice D, which is devoting nearly all resources to education and very few to healthcare, and moves to point F, which is devoting all spending to education and none to healthcare. For the sake of concreteness, you can imagine that in the movement from D to F, the last few doctors must become high school science teachers, the last few nurses must become school librarians rather than dispensers of vaccinations, and the last few emergency rooms are turned into kindergartens. The gains to education from adding these last few resources to education are very small. However, the opportunity cost lost to health will be fairly large, and thus the slope of the PPF between D and F is steep, showing a large drop in health for only a small gain in education.
The lesson is not that society is likely to make an extreme choice like devoting no resources to education at point A or no resources to health at point F. Instead, the lesson is that the gains from committing additional marginal resources to education depend on how much is already being spent. If on the one hand, very few resources are currently committed to education, then an increase in resources used for education can bring relatively large gains. On the other hand, if a large number of resources are already committed to education, then committing additional resources will bring relatively smaller gains.
This pattern is common enough that economists have given it a name: the law of increasing opportunity cost, which holds that as production of a good or service increases, the marginal opportunity cost of producing it increases as well. This happens because some resources are better suited for producing certain goods and services instead of others. When government spends a certain amount more on reducing crime, for example, the original increase in opportunity cost of reducing crime could be relatively small. However, additional increases typically cause relatively larger increases in the opportunity cost of reducing crime, and paying for enough police and security to reduce crime to nothing at all would be a tremendously high opportunity cost.
The curvature of the production possibilities frontier shows that as we add more resources to education, moving from left to right along the horizontal axis, the original increase in opportunity cost is fairly small, but gradually increases. Thus, the slope of the PPF is relatively flat near the vertical-axis intercept. Conversely, as we add more resources to healthcare, moving from bottom to top on the vertical axis, the original declines in opportunity cost are fairly large, but again gradually diminish. Thus, the slope of the PPF is relatively steep near the horizontal-axis intercept. In this way, the law of increasing opportunity cost produces the outward-bending shape of the production possibilities frontier.
Productive Efficiency and Allocative Efficiency
The study of economics does not presume to tell a society what choice it should make along its production possibilities frontier. In a market-oriented economy with a democratic government, the choice will involve a mixture of decisions by individuals, firms, and government. However, economics can point out that some choices are unambiguously better than others. This observation is based on the concept of efficiency. In everyday usage, efficiency refers to lack of waste. An inefficient machine operates at high cost, while an efficient machine operates at lower cost, because it is not wasting energy or materials. An inefficient organization operates with long delays and high costs, while an efficient organization meets schedules, is focused, and performs within budget.
The production possibilities frontier can illustrate two kinds of efficiency: productive efficiency and allocative efficiency. Figure 2.4 illustrates these ideas using a production possibilities frontier between healthcare and education.
Figure 2.4 Productive and Allocative Efficiency Productive efficiency means it is impossible to produce more of one good without decreasing the quantity that is produced of another good. Thus, all choices along a given PPF like B, C, and D display productive efficiency, but R does not. Allocative efficiency means that the particular mix of goods being produced—that is, the specific choice along the production possibilities frontier—represents the allocation that society most desires.
Productive efficiency means that, given the available inputs and technology, it is impossible to produce more of one good without decreasing the quantity that is produced of another good. All choices on the PPF in Figure 2.4, including A, B, C, D, and F, display productive efficiency. As a firm moves from any one of these choices to any other, either healthcare increases and education decreases or vice versa. However, any choice inside the production possibilities frontier is productively inefficient and wasteful because it is possible to produce more of one good, the other good, or some combination of both goods.
For example, point R is productively inefficient because it is possible at choice C to have more of both goods: education on the horizontal axis is higher at point C than point R (E2 is greater than E1), and healthcare on the vertical axis is also higher at point C than point R (H2 is great than H1).
We can show the particular mix of goods and services produced—that is, the specific combination of selected healthcare and education along the production possibilities frontier—as a ray (line) from the origin to a specific point on the PPF. Output mixes that had more healthcare (and less education) would have a steeper ray, while those with more education (and less healthcare) would have a flatter ray.
Allocative efficiency means that the particular combination of goods and services on the production possibility curve that a society produces represents the combination that society most desires. How to determine what a society desires can be a controversial question, and is usually a discussion in political science, sociology, and philosophy classes as well as in economics. At its most basic, allocative efficiency means producers supply the quantity of each product that consumers demand. Only one of the productively efficient choices will be the allocatively efficient choice for society as a whole.
Why Society Must Choose
In Welcome to Economics! we learned that every society faces the problem of scarcity, where limited resources conflict with unlimited needs and wants. The production possibilities curve illustrates the choices involved in this dilemma.
Every economy faces two situations in which it may be able to expand consumption of all goods. In the first case, a society may discover that it has been using its resources inefficiently, in which case by improving efficiency and producing on the production possibilities frontier, it can have more of all goods (or at least more of some and less of none). In the second case, as resources grow over a period of years (e.g., more labor and more capital), the economy grows. As it does, the production possibilities frontier for a society will tend to shift outward and society will be able to afford more of all goods. In addition, over time, improvements in technology can increase the level of production with given resources, and hence push out the PPF.
However, improvements in productive efficiency take time to discover and implement, and economic growth happens only gradually. Thus, a society must choose between tradeoffs in the present. For government, this process often involves trying to identify where additional spending could do the most good and where reductions in spending would do the least harm. At the individual and firm level, the market economy coordinates a process in which firms seek to produce goods and services in the quantity, quality, and price that people want. However, for both the government and the market economy in the short term, increases in production of one good typically mean offsetting decreases somewhere else in the economy.
The PPF and Comparative Advantage
While every society must choose how much of each good or service it should produce, it does not need to produce every single good it consumes. Often how much of a good a country decides to produce depends on how expensive it is to produce it versus buying it from a different country. As we saw earlier, the curvature of a country’s PPF gives us information about the tradeoff between devoting resources to producing one good versus another. In particular, its slope gives the opportunity cost of producing one more unit of the good in the x-axis in terms of the other good (in the y-axis). Countries tend to have different opportunity costs of producing a specific good, either because of different climates, geography, technology, or skills.
Suppose two countries, the US and Brazil, need to decide how much they will produce of two crops: sugar cane and wheat. Due to its climatic conditions, Brazil can produce quite a bit of sugar cane per acre but not much wheat. Conversely, the U.S. can produce large amounts of wheat per acre, but not much sugar cane. Clearly, Brazil has a lower opportunity cost of producing sugar cane (in terms of wheat) than the U.S. The reverse is also true: the U.S. has a lower opportunity cost of producing wheat than Brazil. We illustrate this by the PPFs of the two countries in Figure 2.5.
Figure 2.5 Production Possibility Frontier for the U.S. and Brazil The U.S. PPF is flatter than the Brazil PPF implying that the opportunity cost of wheat in terms of sugar cane is lower in the U.S. than in Brazil. Conversely, the opportunity cost of sugar cane is lower in Brazil. The U.S. has comparative advantage in wheat and Brazil has comparative advantage in sugar cane.
When a country can produce a good at a lower opportunity cost than another country, we say that this country has a comparative advantage in that good. Comparative advantage is not the same as absolute advantage, which is when a country can produce more of a good. In our example, Brazil has an absolute advantage in sugar cane and the U.S. has an absolute advantage in wheat. One can easily see this with a simple observation of the extreme production points in the PPFs of the two countries. If Brazil devoted all of its resources to producing wheat, it would be producing at point A. If however it had devoted all of its resources to producing sugar cane instead, it would be producing a much larger amount than the U.S., at point B.
The slope of the PPF gives the opportunity cost of producing an additional unit of wheat. While the slope is not constant throughout the PPFs, it is quite apparent that the PPF in Brazil is much steeper than in the U.S., and therefore the opportunity cost of wheat is generally higher in Brazil. In the chapter on International Trade you will learn that countries’ differences in comparative advantage determine which goods they will choose to produce and trade. When countries engage in trade, they specialize in the production of the goods in which they have comparative advantage, and trade part of that production for goods in which they do not have comparative advantage. With trade, manufacturers produce goods where the opportunity cost is lowest, so total production increases, benefiting both trading parties. | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_3e_(OpenStax)/02%3A_Choice_in_a_World_of_Scarcity/2.03%3A_The_Production_Possibilities_Frontier_and_Social_Choices.txt |
Learning Objectives
By the end of this section, you will be able to:
• Analyze arguments against economic approaches to decision-making
• Interpret a tradeoff diagram
• Contrast normative statements and positive statements
It is one thing to understand the economic approach to decision-making and another thing to feel comfortable applying it. The sources of discomfort typically fall into two categories: that people do not act in the way that fits the economic way of thinking, and that even if people did act that way, they should try not to. Let’s consider these arguments in turn.
First Objection: People, Firms, and Society Do Not Act Like This
The economic approach to decision-making seems to require more information than most individuals possess and more careful decision-making than most individuals actually display. After all, do you or any of your friends draw a budget constraint and mutter to yourself about maximizing utility before you head to the shopping mall? Do members of the U.S. Congress contemplate production possibilities frontiers before they vote on the annual budget? The messy ways in which people and societies operate somehow doesn’t look much like neat budget constraints or smoothly curving production possibilities frontiers.
However, the economics approach can be a useful way to analyze and understand the tradeoffs of economic decisions. To appreciate this point, imagine for a moment that you are playing basketball, dribbling to the right, and throwing a bounce-pass to the left to a teammate who is running toward the basket. A physicist or engineer could work out the correct speed and trajectory for the pass, given the different movements involved and the weight and bounciness of the ball. However, when you are playing basketball, you do not perform any of these calculations. You just pass the ball, and if you are a good player, you will do so with high accuracy.
Someone might argue: “The scientist’s formula of the bounce-pass requires a far greater knowledge of physics and far more specific information about speeds of movement and weights than the basketball player actually has, so it must be an unrealistic description of how basketball passes actually occur.” This reaction would be wrongheaded. The fact that a good player can throw the ball accurately because of practice and skill, without making a physics calculation, does not mean that the physics calculation is wrong.
Similarly, from an economic point of view, someone who shops for groceries every week has a great deal of practice with how to purchase the combination of goods that will provide that person with utility, even if the shopper does not phrase decisions in terms of a budget constraint. Government institutions may work imperfectly and slowly, but in general, a democratic form of government feels pressure from voters and social institutions to make the choices that are most widely preferred by people in that society. Thus, when thinking about the economic actions of groups of people, firms, and society, it is reasonable, as a first approximation, to analyze them with the tools of economic analysis. For more on this, read about behavioral economics in the chapter on Consumer Choices.
Second Objection: People, Firms, and Society Should Not Act This Way
The economics approach portrays people as self-interested. For some critics of this approach, even if self-interest is an accurate description of how people behave, these behaviors are not moral. Instead, the critics argue that people should be taught to care more deeply about others. Economists offer several answers to these concerns.
First, economics is not a form of moral instruction. Rather, it seeks to describe economic behavior as it actually exists. Philosophers draw a distinction between positive statements, which describe the world as it is, and normative statements, which describe how the world should be. Positive statements are factual. They may be true or false, but we can test them, at least in principle. Normative statements are subjective questions of opinion. We cannot test them since we cannot prove opinions to be true or false. They just are opinions based on one's values. For example, an economist could analyze a proposed subway system in a certain city. If the expected benefits exceed the costs, he concludes that the project is worthy—an example of positive analysis. Another economist argues for extended unemployment compensation during the COVID-19 pandemic because a rich country like the United States should take care of its less fortunate citizens—an example of normative analysis.
Even if the line between positive and normative statements is not always crystal clear, economic analysis does try to remain rooted in the study of the actual people who inhabit the actual economy. Fortunately however, the assumption that individuals are purely self-interested is a simplification about human nature. In fact, we need to look no further than to Adam Smith, the very father of modern economics to find evidence of this. The opening sentence of his book, The Theory of Moral Sentiments, puts it very clearly: “How selfish soever man may be supposed, there are evidently some principles in his nature, which interest him in the fortune of others, and render their happiness necessary to him, though he derives nothing from it except the pleasure of seeing it.” Clearly, individuals are both self-interested and altruistic.
Second, we can label self-interested behavior and profit-seeking with other names, such as personal choice and freedom. The ability to make personal choices about buying, working, and saving is an important personal freedom. Some people may choose high-pressure, high-paying jobs so that they can earn and spend considerable amounts of money on themselves. Others may allocate large portions of their earnings to charity or spend it on their friends and family. Others may devote themselves to a career that can require much time, energy, and expertise but does not offer high financial rewards, like being an elementary school teacher or a social worker. Still others may choose a job that does consume much of their time or provide a high level of income, but still leaves time for family, friends, and contemplation. Some people may prefer to work for a large company; others might want to start their own business. People’s freedom to make their own economic choices has a moral value worth respecting.
Clear It Up
Is a diagram by any other name the same?
When you study economics, you may feel buried under an avalanche of diagrams. Your goal should be to recognize the common underlying logic and pattern of the diagrams, not to memorize each one.
This chapter uses only one basic diagram, although we present it with different sets of labels. The consumption budget constraint and the production possibilities frontier for society, as a whole, are the same basic diagram. Figure 2.6 shows an individual budget constraint and a production possibilities frontier for two goods, Good 1 and Good 2. The tradeoff diagram always illustrates three basic themes: scarcity, tradeoffs, and economic efficiency.
The first theme is scarcity. It is not feasible to have unlimited amounts of both goods. Even if the budget constraint or a PPF shifts, scarcity remains—just at a different level. The second theme is tradeoffs. As depicted in the budget constraint or the production possibilities frontier, it is necessary to forgo some of one good to gain more of the other good. The details of this tradeoff vary. In a budget constraint we determine, the tradeoff is determined by the relative prices of the goods: that is, the relative price of two goods in the consumption choice budget constraint. These tradeoffs appear as a straight line. However, a curved line represents the tradeoffs in many production possibilities frontiers because the law of diminishing returns holds that as we add resources to an area, the marginal gains tend to diminish. Regardless of the specific shape, tradeoffs remain.
The third theme is economic efficiency, or getting the most benefit from scarce resources. All choices on the production possibilities frontier show productive efficiency because in such cases, there is no way to increase the quantity of one good without decreasing the quantity of the other. Similarly, when an individual makes a choice along a budget constraint, there is no way to increase the quantity of one good without decreasing the quantity of the other. The choice on a production possibilities set that is socially preferred, or the choice on an individual’s budget constraint that is personally preferred, will display allocative efficiency.
The basic budget constraint/production possibilities frontier diagram will recur throughout this book. Some examples include using these tradeoff diagrams to analyze trade, environmental protection and economic output, equality of incomes and economic output, and the macroeconomic tradeoff between consumption and investment. Do not allow the different labels to confuse you. The budget constraint/production possibilities frontier diagram is always just a tool for thinking carefully about scarcity, tradeoffs, and efficiency in a particular situation.
Figure 2.6 The Tradeoff Diagram Both the individual opportunity set (or budget constraint) and the social production possibilities frontier show the constraints under which individual consumers and society as a whole operate. Both diagrams show the tradeoff in choosing more of one good at the cost of less of the other.
Third, self-interested behavior can lead to positive social results. For example, when people work hard to make a living, they create economic output. Consumers who are looking for the best deals will encourage businesses to offer goods and services that meet their needs. Adam Smith, writing in The Wealth of Nations, named this property the invisible hand. In describing how consumers and producers interact in a market economy, Smith wrote:
Every individual…generally, indeed, neither intends to promote the public interest, nor knows how much he is promoting it. By preferring the support of domestic to that of foreign industry, he intends only his own security; and by directing that industry in such a manner as its produce may be of the greatest value, he intends only his own gain. And he is in this, as in many other cases, led by an invisible hand to promote an end which was no part of his intention…By pursuing his own interest he frequently promotes that of the society more effectually than when he really intends to promote it.
The metaphor of the invisible hand suggests the remarkable possibility that broader social good can emerge from selfish individual actions.
Fourth, even people who focus on their own self-interest in the economic part of their life often set aside their own narrow self-interest in other parts of life. For example, you might focus on your own self-interest when asking your employer for a raise or negotiating to buy a car. Then you might turn around and focus on other people when you volunteer to read stories at the local library, help a friend move to a new apartment, or donate money to a charity. Self-interest is a reasonable starting point for analyzing many economic decisions, without needing to imply that people never do anything that is not in their own immediate self-interest.
Bring It Home
Choices ... to What Degree?
What have we learned? We know that scarcity impacts all the choices we make. An economist might argue that people do not obtain a bachelor’s or master’s degree because they do not have the resources to make those choices or because their incomes are too low and/or the price of these degrees is too high. A bachelor’s or a master’s degree may not be available in their opportunity set.
The price of these degrees may be too high not only because the actual price, college tuition (and perhaps room and board), is too high. An economist might also say that for many people, the full opportunity cost of a bachelor’s or a master’s degree is too high. For these people, they are unwilling or unable to make the tradeoff of forfeiting years of working, and earning an income, to earn a degree.
Finally, the statistics we introduced at the start of the chapter reveal information about intertemporal choices. An economist might say that people choose not to obtain a college degree because they may have to borrow money to attend college, and the interest they have to pay on that loan in the future will affect their decisions today. Also, it could be that some people have a preference for current consumption over future consumption, so they choose to work now at a lower salary and consume now, rather than postponing that consumption until after they graduate college. | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_3e_(OpenStax)/02%3A_Choice_in_a_World_of_Scarcity/2.04%3A_Confronting_Objections_to_the_Economic_Approach.txt |
allocative efficiency
when the mix of goods produced represents the mix that society most desires
budget constraint
all possible consumption combinations of goods that someone can afford, given the prices of goods, when all income is spent; the boundary of the opportunity set
comparative advantage
when a country can produce a good at a lower cost in terms of other goods; or, when a country has a lower opportunity cost of production
invisible hand
Adam Smith's concept that individuals' self-interested behavior can lead to positive social outcomes
law of diminishing marginal utility
as we consume more of a good or service, the utility we get from additional units of the good or service tends to become smaller than what we received from earlier units
law of diminishing returns
as we add additional increments of resources to producing a good or service, the marginal benefit from those additional increments will decline
marginal analysis
examination of decisions on the margin, meaning a little more or a little less from the status quo
normative statement
statement which describes how the world should be
opportunity cost
measures cost by what we give up/forfeit in exchange; opportunity cost measures the value of the forgone alternative
opportunity set
all possible combinations of consumption that someone can afford given the prices of goods and the individual’s income
positive statement
statement which describes the world as it is
production possibilities frontier (PPF)
a diagram that shows the productively efficient combinations of two products that an economy can produce given the resources it has available.
productive efficiency
when it is impossible to produce more of one good (or service) without decreasing the quantity produced of another good (or service)
sunk costs
costs that we make in the past that we cannot recover
utility
satisfaction, usefulness, or value one obtains from consuming goods and services
2.06: Key Concepts and Summary
2.1 How Individuals Make Choices Based on Their Budget Constraint
Economists see the real world as one of scarcity: that is, a world in which people’s desires exceed what is possible. As a result, economic behavior involves tradeoffs in which individuals, firms, and society must forgo something that they desire to obtain things that they desire more. Individuals face the tradeoff of what quantities of goods and services to consume. The budget constraint, which is the frontier of the opportunity set, illustrates the range of available choices. The relative price of the choices determines the slope of the budget constraint. Choices beyond the budget constraint are not affordable.
Opportunity cost measures cost by what we forgo in exchange. Sometimes we can measure opportunity cost in money, but it is often useful to consider time as well, or to measure it in terms of the actual resources that we must forfeit.
Most economic decisions and tradeoffs are not all-or-nothing. Instead, they involve marginal analysis, which means they are about decisions on the margin, involving a little more or a little less. The law of diminishing marginal utility points out that as a person receives more of something—whether it is a specific good or another resource—the additional marginal gains tend to become smaller. Because sunk costs occurred in the past and cannot be recovered, they should be disregarded in making current decisions.
2.2 The Production Possibilities Frontier and Social Choices
A production possibilities frontier defines the set of choices society faces for the combinations of goods and services it can produce given the resources and the technology that are available. The shape of the PPF is typically curved outward, rather than straight. Choices outside the PPF are unattainable and choices inside the PPF are wasteful. Over time, a growing economy will tend to shift the PPF outwards.
The law of diminishing returns holds that as increments of additional resources are devoted to producing something, the marginal increase in output will become increasingly smaller. All choices along a production possibilities frontier display productive efficiency; that is, it is impossible to use society’s resources to produce more of one good without decreasing production of the other good. The specific choice along a production possibilities frontier that reflects the mix of goods society prefers is the choice with allocative efficiency. The curvature of the PPF is likely to differ by country, which results in different countries having comparative advantage in different goods. Total production can increase if countries specialize in the goods in which they have comparative advantage and trade some of their production for the remaining goods.
2.3 Confronting Objections to the Economic Approach
The economic way of thinking provides a useful approach to understanding human behavior. Economists make the careful distinction between positive statements, which describe the world as it is, and normative statements, which describe how the world should be. Even when economics analyzes the gains and losses from various events or policies, and thus draws normative conclusions about how the world should be, the analysis of economics is rooted in a positive analysis of how people, firms, and governments actually behave, not how they should behave. | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_3e_(OpenStax)/02%3A_Choice_in_a_World_of_Scarcity/2.05%3A_Key_Terms.txt |
1.
Suppose Alphonso’s town raised the price of bus tickets from \$0.50 per trip to \$1 per trip (while the price of burgers stayed at \$2 and his budget remained \$10 per week.) Draw Alphonso’s new budget constraint. What happens to the opportunity cost of bus tickets?
2.
Return to the example in Figure 2.4. Suppose there is an improvement in medical technology that enables more healthcare with the same amount of resources. How would this affect the production possibilities curve and, in particular, how would it affect the opportunity cost of education?
3.
Could a nation be producing in a way that is allocatively efficient, but productively inefficient?
4.
What are the similarities between a consumer’s budget constraint and society’s production possibilities frontier, not just graphically but analytically?
5.
Individuals may not act in the rational, calculating way described by the economic model of decision making, measuring utility and costs at the margin, but can you make a case that they behave approximately that way?
6.
Would an op-ed piece in a newspaper urging the adoption of a particular economic policy be a positive or normative statement?
7.
Would a research study on the effects of soft drink consumption on children’s cognitive development be a positive or normative statement?
2.08: Review Questions
8.
Explain why scarcity leads to tradeoffs.
9.
Explain why individuals make choices that are directly on the budget constraint, rather than inside the budget constraint or outside it.
10.
What is comparative advantage?
11.
What does a production possibilities frontier illustrate?
12.
Why is a production possibilities frontier typically drawn as a curve, rather than a straight line?
13.
Explain why societies cannot make a choice above their production possibilities frontier and should not make a choice below it.
14.
What are diminishing marginal returns?
15.
What is productive efficiency? Allocative efficiency?
16.
What is the difference between a positive and a normative statement?
17.
Is the economic model of decision-making intended as a literal description of how individuals, firms, and the governments actually make decisions?
18.
What are four responses to the claim that people should not behave in the way described in this chapter?
2.09: Critical Thinking Questions
19.
Suppose Alphonso’s town raises the price of bus tickets from \$0.50 to \$1 and the price of burgers rises from \$2 to \$4. Why is the opportunity cost of bus tickets unchanged? Suppose Alphonso’s weekly spending money increases from \$10 to \$20. How is his budget constraint affected from all three changes? Explain.
20.
During the Second World War, Germany’s factories were decimated. It also suffered many human casualties, both soldiers and civilians. How did the war affect Germany’s production possibilities curve?
21.
It is clear that productive inefficiency is a waste since resources are used in a way that produces less goods and services than a nation is capable of. Why is allocative inefficiency also wasteful?
22.
What assumptions about the economy must be true for the invisible hand to work? To what extent are those assumptions valid in the real world?
23.
Do economists have any particular expertise at making normative arguments? In other words, they have expertise at making positive statements (i.e., what will happen) about some economic policy, for example, but do they have special expertise to judge whether or not the policy should be undertaken?
2.10: Problems
Use this information to answer the following 4 questions: Jade has a weekly budget of \$24, which she likes to spend on magazines and pies.
24.
If the price of a magazine is \$4 each, what is the maximum number of magazines she could buy in a week?
25.
If the price of a pie is \$12, what is the maximum number of pies she could buy in a week?
26.
Draw Jade's budget constraint with pies on the horizontal axis and magazines on the vertical axis. What is the slope of the budget constraint?
27.
What is Jade's opportunity cost of purchasing a pie? | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_3e_(OpenStax)/02%3A_Choice_in_a_World_of_Scarcity/2.07%3A_Self-Check_Questions.txt |
Thumbnail: The price P of a product is determined by a balance between production at each price (supply S) and the desires of those with purchasing power at each price (demand D). The diagram shows a positive shift in demand from D1 to D2, resulting in an increase in price (P) and quantity sold (Q) of the product. (CC BY-SA 3.0; Paweł Zdziarski via Wikipedia)
03: Demand and Supply
Figure 3.1 Farmer’s Market Organic vegetables and fruits that are grown and sold within a specific geographical region should, in theory, cost less than conventional produce because the transportation costs are less. That is not, however, usually the case. (Credit: modification of "Old Farmers' Market" by NatalieMaynor/Flickr, CC BY 2.0)
Chapter Objectives
In this chapter, you will learn about:
• Demand, Supply, and Equilibrium in Markets for Goods and Services
• Shifts in Demand and Supply for Goods and Services
• Changes in Equilibrium Price and Quantity: The Four-Step Process
• Price Ceilings and Price Floors
Bring It Home
Why Can We Not Get Enough of Organic Foods?
Organic food is increasingly popular, not just in the United States, but worldwide. At one time, consumers had to go to specialty stores or farmers' markets to find organic produce. Now it is available in most grocery stores. In short, organic has become part of the mainstream.
Ever wonder why organic food costs more than conventional food? Why, say, does an organic Fuji apple cost \$2.75 a pound, while its conventional counterpart costs \$1.72 a pound? The same price relationship is true for just about every organic product on the market. If many organic foods are locally grown, would they not take less time to get to market and therefore be cheaper? What are the forces that keep those prices from coming down? Turns out those forces have quite a bit to do with this chapter’s topic: demand and supply.
An auction bidder pays thousands of dollars for a dress Whitney Houston wore. A collector spends a small fortune for a few drawings by John Lennon. People usually react to purchases like these in two ways: their jaw drops because they think these are high prices to pay for such goods or they think these are rare, desirable items and the amount paid seems right.
Link It Up
Visit this website to read a list of bizarre items that have been purchased for their ties to celebrities. These examples represent an interesting facet of demand and supply.
When economists talk about prices, they are less interested in making judgments than in gaining a practical understanding of what determines prices and why prices change. Consider a price most of us contend with weekly: that of a gallon of gas. Why was the average price of gasoline in the United States \$3.16 per gallon in June of 2020? Why did the price for gasoline fall sharply to \$2.42 per gallon by January of 2021? To explain these price movements, economists focus on the determinants of what gasoline buyers are willing to pay and what gasoline sellers are willing to accept.
As it turns out, the price of gasoline in June of any given year is nearly always higher than the price in January of that same year. Over recent decades, gasoline prices in midsummer have averaged about 10 cents per gallon more than their midwinter low. The likely reason is that people drive more in the summer, and are also willing to pay more for gas, but that does not explain how steeply gas prices fell. Other factors were at work during those 18 months, such as increases in supply and decreases in the demand for crude oil.
This chapter introduces the economic model of demand and supply—one of the most powerful models in all of economics. The discussion here begins by examining how demand and supply determine the price and the quantity sold in markets for goods and services, and how changes in demand and supply lead to changes in prices and quantities. | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_3e_(OpenStax)/03%3A_Demand_and_Supply/3.01%3A_Introduction_to_Demand_and_Supply.txt |
Learning Objectives
By the end of this section, you will be able to:
• Explain demand, quantity demanded, and the law of demand
• Explain supply, quantity supplied, and the law of supply
• Identify a demand curve and a supply curve
• Explain equilibrium, equilibrium price, and equilibrium quantity
First let’s first focus on what economists mean by demand, what they mean by supply, and then how demand and supply interact in a market.
Demand for Goods and Services
Economists use the term demand to refer to the amount of some good or service consumers are willing and able to purchase at each price. Demand is fundamentally based on needs and wants—if you have no need or want for something, you won't buy it. While a consumer may be able to differentiate between a need and a want, from an economist’s perspective they are the same thing. Demand is also based on ability to pay. If you cannot pay for it, you have no effective demand. By this definition, a person who does not have a drivers license has no effective demand for a car.
What a buyer pays for a unit of the specific good or service is called price. The total number of units that consumers would purchase at that price is called the quantity demanded. A rise in price of a good or service almost always decreases the quantity demanded of that good or service. Conversely, a fall in price will increase the quantity demanded. When the price of a gallon of gasoline increases, for example, people look for ways to reduce their consumption by combining several errands, commuting by carpool or mass transit, or taking weekend or vacation trips closer to home. Economists call this inverse relationship between price and quantity demanded the law of demand. The law of demand assumes that all other variables that affect demand (which we explain in the next module) are held constant.
We can show an example from the market for gasoline in a table or a graph. Economist call a table that shows the quantity demanded at each price, such as Table 3.1, a demand schedule. In this case we measure price in dollars per gallon of gasoline. We measure the quantity demanded in millions of gallons over some time period (for example, per day or per year) and over some geographic area (like a state or a country). A demand curve shows the relationship between price and quantity demanded on a graph like Figure 3.2, with quantity on the horizontal axis and the price per gallon on the vertical axis. (Note that this is an exception to the normal rule in mathematics that the independent variable (x) goes on the horizontal axis and the dependent variable (y) goes on the vertical axis. Economics is not math.)
Table 3.1 shows the demand schedule and the graph in Figure 3.2 shows the demand curve. These are two ways to describe the same relationship between price and quantity demanded.
Price (per gallon) Quantity Demanded (millions of gallons)
\$1.00 800
\$1.20 700
\$1.40 600
\$1.60 550
\$1.80 500
\$2.00 460
\$2.20 420
Table 3.1 Price and Quantity Demanded of Gasoline
Figure 3.2 A Demand Curve for Gasoline The demand schedule shows that as price rises, quantity demanded decreases, and vice versa. We graph these points, and the line connecting them is the demand curve (D). The downward slope of the demand curve again illustrates the law of demand—the inverse relationship between prices and quantity demanded.
Demand curves will appear somewhat different for each product. They may appear relatively steep or flat, or they may be straight or curved. Nearly all demand curves share the fundamental similarity that they slope down from left to right. Demand curves embody the law of demand: As the price increases, the quantity demanded decreases, and conversely, as the price decreases, the quantity demanded increases.
Confused about these different types of demand? Read the next Clear It Up feature.
Clear It Up
Is demand the same as quantity demanded?
In economic terminology, demand is not the same as quantity demanded. When economists talk about demand, they mean the relationship between a range of prices and the quantities demanded at those prices, as illustrated by a demand curve or a demand schedule. When economists talk about quantity demanded, they mean only a certain point on the demand curve, or one quantity on the demand schedule. In short, demand refers to the curve and quantity demanded refers to a (specific) point on the curve.
Supply of Goods and Services
When economists talk about supply, they mean the amount of some good or service a producer is willing to supply at each price. Price is what the producer receives for selling one unit of a good or service. A rise in price almost always leads to an increase in the quantity supplied of that good or service, while a fall in price will decrease the quantity supplied. When the price of gasoline rises, for example, it encourages profit-seeking firms to take several actions: expand exploration for oil reserves; drill for more oil; invest in more pipelines and oil tankers to bring the oil to plants for refining into gasoline; build new oil refineries; purchase additional pipelines and trucks to ship the gasoline to gas stations; and open more gas stations or keep existing gas stations open longer hours. Economists call this positive relationship between price and quantity supplied—that a higher price leads to a higher quantity supplied and a lower price leads to a lower quantity supplied—the law of supply. The law of supply assumes that all other variables that affect supply (to be explained in the next module) are held constant.
Still unsure about the different types of supply? See the following Clear It Up feature.
Clear It Up
Is supply the same as quantity supplied?
In economic terminology, supply is not the same as quantity supplied. When economists refer to supply, they mean the relationship between a range of prices and the quantities supplied at those prices, a relationship that we can illustrate with a supply curve or a supply schedule. When economists refer to quantity supplied, they mean only a certain point on the supply curve, or one quantity on the supply schedule. In short, supply refers to the curve and quantity supplied refers to a (specific) point on the curve.
Figure 3.3 illustrates the law of supply, again using the market for gasoline as an example. Like demand, we can illustrate supply using a table or a graph. A supply schedule is a table, like Table 3.2, that shows the quantity supplied at a range of different prices. Again, we measure price in dollars per gallon of gasoline and we measure quantity supplied in millions of gallons. A supply curve is a graphic illustration of the relationship between price, shown on the vertical axis, and quantity, shown on the horizontal axis. The supply schedule and the supply curve are just two different ways of showing the same information. Notice that the horizontal and vertical axes on the graph for the supply curve are the same as for the demand curve.
Figure 3.3 A Supply Curve for Gasoline The supply schedule is the table that shows quantity supplied of gasoline at each price. As price rises, quantity supplied also increases, and vice versa. The supply curve (S) is created by graphing the points from the supply schedule and then connecting them. The upward slope of the supply curve illustrates the law of supply—that a higher price leads to a higher quantity supplied, and vice versa.
Price (per gallon) Quantity Supplied (millions of gallons)
\$1.00 500
\$1.20 550
\$1.40 600
\$1.60 640
\$1.80 680
\$2.00 700
\$2.20 720
Table 3.2 Price and Supply of Gasoline
The shape of supply curves will vary somewhat according to the product: steeper, flatter, straighter, or curved. Nearly all supply curves, however, share a basic similarity: they slope up from left to right and illustrate the law of supply: as the price rises, say, from \$1.00 per gallon to \$2.20 per gallon, the quantity supplied increases from 500 gallons to 720 gallons. Conversely, as the price falls, the quantity supplied decreases.
Equilibrium—Where Demand and Supply Intersect
Because the graphs for demand and supply curves both have price on the vertical axis and quantity on the horizontal axis, the demand curve and supply curve for a particular good or service can appear on the same graph. Together, demand and supply determine the price and the quantity that will be bought and sold in a market.
Figure 3.4 illustrates the interaction of demand and supply in the market for gasoline. The demand curve (D) is identical to Figure 3.2. The supply curve (S) is identical to Figure 3.3. Table 3.3 contains the same information in tabular form.
Figure 3.4 Demand and Supply for Gasoline The demand curve (D) and the supply curve (S) intersect at the equilibrium point E, with a price of \$1.40 and a quantity of 600. The equilibrium price is the only price where quantity demanded is equal to quantity supplied. At a price above equilibrium like \$1.80, quantity supplied exceeds the quantity demanded, so there is excess supply. At a price below equilibrium such as \$1.20, quantity demanded exceeds quantity supplied, so there is excess demand.
Price (per gallon) Quantity demanded (millions of gallons) Quantity supplied (millions of gallons)
\$1.00 800 500
\$1.20 700 550
\$1.40 600 600
\$1.60 550 640
\$1.80 500 680
\$2.00 460 700
\$2.20 420 720
Table 3.3 Price, Quantity Demanded, and Quantity Supplied
Remember this: When two lines on a diagram cross, this intersection usually means something. The point where the supply curve (S) and the demand curve (D) cross, designated by point E in Figure 3.4, is called the equilibrium. The equilibrium price is the only price where the plans of consumers and the plans of producers agree—that is, where the amount of the product consumers want to buy (quantity demanded) is equal to the amount producers want to sell (quantity supplied). Economists call this common quantity the equilibrium quantity. At any other price, the quantity demanded does not equal the quantity supplied, so the market is not in equilibrium at that price.
In Figure 3.4, the equilibrium price is \$1.40 per gallon of gasoline and the equilibrium quantity is 600 million gallons. If you had only the demand and supply schedules, and not the graph, you could find the equilibrium by looking for the price level on the tables where the quantity demanded and the quantity supplied are equal.
The word “equilibrium” means “balance.” If a market is at its equilibrium price and quantity, then it has no reason to move away from that point. However, if a market is not at equilibrium, then economic pressures arise to move the market toward the equilibrium price and the equilibrium quantity.
Imagine, for example, that the price of a gallon of gasoline was above the equilibrium price—that is, instead of \$1.40 per gallon, the price is \$1.80 per gallon. The dashed horizontal line at the price of \$1.80 in Figure 3.4 illustrates this above-equilibrium price. At this higher price, the quantity demanded drops from 600 to 500. This decline in quantity reflects how consumers react to the higher price by finding ways to use less gasoline.
Moreover, at this higher price of \$1.80, the quantity of gasoline supplied rises from 600 to 680, as the higher price makes it more profitable for gasoline producers to expand their output. Now, consider how quantity demanded and quantity supplied are related at this above-equilibrium price. Quantity demanded has fallen to 500 gallons, while quantity supplied has risen to 680 gallons. In fact, at any above-equilibrium price, the quantity supplied exceeds the quantity demanded. We call this an excess supply or a surplus.
With a surplus, gasoline accumulates at gas stations, in tanker trucks, in pipelines, and at oil refineries. This accumulation puts pressure on gasoline sellers. If a surplus remains unsold, those firms involved in making and selling gasoline are not receiving enough cash to pay their workers and to cover their expenses. In this situation, some producers and sellers will want to cut prices, because it is better to sell at a lower price than not to sell at all. Once some sellers start cutting prices, others will follow to avoid losing sales. These price reductions in turn will stimulate a higher quantity demanded. Therefore, if the price is above the equilibrium level, incentives built into the structure of demand and supply will create pressures for the price to fall toward the equilibrium.
Now suppose that the price is below its equilibrium level at \$1.20 per gallon, as the dashed horizontal line at this price in Figure 3.4 shows. At this lower price, the quantity demanded increases from 600 to 700 as drivers take longer trips, spend more minutes warming up the car in the driveway in wintertime, stop sharing rides to work, and buy larger cars that get fewer miles to the gallon. However, the below-equilibrium price reduces gasoline producers’ incentives to produce and sell gasoline, and the quantity supplied falls from 600 to 550.
When the price is below equilibrium, there is excess demand, or a shortage—that is, at the given price the quantity demanded, which has been stimulated by the lower price, now exceeds the quantity supplied, which has been depressed by the lower price. In this situation, eager gasoline buyers mob the gas stations, only to find many stations running short of fuel. Oil companies and gas stations recognize that they have an opportunity to make higher profits by selling what gasoline they have at a higher price. As a result, the price rises toward the equilibrium level. Read Demand, Supply, and Efficiency for more discussion on the importance of the demand and supply model. | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_3e_(OpenStax)/03%3A_Demand_and_Supply/3.02%3A_Demand_Supply_and_Equilibrium_in_Markets_for_Goods_and_Services.txt |
Learning Objectives
By the end of this section, you will be able to:
• Identify factors that affect demand
• Graph demand curves and demand shifts
• Identify factors that affect supply
• Graph supply curves and supply shifts
The previous module explored how price affects the quantity demanded and the quantity supplied. The result was the demand curve and the supply curve. Price, however, is not the only factor that influences buyers’ and sellers’ decisions. For example, how is demand for vegetarian food affected if, say, health concerns cause more consumers to avoid eating meat? How is the supply of diamonds affected if diamond producers discover several new diamond mines? What are the major factors, in addition to the price, that influence demand or supply?
Link It Up
Visit this website to read a brief note on how marketing strategies can influence supply and demand of products.
What Factors Affect Demand?
We defined demand as the amount of some product a consumer is willing and able to purchase at each price. That suggests at least two factors that affect demand. Willingness to purchase suggests a desire, based on what economists call tastes and preferences. If you neither need nor want something, you will not buy it, and if you really like something, you will buy more of it than someone who does not share your strong preference for it. Ability to purchase suggests that income is important. Professors are usually able to afford better housing and transportation than students, because they have more income. Prices of related goods can affect demand also. If you need a new car, the price of a Honda may affect your demand for a Ford. Finally, the size or composition of the population can affect demand. The more children a family has, the greater their demand for clothing. The more driving-age children a family has, the greater their demand for car insurance, and the less for diapers and baby formula.
These factors matter for both individual and market demand as a whole. Exactly how do these various factors affect demand, and how do we show the effects graphically? To answer those questions, we need the ceteris paribus assumption.
The Ceteris Paribus Assumption
A demand curve or a supply curve is a relationship between two, and only two, variables: quantity on the horizontal axis and price on the vertical axis. The assumption behind a demand curve or a supply curve is that no relevant economic factors, other than the product’s price, are changing. Economists call this assumption ceteris paribus, a Latin phrase meaning “other things being equal.” Any given demand or supply curve is based on the ceteris paribus assumption that all else is held equal. A demand curve or a supply curve is a relationship between two, and only two, variables when all other variables are kept constant. If all else is not held equal, then the laws of supply and demand will not necessarily hold, as the following Clear It Up feature shows.
Clear It Up
When does ceteris paribus apply?
We typically apply ceteris paribus when we observe how changes in price affect demand or supply, but we can apply ceteris paribus more generally. In the real world, demand and supply depend on more factors than just price. For example, a consumer’s demand depends on income and a producer’s supply depends on the cost of producing the product. How can we analyze the effect on demand or supply if multiple factors are changing at the same time—say price rises and income falls? The answer is that we examine the changes one at a time, assuming the other factors are held constant.
For example, we can say that an increase in the price reduces the amount consumers will buy (assuming income, and anything else that affects demand, is unchanged). Additionally, a decrease in income reduces the amount consumers can afford to buy (assuming price, and anything else that affects demand, is unchanged). This is what the ceteris paribus assumption really means. In this particular case, after we analyze each factor separately, we can combine the results. The amount consumers buy falls for two reasons: first because of the higher price and second because of the lower income.
How Does Income Affect Demand?
Let’s use income as an example of how factors other than price affect demand. Figure 3.5 shows the initial demand for automobiles as D0. At point Q, for example, if the price is \$20,000 per car, the quantity of cars demanded is 18 million. D0 also shows how the quantity of cars demanded would change as a result of a higher or lower price. For example, if the price of a car rose to \$22,000, the quantity demanded would decrease to 17 million, at point R.
The original demand curve D0, like every demand curve, is based on the ceteris paribus assumption that no other economically relevant factors change. Now imagine that the economy expands in a way that raises the incomes of many people, making cars more affordable. How will this affect demand? How can we show this graphically?
Return to Figure 3.5. The price of cars is still \$20,000, but with higher incomes, the quantity demanded has now increased to 20 million cars, shown at point S. As a result of the higher income levels, the demand curve shifts to the right to the new demand curve D1, indicating an increase in demand. Table 3.4 shows clearly that this increased demand would occur at every price, not just the original one.
Figure 3.5 Shifts in Demand: A Car Example Increased demand means that at every given price, the quantity demanded is higher, so that the demand curve shifts to the right from D0 to D1. Decreased demand means that at every given price, the quantity demanded is lower, so that the demand curve shifts to the left from D0 to D2.
Price Decrease to D2 Original Quantity Demanded D0 Increase to D1
\$16,000 17.6 million 22.0 million 24.0 million
\$18,000 16.0 million 20.0 million 22.0 million
\$20,000 14.4 million 18.0 million 20.0 million
\$22,000 13.6 million 17.0 million 19.0 million
\$24,000 13.2 million 16.5 million 18.5 million
\$26,000 12.8 million 16.0 million 18.0 million
Table 3.4 Price and Demand Shifts: A Car Example
Now, imagine that the economy slows down so that many people lose their jobs or work fewer hours, reducing their incomes. In this case, the decrease in income would lead to a lower quantity of cars demanded at every given price, and the original demand curve D0 would shift left to D2. The shift from D0 to D2 represents such a decrease in demand: At any given price level, the quantity demanded is now lower. In this example, a price of \$20,000 means 18 million cars sold along the original demand curve, but only 14.4 million sold after demand fell.
When a demand curve shifts, it does not mean that the quantity demanded by every individual buyer changes by the same amount. In this example, not everyone would have higher or lower income and not everyone would buy or not buy an additional car. Instead, a shift in a demand curve captures a pattern for the market as a whole.
In the previous section, we argued that higher income causes greater demand at every price. This is true for most goods and services. For some—luxury cars, vacations in Europe, and fine jewelry—the effect of a rise in income can be especially pronounced. A product whose demand rises when income rises, and vice versa, is called a normal good. A few exceptions to this pattern do exist. As incomes rise, many people will buy fewer generic brand groceries and more name brand groceries. They are less likely to buy used cars and more likely to buy new cars. They will be less likely to rent an apartment and more likely to own a home. A product whose demand falls when income rises, and vice versa, is called an inferior good. In other words, when income increases, the demand curve shifts to the left.
Other Factors That Shift Demand Curves
Income is not the only factor that causes a shift in demand. Other factors that change demand include tastes and preferences, the composition or size of the population, the prices of related goods, and even expectations. A change in any one of the underlying factors that determine what quantity people are willing to buy at a given price will cause a shift in demand. Graphically, the new demand curve lies either to the right (an increase) or to the left (a decrease) of the original demand curve. Let’s look at these factors.
Changing Tastes or Preferences
From 1980 to 2021, the per-person consumption of chicken by Americans rose from 47 pounds per year to 97 pounds per year, and consumption of beef fell from 76 pounds per year to 59 pounds per year, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). Changes like these are largely due to movements in taste, which change the quantity of a good demanded at every price: that is, they shift the demand curve for that good, rightward for chicken and leftward for beef.
Changes in the Composition of the Population
The proportion of elderly citizens in the United States population is rising. It rose from 9.8% in 1970 to 12.6% in 2000, and will be a projected (by the U.S. Census Bureau) 20% of the population by 2030. A society with relatively more children, like the United States in the 1960s, will have greater demand for goods and services like tricycles and day care facilities. A society with relatively more elderly persons, as the United States is projected to have by 2030, has a higher demand for nursing homes and hearing aids. Similarly, changes in the size of the population can affect the demand for housing and many other goods. Each of these changes in demand will be shown as a shift in the demand curve.
Changes in the Prices of Related Goods
Changes in the prices of related goods such as substitutes or complements also can affect the demand for a product. A substitute is a good or service that we can use in place of another good or service. As electronic books, like this one, become more available, you would expect to see a decrease in demand for traditional printed books. A lower price for a substitute decreases demand for the other product. For example, in recent years as the price of tablet computers has fallen, the quantity demanded has increased (because of the law of demand). Since people are purchasing tablets, there has been a decrease in demand for laptops, which we can show graphically as a leftward shift in the demand curve for laptops. A higher price for a substitute good has the reverse effect.
Other goods are complements for each other, meaning we often use the goods together, because consumption of one good tends to enhance consumption of the other. Examples include breakfast cereal and milk; notebooks and pens or pencils, golf balls and golf clubs; gasoline and sport utility vehicles; and the five-way combination of bacon, lettuce, tomato, mayonnaise, and bread. If the price of golf clubs rises, since the quantity demanded of golf clubs falls (because of the law of demand), demand for a complement good like golf balls decreases, too. Similarly, a higher price for skis would shift the demand curve for a complement good like ski resort trips to the left, while a lower price for a complement has the reverse effect.
Changes in Expectations about Future Prices or Other Factors that Affect Demand
While it is clear that the price of a good affects the quantity demanded, it is also true that expectations about the future price (or expectations about tastes and preferences, income, and so on) can affect demand. For example, if people hear that a hurricane is coming, they may rush to the store to buy flashlight batteries and bottled water. If people learn that the price of a good like coffee is likely to rise in the future, they may head for the store to stock up on coffee now. We show these changes in demand as shifts in the curve. Therefore, a shift in demand happens when a change in some economic factor (other than price) causes a different quantity to be demanded at every price. The following Work It Out feature shows how this happens.
Work It Out
Shift in Demand
A shift in demand means that at any price (and at every price), the quantity demanded will be different than it was before. Following is an example of a shift in demand due to an income increase.
Step 1. Draw the graph of a demand curve for a normal good like pizza. Pick a price (like P0). Identify the corresponding Q0. See an example in Figure 3.6.
Figure 3.6 Demand Curve We can use the demand curve to identify how much consumers would buy at any given price.
Step 2. Suppose income increases. As a result of the change, are consumers going to buy more or less pizza? The answer is more. Draw a dotted horizontal line from the chosen price, through the original quantity demanded, to the new point with the new Q1. Draw a dotted vertical line down to the horizontal axis and label the new Q1. Figure 3.7 provides an example.
Figure 3.7 Demand Curve with Income Increase With an increase in income, consumers will purchase larger quantities, pushing demand to the right.
Step 3. Now, shift the curve through the new point. You will see that an increase in income causes an upward (or rightward) shift in the demand curve, so that at any price the quantities demanded will be higher, as Figure 3.8 illustrates.
Figure 3.8 Demand Curve Shifted Right With an increase in income, consumers will purchase larger quantities, pushing demand to the right, and causing the demand curve to shift right.
Summing Up Factors That Change Demand
Figure 3.9 summarizes six factors that can shift demand curves. The direction of the arrows indicates whether the demand curve shifts represent an increase in demand or a decrease in demand. Notice that a change in the price of the good or service itself is not listed among the factors that can shift a demand curve. A change in the price of a good or service causes a movement along a specific demand curve, and it typically leads to some change in the quantity demanded, but it does not shift the demand curve.
Figure 3.9 Factors That Shift Demand Curves (a) A list of factors that can cause an increase in demand from D0 to D1. (b) The same factors, if their direction is reversed, can cause a decrease in demand from D0 to D1.
When a demand curve shifts, it will then intersect with a given supply curve at a different equilibrium price and quantity. We are, however, getting ahead of our story. Before discussing how changes in demand can affect equilibrium price and quantity, we first need to discuss shifts in supply curves.
How Production Costs Affect Supply
A supply curve shows how quantity supplied will change as the price rises and falls, assuming ceteris paribus so that no other economically relevant factors are changing. If other factors relevant to supply do change, then the entire supply curve will shift. Just as we described a shift in demand as a change in the quantity demanded at every price, a shift in supply means a change in the quantity supplied at every price.
In thinking about the factors that affect supply, remember what motivates firms: profits, which are the difference between revenues and costs. A firm produces goods and services using combinations of labor, materials, and machinery, or what we call inputs or factors of production. If a firm faces lower costs of production, while the prices for the good or service the firm produces remain unchanged, a firm’s profits go up. When a firm’s profits increase, it is more motivated to produce output, since the more it produces the more profit it will earn. When costs of production fall, a firm will tend to supply a larger quantity at any given price for its output. We can show this by the supply curve shifting to the right.
Take, for example, a messenger company that delivers packages around a city. The company may find that buying gasoline is one of its main costs. If the price of gasoline falls, then the company will find it can deliver messages more cheaply than before. Since lower costs correspond to higher profits, the messenger company may now supply more of its services at any given price. For example, given the lower gasoline prices, the company can now serve a greater area, and increase its supply.
Conversely, if a firm faces higher costs of production, then it will earn lower profits at any given selling price for its products. As a result, a higher cost of production typically causes a firm to supply a smaller quantity at any given price. In this case, the supply curve shifts to the left.
Consider the supply for cars, shown by curve S0 in Figure 3.10. Point J indicates that if the price is \$20,000, the quantity supplied will be 18 million cars. If the price rises to \$22,000 per car, ceteris paribus, the quantity supplied will rise to 20 million cars, as point K on the S0 curve shows. We can show the same information in table form, as in Table 3.5.
Figure 3.10 Shifts in Supply: A Car Example Decreased supply means that at every given price, the quantity supplied is lower, so that the supply curve shifts to the left, from S0 to S1. Increased supply means that at every given price, the quantity supplied is higher, so that the supply curve shifts to the right, from S0 to S2.
Price Decrease to S1 Original Quantity Supplied S0 Increase to S2
\$16,000 10.5 million 12.0 million 13.2 million
\$18,000 13.5 million 15.0 million 16.5 million
\$20,000 16.5 million 18.0 million 19.8 million
\$22,000 18.5 million 20.0 million 22.0 million
\$24,000 19.5 million 21.0 million 23.1 million
\$26,000 20.5 million 22.0 million 24.2 million
Table 3.5 Price and Shifts in Supply: A Car Example
Now, imagine that the price of steel, an important ingredient in manufacturing cars, rises, so that producing a car has become more expensive. At any given price for selling cars, car manufacturers will react by supplying a lower quantity. We can show this graphically as a leftward shift of supply, from S0 to S1, which indicates that at any given price, the quantity supplied decreases. In this example, at a price of \$20,000, the quantity supplied decreases from 18 million on the original supply curve (S0) to 16.5 million on the supply curve S1, which is labeled as point L.
Conversely, if the price of steel decreases, producing a car becomes less expensive. At any given price for selling cars, car manufacturers can now expect to earn higher profits, so they will supply a higher quantity. The shift of supply to the right, from S0 to S2, means that at all prices, the quantity supplied has increased. In this example, at a price of \$20,000, the quantity supplied increases from 18 million on the original supply curve (S0) to 19.8 million on the supply curve S2, which is labeled M.
Other Factors That Affect Supply
In the example above, we saw that changes in the prices of inputs in the production process will affect the cost of production and thus the supply. Several other things affect the cost of production, too, such as changes in weather or other natural conditions, new technologies for production, and some government policies.
Changes in weather and climate will affect the cost of production for many agricultural products. For example, in 2014 the Manchurian Plain in Northeastern China, which produces most of the country's wheat, corn, and soybeans, experienced its most severe drought in 50 years. A drought decreases the supply of agricultural products, which means that at any given price, a lower quantity will be supplied. Conversely, especially good weather would shift the supply curve to the right.
When a firm discovers a new technology that allows the firm to produce at a lower cost, the supply curve will shift to the right, as well. For instance, in the 1960s a major scientific effort nicknamed the Green Revolution focused on breeding improved seeds for basic crops like wheat and rice. By the early 1990s, more than two-thirds of the wheat and rice in low-income countries around the world used these Green Revolution seeds—and the harvest was twice as high per acre. A technological improvement that reduces costs of production will shift supply to the right, so that a greater quantity will be produced at any given price.
Government policies can affect the cost of production and the supply curve through taxes, regulations, and subsidies. For example, the U.S. government imposes a tax on alcoholic beverages that collects about \$8 billion per year from producers. Businesses treat taxes as costs. Higher costs decrease supply for the reasons we discussed above. Other examples of policy that can affect cost are the wide array of government regulations that require firms to spend money to provide a cleaner environment or a safer workplace. Complying with regulations increases costs.
A government subsidy, on the other hand, is the opposite of a tax. A subsidy occurs when the government pays a firm directly or reduces the firm’s taxes if the firm carries out certain actions. From the firm’s perspective, taxes or regulations are an additional cost of production that shifts supply to the left, leading the firm to produce a lower quantity at every given price. Government subsidies reduce the cost of production and increase supply at every given price, shifting supply to the right. The following Work It Out feature shows how this shift happens.
Work It Out
Shift in Supply
We know that a supply curve shows the minimum price a firm will accept to produce a given quantity of output. What happens to the supply curve when the cost of production goes up? Following is an example of a shift in supply due to a production cost increase. (We’ll introduce some other concepts regarding firm decision-making in Chapters 7 and 8.)
Step 1. Draw a graph of a supply curve for pizza. Pick a quantity (like Q0). If you draw a vertical line up from Q0 to the supply curve, you will see the price the firm chooses. Figure 3.11 provides an example.
Figure 3.11 Supply Curve You can use a supply curve to show the minimum price a firm will accept to produce a given quantity of output.
Step 2. Why did the firm choose that price and not some other? One way to think about this is that the price is composed of two parts. The first part is the cost of producing pizzas at the margin; in this case, the cost of producing the pizza, including cost of ingredients (e.g., dough, sauce, cheese, and pepperoni), the cost of the pizza oven, the shop rent, and the workers' wages. The second part is the firm’s desired profit, which is determined, among other factors, by the profit margins in that particular business. (Desired profit is not necessarily the same as economic profit, which will be explained in Chapter 7.) If you add these two parts together, you get the price the firm wishes to charge. The quantity Q0 and associated price P0 give you one point on the firm’s supply curve, as Figure 3.12 illustrates.
Figure 3.12 Setting Prices The cost of production and the desired profit equal the price a firm will set for a product.
Step 3. Now, suppose that the cost of production increases. Perhaps cheese has become more expensive by \$0.75 per pizza. If that is true, the firm will want to raise its price by the amount of the increase in cost (\$0.75). Draw this point on the supply curve directly above the initial point on the curve, but \$0.75 higher, as Figure 3.13 shows.
Figure 3.13 Increasing Costs Leads to Increasing Price Because the cost of production and the desired profit equal the price a firm will set for a product, if the cost of production increases, the price for the product will also need to increase.
Step 4. Shift the supply curve through this point. You will see that an increase in cost causes an upward (or a leftward) shift of the supply curve so that at any price, the quantities supplied will be smaller, as Figure 3.14 illustrates.
Figure 3.14 Supply Curve Shifts When the cost of production increases, the supply curve shifts upwardly to a new price level.
Summing Up Factors That Change Supply
Changes in the cost of inputs, natural disasters, new technologies, and the impact of government decisions all affect the cost of production. In turn, these factors affect how much firms are willing to supply at any given price.
Figure 3.15 summarizes factors that change the supply of goods and services. Notice that a change in the price of the product itself is not among the factors that shift the supply curve. Although a change in price of a good or service typically causes a change in quantity supplied or a movement along the supply curve for that specific good or service, it does not cause the supply curve itself to shift.
Figure 3.15 Factors That Shift Supply Curves (a) A list of factors that can cause an increase in supply from S0 to S1. (b) The same factors, if their direction is reversed, can cause a decrease in supply from S0 to S1.
Because demand and supply curves appear on a two-dimensional diagram with only price and quantity on the axes, an unwary visitor to the land of economics might be fooled into believing that economics is about only four topics: demand, supply, price, and quantity. However, demand and supply are really “umbrella” concepts: demand covers all the factors that affect demand, and supply covers all the factors that affect supply. We include factors other than price that affect demand and supply by using shifts in the demand or the supply curve. In this way, the two-dimensional demand and supply model becomes a powerful tool for analyzing a wide range of economic circumstances. | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_3e_(OpenStax)/03%3A_Demand_and_Supply/3.03%3A_Shifts_in_Demand_and_Supply_for_Goods_and_Services.txt |
Learning Objectives
By the end of this section, you will be able to:
• Identify equilibrium price and quantity through the four-step process
• Graph equilibrium price and quantity
• Contrast shifts of demand or supply and movements along a demand or supply curve
• Graph demand and supply curves, including equilibrium price and quantity, based on real-world examples
Let’s begin this discussion with a single economic event. It might be an event that affects demand, like a change in income, population, tastes, prices of substitutes or complements, or expectations about future prices. It might be an event that affects supply, like a change in natural conditions, input prices, or technology, or government policies that affect production. How does this economic event affect equilibrium price and quantity? We will analyze this question using a four-step process.
Step 1. Draw a demand and supply model before the economic change took place. To establish the model requires four standard pieces of information: The law of demand, which tells us the slope of the demand curve is negative; the law of supply, which tells us that the slope of the supply curve is positive; the shift variables for demand; and the shift variables for supply. From this model, find the initial equilibrium values for price and quantity.
Step 2. Decide whether the economic change you are analyzing affects demand or supply. In other words, does the event refer to something in the list of demand factors or supply factors?
Step 3. Decide whether the effect on demand or supply causes the curve to shift to the right or to the left, and sketch the new demand or supply curve on the diagram. In other words, does the event increase or decrease the amount consumers want to buy or producers want to sell?
Step 4. Identify the new equilibrium and then compare the original equilibrium price and quantity to the new equilibrium price and quantity.
Let’s consider one example that involves a shift in supply and one that involves a shift in demand. Then we will consider an example where both supply and demand shift.
Good Weather for Salmon Fishing
Suppose that during the summer of 2015, weather conditions were excellent for commercial salmon fishing off the California coast. Heavy rains meant higher than normal levels of water in the rivers, which helps the salmon to breed. Slightly cooler ocean temperatures stimulated the growth of plankton, the microscopic organisms at the bottom of the ocean food chain, providing everything in the ocean with a hearty food supply. The ocean stayed calm during fishing season, so commercial fishing operations did not lose many days to bad weather. How did these climate conditions affect the quantity and price of salmon? Figure 3.16 illustrates the four-step approach, which we explain below, to work through this problem. Table 3.6 also provides the information to work the problem.
Figure 3.16 Good Weather for Salmon Fishing: The Four-Step Process Unusually good weather leads to changes in the price and quantity of salmon.
Price per Pound Quantity Supplied in 2014 Quantity Supplied in 2015 Quantity Demanded
\$2.00 80 400 840
\$2.25 120 480 680
\$2.50 160 550 550
\$2.75 200 600 450
\$3.00 230 640 350
\$3.25 250 670 250
\$3.50 270 700 200
Table 3.6 Salmon Fishing
Step 1. Draw a demand and supply model to illustrate the market for salmon in the year before the good weather conditions began. The demand curve D0 and the supply curve S0 show that the original equilibrium price is \$3.25 per pound and the original equilibrium quantity is 250,000 fish. (This price per pound is what commercial buyers pay at the fishing docks. What consumers pay at the grocery is higher.)
Step 2. Did the economic event affect supply or demand? Good weather is an example of a natural condition that affects supply.
Step 3. Was the effect on supply an increase or a decrease? Good weather is a change in natural conditions that increases the quantity supplied at any given price. The supply curve shifts to the right, moving from the original supply curve S0 to the new supply curve S1, which Figure 3.16 and Table 3.6 show.
Step 4. Compare the new equilibrium price and quantity to the original equilibrium. At the new equilibrium E1, the equilibrium price falls from \$3.25 to \$2.50, but the equilibrium quantity increases from 250,000 to 550,000 salmon. Notice that the equilibrium quantity demanded increased, even though the demand curve did not move.
In short, good weather conditions increased supply of the California commercial salmon. The result was a higher equilibrium quantity of salmon bought and sold in the market at a lower price.
Newspapers and the Internet
According to the Pew Research Center for People and the Press, increasingly more people, especially younger people, are obtaining their news from online and digital sources. The majority of U.S. adults now own smartphones or tablets, and most of those Americans say they use them in part to access the news. From 2004 to 2012, the share of Americans who reported obtaining their news from digital sources increased from 24% to 39%. How has this affected consumption of print news media, and radio and television news? Figure 3.17 and the text below illustrates using the four-step analysis to answer this question.
Figure 3.17 The Print News Market: A Four-Step Analysis A change in tastes from print news sources to digital sources results in a leftward shift in demand for the former. The result is a decrease in both equilibrium price and quantity.
Step 1. Develop a demand and supply model to think about what the market looked like before the event. The demand curve D0 and the supply curve S0 show the original relationships. In this case, we perform the analysis without specific numbers on the price and quantity axis.
Step 2. Did the described change affect supply or demand? A change in tastes, from traditional news sources (print, radio, and television) to digital sources, caused a change in demand for the former.
Step 3. Was the effect on demand positive or negative? A shift to digital news sources will tend to mean a lower quantity demanded of traditional news sources at every given price, causing the demand curve for print and other traditional news sources to shift to the left, from D0 to D1.
Step 4. Compare the new equilibrium price and quantity to the original equilibrium price. The new equilibrium (E1) occurs at a lower quantity and a lower price than the original equilibrium (E0).
The decline in print news reading predates 2004. Print newspaper circulation peaked in 1973 and has declined since then due to competition from television and radio news. In 1991, 55% of Americans indicated they received their news from print sources, while only 29% did so in 2012. Radio news has followed a similar path in recent decades, with the share of Americans obtaining their news from radio declining from 54% in 1991 to 33% in 2012. Television news has held its own in recent years, with a market share staying in the mid to upper fifties. What does this suggest for the future, given that two-thirds of Americans under 30 years old say they do not obtain their news from television at all?
The Interconnections and Speed of Adjustment in Real Markets
In the real world, many factors that affect demand and supply can change all at once. For example, the demand for cars might increase because of rising incomes and population, and it might decrease because of rising gasoline prices (a complementary good). Likewise, the supply of cars might increase because of innovative new technologies that reduce the cost of car production, and it might decrease as a result of new government regulations requiring the installation of costly pollution-control technology.
Moreover, rising incomes and population or changes in gasoline prices will affect many markets, not just cars. How can an economist sort out all these interconnected events? The answer lies in the ceteris paribus assumption. Look at how each economic event affects each market, one event at a time, holding all else constant. Then combine the analyses to see the net effect.
A Combined Example
The U.S. Postal Service is facing difficult challenges. Compensation for postal workers tends to increase most years due to cost-of-living increases. At the same time, increasingly more people are using email, text, and other digital message forms such as Facebook and Twitter to communicate with friends and others. What does this suggest about the continued viability of the Postal Service? Figure 3.18 and the text below illustrate this using the four-step analysis to answer this question.
Figure 3.18 Higher Compensation for Postal Workers: A Four-Step Analysis (a) Higher labor compensation causes a leftward shift in the supply curve, a decrease in the equilibrium quantity, and an increase in the equilibrium price. (b) A change in tastes away from Postal Services causes a leftward shift in the demand curve, a decrease in the equilibrium quantity, and a decrease in the equilibrium price.
Since this problem involves two disturbances, we need two four-step analyses, the first to analyze the effects of higher compensation for postal workers, the second to analyze the effects of many people switching from “snail mail” to email and other digital messages.
Figure 3.18 (a) shows the shift in supply discussed in the following steps.
Step 1. Draw a demand and supply model to illustrate what the market for the U.S. Postal Service looked like before this scenario starts. The demand curve D0 and the supply curve S0 show the original relationships.
Step 2. Did the described change affect supply or demand? Labor compensation is a cost of production. A change in production costs caused a change in supply for the Postal Service.
Step 3. Was the effect on supply positive or negative? Higher labor compensation leads to a lower quantity supplied of postal services at every given price, causing the supply curve for postal services to shift to the left, from S0 to S1.
Step 4. Compare the new equilibrium price and quantity to the original equilibrium price. The new equilibrium (E1) occurs at a lower quantity and a higher price than the original equilibrium (E0).
Figure 3.18 (b) shows the shift in demand in the following steps.
Step 1. Draw a demand and supply model to illustrate what the market for U.S. Postal Services looked like before this scenario starts. The demand curve D0 and the supply curve S0 show the original relationships. Note that this diagram is independent from the diagram in panel (a).
Step 2. Did the change described affect supply or demand? A change in tastes away from snail mail toward digital messages will cause a change in demand for the Postal Service.
Step 3. Was the effect on demand positive or negative? A change in tastes away from snailmail toward digital messages causes lower quantity demanded of postal services at every given price, causing the demand curve for postal services to shift to the left, from D0 to D1.
Step 4. Compare the new equilibrium price and quantity to the original equilibrium price. The new equilibrium (E2) occurs at a lower quantity and a lower price than the original equilibrium (E0).
The final step in a scenario where both supply and demand shift is to combine the two individual analyses to determine what happens to the equilibrium quantity and price. Graphically, we superimpose the previous two diagrams one on top of the other, as in Figure 3.19.
Figure 3.19 Combined Effect of Decreased Demand and Decreased Supply Supply and demand shifts cause changes in equilibrium price and quantity.
Following are the results:
Effect on Quantity: The effect of higher labor compensation on Postal Services because it raises the cost of production is to decrease the equilibrium quantity. The effect of a change in tastes away from snail mail is to decrease the equilibrium quantity. Since both shifts are to the left, the overall impact is a decrease in the equilibrium quantity of Postal Services (Q3). This is easy to see graphically, since Q3 is to the left of Q0.
Effect on Price: The overall effect on price is more complicated. The effect of higher labor compensation on Postal Services, because it raises the cost of production, is to increase the equilibrium price. The effect of a change in tastes away from snail mail is to decrease the equilibrium price. Since the two effects are in opposite directions, unless we know the magnitudes of the two effects, the overall effect is unclear. This is not unusual. When both curves shift, typically we can determine the overall effect on price or on quantity, but not on both. In this case, we determined the overall effect on the equilibrium quantity, but not on the equilibrium price. In other cases, it might be the opposite.
The next Clear It Up feature focuses on the difference between shifts of supply or demand and movements along a curve.
Clear It Up
What is the difference between shifts of demand or supply versus movements along a demand or supply curve?
One common mistake in applying the demand and supply framework is to confuse the shift of a demand or a supply curve with movement along a demand or supply curve. As an example, consider a problem that asks whether a drought will increase or decrease the equilibrium quantity and equilibrium price of wheat. Lee, a student in an introductory economics class, might reason:
“Well, it is clear that a drought reduces supply, so I will shift back the supply curve, as in the shift from the original supply curve S0 to S1 on the diagram (Shift 1). The equilibrium moves from E0 to E1, the equilibrium quantity is lower and the equilibrium price is higher. Then, a higher price makes farmers more likely to supply the good, so the supply curve shifts right, as shows the shift from S1 to S2, shows on the diagram (Shift 2), so that the equilibrium now moves from E1 to E2. The higher price, however, also reduces demand and so causes demand to shift back, like the shift from the original demand curve, D0 to D1 on the diagram (labeled Shift 3), and the equilibrium moves from E2 to E3.”
Figure 3.20 Shifts of Demand or Supply versus Movements along a Demand or Supply Curve A shift in one curve never causes a shift in the other curve. Rather, a shift in one curve causes a movement along the second curve.
At about this point, Lee suspects that this answer is headed down the wrong path. Think about what might be wrong with Lee’s logic, and then read the answer that follows.
Answer: Lee’s first step is correct: that is, a drought shifts back the supply curve of wheat and leads to a prediction of a lower equilibrium quantity and a higher equilibrium price. This corresponds to a movement along the original demand curve (D0), from E0 to E1. The rest of Lee’s argument is wrong, because it mixes up shifts in supply with quantity supplied, and shifts in demand with quantity demanded. A higher or lower price never shifts the supply curve, as suggested by the shift in supply from S1 to S2. Instead, a price change leads to a movement along a given supply curve. Similarly, a higher or lower price never shifts a demand curve, as suggested in the shift from D0 to D1. Instead, a price change leads to a movement along a given demand curve. Remember, a change in the price of a good never causes the demand or supply curve for that good to shift.
Think carefully about the timeline of events: What happens first, what happens next? What is cause, what is effect? If you keep the order right, you are more likely to get the analysis correct.
In the four-step analysis of how economic events affect equilibrium price and quantity, the movement from the old to the new equilibrium seems immediate. As a practical matter, however, prices and quantities often do not zoom straight to equilibrium. More realistically, when an economic event causes demand or supply to shift, prices and quantities set off in the general direction of equilibrium. Even as they are moving toward one new equilibrium, a subsequent change in demand or supply often pushes prices toward another equilibrium. | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_3e_(OpenStax)/03%3A_Demand_and_Supply/3.04%3A_Changes_in_Equilibrium_Price_and_Quantity-_The_Four-Step_Process.txt |
Learning Objectives
By the end of this section, you will be able to:
• Explain price controls, price ceilings, and price floors
• Analyze demand and supply as a social adjustment mechanism
To this point in the chapter, we have been assuming that markets are free, that is, they operate with no government intervention. In this section, we will explore the outcomes, both anticipated and otherwise, when government does intervene in a market either to prevent the price of some good or service from rising “too high” or to prevent the price of some good or service from falling “too low”.
Economists believe there are a small number of fundamental principles that explain how economic agents respond in different situations. Two of these principles, which we have already introduced, are the laws of demand and supply.
Governments can pass laws affecting market outcomes, but no law can negate these economic principles. Rather, the principles will become apparent in sometimes unexpected ways, which may undermine the intent of the government policy. This is one of the major conclusions of this section.
Controversy sometimes surrounds the prices and quantities established by demand and supply, especially for products that are considered necessities. In some cases, discontent over prices turns into public pressure on politicians, who may then pass legislation to prevent a certain price from climbing “too high” or falling “too low.”
The demand and supply model shows how people and firms will react to the incentives that these laws provide to control prices, in ways that will often lead to undesirable consequences. Alternative policy tools can often achieve the desired goals of price control laws, while avoiding at least some of their costs and tradeoffs.
Price Ceilings
Laws that governments enact to regulate prices are called price controls. Price controls come in two flavors. A price ceiling keeps a price from rising above a certain level (the “ceiling”), while a price floor keeps a price from falling below a given level (the “floor”). This section uses the demand and supply framework to analyze price ceilings. The next section discusses price floors.
A price ceiling is a legal maximum price that one pays for some good or service. A government imposes price ceilings in order to keep the price of some necessary good or service affordable. For example, in 2005 during Hurricane Katrina, the price of bottled water increased above \$5 per gallon. As a result, many people called for price controls on bottled water to prevent the price from rising so high. In this particular case, the government did not impose a price ceiling, but there are other examples of where price ceilings did occur.
In many markets for goods and services, demanders outnumber suppliers. Consumers, who are also potential voters, sometimes unite behind a political proposal to hold down a certain price. In some cities, such as Albany, renters have pressed political leaders to pass rent control laws, a price ceiling that usually works by stating that landlords can raise rents by only a certain maximum percentage each year. Some of the best examples of rent control occur in urban areas such as New York, Washington D.C., or San Francisco.
Rent control becomes a politically hot topic when rents begin to rise rapidly. Everyone needs an affordable place to live. Perhaps a change in tastes makes a certain suburb or town a more popular place to live. Perhaps locally-based businesses expand, bringing higher incomes and more people into the area. Such changes can cause a change in the demand for rental housing, as Figure 3.21 illustrates. The original equilibrium (E0) lies at the intersection of supply curve S0 and demand curve D0, corresponding to an equilibrium price of \$500 and an equilibrium quantity of 15,000 units of rental housing. The effect of greater income or a change in tastes is to shift the demand curve for rental housing to the right, as the data in Table 3.7 shows and the shift from D0 to D1 on the graph. In this market, at the new equilibrium E1, the price of a rental unit would rise to \$600 and the equilibrium quantity would increase to 17,000 units.
Figure 3.21 A Price Ceiling Example—Rent Control The original intersection of demand and supply occurs at E0. If demand shifts from D0 to D1, the new equilibrium would be at E1—unless a price ceiling prevents the price from rising. If the price is not permitted to rise, the quantity supplied remains at 15,000. However, after the change in demand, the quantity demanded rises to 19,000, resulting in a shortage.
Price Original Quantity Supplied Original Quantity Demanded New Quantity Demanded
\$400 12,000 18,000 23,000
\$500 15,000 15,000 19,000
\$600 17,000 13,000 17,000
\$700 19,000 11,000 15,000
\$800 20,000 10,000 14,000
Table 3.7 Rent Control
Suppose that a city government passes a rent control law to keep the price at the original equilibrium of \$500 for a typical apartment. In Figure 3.21, the horizontal line at the price of \$500 shows the legally fixed maximum price set by the rent control law. However, the underlying forces that shifted the demand curve to the right are still there. At that price (\$500), the quantity supplied remains at the same 15,000 rental units, but the quantity demanded is 19,000 rental units. In other words, the quantity demanded exceeds the quantity supplied, so there is a shortage of rental housing. One of the ironies of price ceilings is that while the price ceiling was intended to help renters, there are actually fewer apartments rented out under the price ceiling (15,000 rental units) than would be the case at the market rent of \$600 (17,000 rental units).
Price ceilings do not simply benefit renters at the expense of landlords. Rather, some renters (or potential renters) lose their housing as landlords convert apartments to co-ops and condos. Even when the housing remains in the rental market, landlords tend to spend less on maintenance and on essentials like heating, cooling, hot water, and lighting. The first rule of economics is you do not get something for nothing—everything has an opportunity cost. Thus, if renters obtain “cheaper” housing than the market requires, they tend to also end up with lower quality housing.
Price ceilings are enacted in an attempt to keep prices low for those who need the product. However, when the market price is not allowed to rise to the equilibrium level, quantity demanded exceeds quantity supplied, and thus a shortage occurs. Those who manage to purchase the product at the lower price given by the price ceiling will benefit, but sellers of the product will suffer, along with those who are not able to purchase the product at all. Quality is also likely to deteriorate.
Price Floors
A price floor is the lowest price that one can legally pay for some good or service. Perhaps the best-known example of a price floor is the minimum wage, which is based on the view that someone working full time should be able to afford a basic standard of living. The federal minimum wage in 2022 was \$7.25 per hour, although some states and localities have a higher minimum wage. The federal minimum wage yields an annual income for a single person of \$15,080, which is slightly higher than the Federal poverty line of \$11,880. Congress periodically raises the federal minimum wage as the cost of living rises. As of March 2022, the most recent adjustment occurred in 2009, when the federal minimum wage was raised from \$6.55 to \$7.25.
Price floors are sometimes called “price supports,” because they support a price by preventing it from falling below a certain level. Around the world, many countries have passed laws to create agricultural price supports. Farm prices and thus farm incomes fluctuate, sometimes widely. Even if, on average, farm incomes are adequate, some years they can be quite low. The purpose of price supports is to prevent these swings.
The most common way price supports work is that the government enters the market and buys up the product, adding to demand to keep prices higher than they otherwise would be. According to the Common Agricultural Policy reform effective in 2019, the European Union (EU) will spend about 58 billion euros per year, or 65.5 billion dollars per year (with the December 2021 exchange rate), or roughly 36% of the EU budget, on price supports for Europe’s farmers.
Figure 3.22 illustrates the effects of a government program that assures a price above the equilibrium by focusing on the market for wheat in Europe. In the absence of government intervention, the price would adjust so that the quantity supplied would equal the quantity demanded at the equilibrium point E0, with price P0 and quantity Q0. However, policies to keep prices high for farmers keep the price above what would have been the market equilibrium level—the price Pf shown by the dashed horizontal line in the diagram. The result is a quantity supplied in excess of the quantity demanded (Qd). When quantity supplied exceeds quantity demanded, a surplus exists.
Economists estimate that the high-income areas of the world, including the United States, Europe, and Japan, spend roughly \$1 billion per day in supporting their farmers. If the government is willing to purchase the excess supply (or to provide payments for others to purchase it), then farmers will benefit from the price floor, but taxpayers and consumers of food will pay the costs. Agricultural economists and policy makers have offered numerous proposals for reducing farm subsidies. In many countries, however, political support for subsidies for farmers remains strong. This is either because the population views this as supporting the traditional rural way of life or because of industry's lobbying power of the agro-business.
Figure 3.22 European Wheat Prices: A Price Floor Example The intersection of demand (D) and supply (S) would be at the equilibrium point E0. However, a price floor set at Pf holds the price above E0 and prevents it from falling. The result of the price floor is that the quantity supplied Qs exceeds the quantity demanded Qd. There is excess supply, also called a surplus. | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_3e_(OpenStax)/03%3A_Demand_and_Supply/3.05%3A_Price_Ceilings_and_Price_Floors.txt |
Learning Objectives
By the end of this section, you will be able to:
• Contrast consumer surplus, producer surplus, and social surplus
• Explain why price floors and price ceilings can be inefficient
• Analyze demand and supply as a social adjustment mechanism
The familiar demand and supply diagram holds within it the concept of economic efficiency. One typical way that economists define efficiency is when it is impossible to improve the situation of one party without imposing a cost on another. Conversely, if a situation is inefficient, it becomes possible to benefit at least one party without imposing costs on others.
Efficiency in the demand and supply model has the same basic meaning: The economy is getting as much benefit as possible from its scarce resources and all the possible gains from trade have been achieved. In other words, the optimal amount of each good and service is produced and consumed.
Consumer Surplus, Producer Surplus, Social Surplus
Consider a market for tablet computers, as Figure 3.23 shows. The equilibrium price is \$80 and the equilibrium quantity is 28 million. To see the benefits to consumers, look at the segment of the demand curve above the equilibrium point and to the left. This portion of the demand curve shows that at least some demanders would have been willing to pay more than \$80 for a tablet.
For example, point J shows that if the price were \$90, 20 million tablets would be sold. Those consumers who would have been willing to pay \$90 for a tablet based on the utility they expect to receive from it, but who were able to pay the equilibrium price of \$80, clearly received a benefit beyond what they had to pay. Remember, the demand curve traces consumers’ willingness to pay for different quantities. The amount that individuals would have been willing to pay, minus the amount that they actually paid, is called consumer surplus. Consumer surplus is the area labeled F—that is, the area above the market price and below the demand curve.
Figure 3.23 Consumer and Producer Surplus The somewhat triangular area labeled by F shows the area of consumer surplus, which shows that the equilibrium price in the market was less than what many of the consumers were willing to pay. Point J on the demand curve shows that, even at the price of \$90, consumers would have been willing to purchase a quantity of 20 million. The somewhat triangular area labeled by G shows the area of producer surplus, which shows that the equilibrium price received in the market was more than what many of the producers were willing to accept for their products. For example, point K on the supply curve shows that at a price of \$45, firms would have been willing to supply a quantity of 14 million.
The supply curve shows the quantity that firms are willing to supply at each price. For example, point K in Figure 3.23 illustrates that, at \$45, firms would still have been willing to supply a quantity of 14 million. Those producers who would have been willing to supply the tablets at \$45, but who were instead able to charge the equilibrium price of \$80, clearly received an extra benefit beyond what they required to supply the product. The extra benefit producers receive from selling a good or service, measured by the price the producer actually received minus the price the producer would have been willing to accept is called producer surplus. In Figure 3.23, producer surplus is the area labeled G—that is, the area between the market price and the segment of the supply curve below the equilibrium.
The sum of consumer surplus and producer surplus is social surplus, also referred to as economic surplus or total surplus. In Figure 3.23 we show social surplus as the area F + G. Social surplus is larger at equilibrium quantity and price than it would be at any other quantity. This demonstrates the economic efficiency of the market equilibrium. In addition, at the efficient level of output, it is impossible to produce greater consumer surplus without reducing producer surplus, and it is impossible to produce greater producer surplus without reducing consumer surplus.
Inefficiency of Price Floors and Price Ceilings
The imposition of a price floor or a price ceiling will prevent a market from adjusting to its equilibrium price and quantity, and thus will create an inefficient outcome. However, there is an additional twist here. Along with creating inefficiency, price floors and ceilings will also transfer some consumer surplus to producers, or some producer surplus to consumers.
Imagine that several firms develop a promising but expensive new drug for treating back pain. If this therapy is left to the market, the equilibrium price will be \$600 per month and 20,000 people will use the drug, as shown in Figure 3.24 (a). The original level of consumer surplus is T + U and producer surplus is V + W + X. However, the government decides to impose a price ceiling of \$400 to make the drug more affordable. At this price ceiling, firms in the market now produce only 15,000.
As a result, two changes occur. First, an inefficient outcome occurs and the total surplus of society is reduced. The loss in social surplus that occurs when the economy produces at an inefficient quantity is called deadweight loss. In a very real sense, it is like money thrown away that benefits no one. In Figure 3.24 (a), the deadweight loss is the area U + W. When deadweight loss exists, it is possible for both consumer and producer surplus to be higher, in this case because the price control is blocking some suppliers and demanders from transactions they would both be willing to make.
A second change from the price ceiling is that some of the producer surplus is transferred to consumers. After the price ceiling is imposed, the new consumer surplus is T + V, while the new producer surplus is X. In other words, the price ceiling transfers the area of surplus (V) from producers to consumers. Note that the gain to consumers is less than the loss to producers, which is just another way of seeing the deadweight loss.
Figure 3.24 Efficiency and Price Floors and Ceilings (a) The original equilibrium price is \$600 with a quantity of 20,000. Consumer surplus is T + U, and producer surplus is V + W + X. A price ceiling is imposed at \$400, so firms in the market now produce only a quantity of 15,000. As a result, the new consumer surplus is T + V, while the new producer surplus is X. (b) The original equilibrium is \$8 at a quantity of 1,800. Consumer surplus is G + H + J, and producer surplus is I + K. A price floor is imposed at \$12, which means that quantity demanded falls to 1,400. As a result, the new consumer surplus is G, and the new producer surplus is H + I.
Figure 3.24 (b) shows a price floor example using a string of struggling movie theaters, all in the same city. The current equilibrium is \$8 per movie ticket, with 1,800 people attending movies. The original consumer surplus is G + H + J, and producer surplus is I + K. The city government is worried that movie theaters will go out of business, reducing the entertainment options available to citizens, so it decides to impose a price floor of \$12 per ticket. As a result, the quantity demanded of movie tickets falls to 1,400. The new consumer surplus is G, and the new producer surplus is H + I. In effect, the price floor causes the area H to be transferred from consumer to producer surplus, but also causes a deadweight loss of J + K.
This analysis shows that a price ceiling, like a law establishing rent controls, will transfer some producer surplus to consumers—which helps to explain why consumers often favor them. Conversely, a price floor like a guarantee that farmers will receive a certain price for their crops will transfer some consumer surplus to producers, which explains why producers often favor them. However, both price floors and price ceilings block some transactions that buyers and sellers would have been willing to make, and creates deadweight loss. Removing such barriers, so that prices and quantities can adjust to their equilibrium level, will increase the economy’s social surplus.
Demand and Supply as a Social Adjustment Mechanism
The demand and supply model emphasizes that prices are not set only by demand or only by supply, but by the interaction between the two. In 1890, the famous economist Alfred Marshall wrote that asking whether supply or demand determined a price was like arguing “whether it is the upper or the under blade of a pair of scissors that cuts a piece of paper.” The answer is that both blades of the demand and supply scissors are always involved.
The adjustments of equilibrium price and quantity in a market-oriented economy often occur without much government direction or oversight. If the coffee crop in Brazil suffers a terrible frost, then the supply curve of coffee shifts to the left and the price of coffee rises. Some people continue to drink coffee and pay the higher price. Others switch to tea or soft drinks. No government commission is needed to figure out how to adjust coffee prices, which companies will be allowed to process the remaining supply, which supermarkets in which cities will get how much coffee to sell, or which consumers will ultimately be allowed to drink the brew. Such adjustments in response to price changes happen all the time in a market economy, often so smoothly and rapidly that we barely notice them.
Think for a moment of all the seasonal foods that are available and inexpensive at certain times of the year, like fresh corn in midsummer, but more expensive at other times of the year. People alter their diets and restaurants alter their menus in response to these fluctuations in prices without fuss or fanfare. For both the U.S. economy and the world economy as a whole, markets—that is, demand and supply—are the primary social mechanism for answering the basic questions about what is produced, how it is produced, and for whom it is produced.
Bring It Home
Why Can We Not Get Enough of Organic Food?
Organic food is grown without synthetic pesticides, chemical fertilizers or genetically modified seeds. In recent decades, the demand for organic products has increased dramatically. The Organic Trade Association reported sales increased from \$1 billion in 1990 to nearly \$62 billion in 2020, more than 90% of which were sales of food products.
Why, then, are organic foods more expensive than their conventional counterparts? The answer is a clear application of the theories of supply and demand. As people have learned more about the harmful effects of chemical fertilizers, growth hormones, pesticides and the like from large-scale factory farming, our tastes and preferences for safer, organic foods have increased. This change in tastes has been reinforced by increases in income, which allow people to purchase pricier products, and has made organic foods more mainstream. This shift, in addition to population growth, has led to an increased demand for organic foods. Graphically, the demand curve has shifted right, and we have moved up the supply curve as producers have responded to the higher prices by supplying a greater quantity.
In addition to the movement along the supply curve, we have also had an increase in the number of farmers converting to organic farming over time. This is represented by a shift to the right of the supply curve. Since both demand and supply have shifted to the right, the resulting equilibrium quantity of organic foods is definitely higher, but the price will only fall when the increase in supply is larger than the increase in demand. We may need more time before we see lower prices in organic foods. Since the production costs of these foods may remain higher than conventional farming, because organic fertilizers and pest management techniques are more expensive, they may never fully catch up with the lower prices of non-organic foods.
As a final, specific example: The Environmental Working Group’s “Dirty Dozen” list of fruits and vegetables, which test high for pesticide residue even after washing, was released in April 2013. The inclusion of strawberries on the list led to an increase in demand for organic strawberries, resulting in both a higher equilibrium price and quantity of sales. | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_3e_(OpenStax)/03%3A_Demand_and_Supply/3.06%3A_Demand_Supply_and_Efficiency.txt |
ceteris paribus
other things being equal
complements
goods that are often used together so that consumption of one good tends to enhance consumption of the other
consumer surplus
the extra benefit consumers receive from buying a good or service, measured by what the individuals would have been willing to pay minus the amount that they actually paid
deadweight loss
the loss in social surplus that occurs when a market produces an inefficient quantity
demand
the relationship between price and the quantity demanded of a certain good or service
demand curve
a graphic representation of the relationship between price and quantity demanded of a certain good or service, with quantity on the horizontal axis and the price on the vertical axis
demand schedule
a table that shows a range of prices for a certain good or service and the quantity demanded at each price
economic surplus
see social surplus
equilibrium
the situation where quantity demanded is equal to the quantity supplied; the combination of price and quantity where there is no economic pressure from surpluses or shortages that would cause price or quantity to change
equilibrium price
the price where quantity demanded is equal to quantity supplied
equilibrium quantity
the quantity at which quantity demanded and quantity supplied are equal for a certain price level
excess demand
at the existing price, the quantity demanded exceeds the quantity supplied; also called a shortage
excess supply
at the existing price, quantity supplied exceeds the quantity demanded; also called a surplus
factors of production
the resources such as labor, materials, and machinery that are used to produce goods and services; also called inputs
inferior good
a good in which the quantity demanded falls as income rises, and in which quantity demanded rises and income falls
inputs
the resources such as labor, materials, and machinery that are used to produce goods and services; also called factors of production
law of demand
the common relationship that a higher price leads to a lower quantity demanded of a certain good or service and a lower price leads to a higher quantity demanded, while all other variables are held constant
law of supply
the common relationship that a higher price leads to a greater quantity supplied and a lower price leads to a lower quantity supplied, while all other variables are held constant
normal good
a good in which the quantity demanded rises as income rises, and in which quantity demanded falls as income falls
price
what a buyer pays for a unit of the specific good or service
price ceiling
a legal maximum price
price control
government laws to regulate prices instead of letting market forces determine prices
price floor
a legal minimum price
producer surplus
the extra benefit producers receive from selling a good or service, measured by the price the producer actually received minus the price the producer would have been willing to accept
quantity demanded
the total number of units of a good or service consumers are willing to purchase at a given price
quantity supplied
the total number of units of a good or service producers are willing to sell at a given price
shift in demand
when a change in some economic factor (other than price) causes a different quantity to be demanded at every price
shift in supply
when a change in some economic factor (other than price) causes a different quantity to be supplied at every price
shortage
at the existing price, the quantity demanded exceeds the quantity supplied; also called excess demand
social surplus
the sum of consumer surplus and producer surplus
substitute
a good that can replace another to some extent, so that greater consumption of one good can mean less of the other
supply
the relationship between price and the quantity supplied of a certain good or service
supply curve
a line that shows the relationship between price and quantity supplied on a graph, with quantity supplied on the horizontal axis and price on the vertical axis
supply schedule
a table that shows a range of prices for a good or service and the quantity supplied at each price
surplus
at the existing price, quantity supplied exceeds the quantity demanded; also called excess supply
total surplus
see social surplus | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_3e_(OpenStax)/03%3A_Demand_and_Supply/3.07%3A_Key_Terms.txt |
3.1 Demand, Supply, and Equilibrium in Markets for Goods and Services
A demand schedule is a table that shows the quantity demanded at different prices in the market. A demand curve shows the relationship between quantity demanded and price in a given market on a graph. The law of demand states that a higher price typically leads to a lower quantity demanded.
A supply schedule is a table that shows the quantity supplied at different prices in the market. A supply curve shows the relationship between quantity supplied and price on a graph. The law of supply says that a higher price typically leads to a higher quantity supplied.
The equilibrium price and equilibrium quantity occur where the supply and demand curves cross. The equilibrium occurs where the quantity demanded is equal to the quantity supplied. If the price is below the equilibrium level, then the quantity demanded will exceed the quantity supplied. Excess demand or a shortage will exist. If the price is above the equilibrium level, then the quantity supplied will exceed the quantity demanded. Excess supply or a surplus will exist. In either case, economic pressures will push the price toward the equilibrium level.
3.2 Shifts in Demand and Supply for Goods and Services
Economists often use the ceteris paribus or “other things being equal” assumption: while examining the economic impact of one event, all other factors remain unchanged for analysis purposes. Factors that can shift the demand curve for goods and services, causing a different quantity to be demanded at any given price, include changes in tastes, population, income, prices of substitute or complement goods, and expectations about future conditions and prices. Factors that can shift the supply curve for goods and services, causing a different quantity to be supplied at any given price, include input prices, natural conditions, changes in technology, and government taxes, regulations, or subsidies.
3.3 Changes in Equilibrium Price and Quantity: The Four-Step Process
When using the supply and demand framework to think about how an event will affect the equilibrium price and quantity, proceed through four steps: (1) sketch a supply and demand diagram to think about what the market looked like before the event; (2) decide whether the event will affect supply or demand; (3) decide whether the effect on supply or demand is negative or positive, and draw the appropriate shifted supply or demand curve; (4) compare the new equilibrium price and quantity to the original ones.
3.4 Price Ceilings and Price Floors
Price ceilings prevent a price from rising above a certain level. When a price ceiling is set below the equilibrium price, quantity demanded will exceed quantity supplied, and excess demand or shortages will result. Price floors prevent a price from falling below a certain level. When a price floor is set above the equilibrium price, quantity supplied will exceed quantity demanded, and excess supply or surpluses will result. Price floors and price ceilings often lead to unintended consequences.
3.5 Demand, Supply, and Efficiency
Consumer surplus is the gap between the price that consumers are willing to pay, based on their preferences, and the market equilibrium price. Producer surplus is the gap between the price for which producers are willing to sell a product, based on their costs, and the market equilibrium price. Social surplus is the sum of consumer surplus and producer surplus. Total surplus is larger at the equilibrium quantity and price than it will be at any other quantity and price. Deadweight loss is loss in total surplus that occurs when the economy produces at an inefficient quantity. | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_3e_(OpenStax)/03%3A_Demand_and_Supply/3.08%3A_Key_Concepts_and_Summary.txt |
1.
Review Figure 3.4. Suppose the price of gasoline is \$1.60 per gallon. Is the quantity demanded higher or lower than at the equilibrium price of \$1.40 per gallon? What about the quantity supplied? Is there a shortage or a surplus in the market? If so, how much?
2.
Why do economists use the ceteris paribus assumption?
3.
In an analysis of the market for paint, an economist discovers the facts listed below. State whether each of these changes will affect supply or demand, and in what direction.
1. There have recently been some important cost-saving inventions in the technology for making paint.
2. Paint is lasting longer, so that property owners need not repaint as often.
3. Because of severe hailstorms, many people need to repaint now.
4. The hailstorms damaged several factories that make paint, forcing them to close down for several months.
4.
Many changes are affecting the market for oil. Predict how each of the following events will affect the equilibrium price and quantity in the market for oil. In each case, state how the event will affect the supply and demand diagram. Create a sketch of the diagram if necessary.
1. Cars are becoming more fuel efficient, and therefore get more miles to the gallon.
2. The winter is exceptionally cold.
3. A major discovery of new oil is made off the coast of Norway.
4. The economies of some major oil-using nations, like Japan, slow down.
5. A war in the Middle East disrupts oil-pumping schedules.
6. Landlords install additional insulation in buildings.
7. The price of solar energy falls dramatically.
8. Chemical companies invent a new, popular kind of plastic made from oil.
5.
Let’s think about the market for air travel. From August 2014 to January 2015, the price of jet fuel increased roughly 47%. Using the four-step analysis, how do you think this fuel price increase affected the equilibrium price and quantity of air travel?
6.
A tariff is a tax on imported goods. Suppose the U.S. government cuts the tariff on imported flat screen televisions. Using the four-step analysis, how do you think the tariff reduction will affect the equilibrium price and quantity of flat screen TVs?
7.
What is the effect of a price ceiling on the quantity demanded of the product? What is the effect of a price ceiling on the quantity supplied? Why exactly does a price ceiling cause a shortage?
8.
Does a price ceiling change the equilibrium price?
9.
What would be the impact of imposing a price floor below the equilibrium price?
10.
Does a price ceiling increase or decrease the number of transactions in a market? Why? What about a price floor?
11.
If a price floor benefits producers, why does a price floor reduce social surplus?
3.10: Review Questions
12.
What determines the level of prices in a market?
13.
What does a downward-sloping demand curve mean about how buyers in a market will react to a higher price?
14.
Will demand curves have the same exact shape in all markets? If not, how will they differ?
15.
Will supply curves have the same shape in all markets? If not, how will they differ?
16.
What is the relationship between quantity demanded and quantity supplied at equilibrium? What is the relationship when there is a shortage? What is the relationship when there is a surplus?
17.
How can you locate the equilibrium point on a demand and supply graph?
18.
If the price is above the equilibrium level, would you predict a surplus or a shortage? If the price is below the equilibrium level, would you predict a surplus or a shortage? Why?
19.
When the price is above the equilibrium, explain how market forces move the market price to equilibrium. Do the same when the price is below the equilibrium.
20.
What is the difference between the demand and the quantity demanded of a product, say milk? Explain in words and show the difference on a graph with a demand curve for milk.
21.
What is the difference between the supply and the quantity supplied of a product, say milk? Explain in words and show the difference on a graph with the supply curve for milk.
22.
When analyzing a market, how do economists deal with the problem that many factors that affect the market are changing at the same time?
23.
Name some factors that can cause a shift in the demand curve in markets for goods and services.
24.
Name some factors that can cause a shift in the supply curve in markets for goods and services.
25.
How does one analyze a market where both demand and supply shift?
26.
What causes a movement along the demand curve? What causes a movement along the supply curve?
27.
Does a price ceiling attempt to make a price higher or lower?
28.
How does a price ceiling set below the equilibrium level affect quantity demanded and quantity supplied?
29.
Does a price floor attempt to make a price higher or lower?
30.
How does a price floor set above the equilibrium level affect quantity demanded and quantity supplied?
31.
What is consumer surplus? How is it illustrated on a demand and supply diagram?
32.
What is producer surplus? How is it illustrated on a demand and supply diagram?
33.
What is total surplus? How is it illustrated on a demand and supply diagram?
34.
What is the relationship between total surplus and economic efficiency?
35.
What is deadweight loss? | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_3e_(OpenStax)/03%3A_Demand_and_Supply/3.09%3A_Self-Check_Questions.txt |
36.
Review Figure 3.4. Suppose the government decided that, since gasoline is a necessity, its price should be legally capped at \$1.30 per gallon. What do you anticipate would be the outcome in the gasoline market?
37.
Explain why the following statement is false: “In the goods market, no buyer would be willing to pay more than the equilibrium price.”
38.
Explain why the following statement is false: “In the goods market, no seller would be willing to sell for less than the equilibrium price.”
39.
Consider the demand for hamburgers. If the price of a substitute good (for example, hot dogs) increases and the price of a complement good (for example, hamburger buns) increases, can you tell for sure what will happen to the demand for hamburgers? Why or why not? Illustrate your answer with a graph.
40.
How do you suppose the demographics of an aging population of “Baby Boomers” in the United States will affect the demand for milk? Justify your answer.
41.
We know that a change in the price of a product causes a movement along the demand curve. Suppose consumers believe that prices will be rising in the future. How will that affect demand for the product in the present? Can you show this graphically?
42.
Suppose there is a soda tax to curb obesity. What should a reduction in the soda tax do to the supply of sodas and to the equilibrium price and quantity? Can you show this graphically? Hint: Assume that the soda tax is collected from the sellers.
43.
Use the four-step process to analyze the impact of the advent of the iPod (or other portable digital music players) on the equilibrium price and quantity of the Sony Walkman (or other portable audio cassette players).
44.
Use the four-step process to analyze the impact of a reduction in tariffs on imports of iPods on the equilibrium price and quantity of Sony Walkman-type products.
45.
Suppose both of these events took place at the same time. Combine your analyses of the impacts of the iPod and the tariff reduction to determine the likely impact on the equilibrium price and quantity of Sony Walkman-type products. Show your answer graphically.
46.
Most government policy decisions have winners and losers. What are the effects of raising the minimum wage? It is more complex than simply producers lose and workers gain. Who are the winners and who are the losers, and what exactly do they win and lose? To what extent does the policy change achieve its goals?
47.
Agricultural price supports result in governments holding large inventories of agricultural products. Why do you think the government cannot simply give the products away to people experiencing poverty?
48.
Can you propose a policy that would induce the market to supply more rental housing units?
49.
What term would an economist use to describe what happens when a shopper gets a “good deal” on a product?
50.
Explain why voluntary transactions improve social welfare.
51.
Why would a free market never operate at a quantity greater than the equilibrium quantity? Hint: What would be required for a transaction to occur at that quantity? | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_3e_(OpenStax)/03%3A_Demand_and_Supply/3.11%3A_Critical_Thinking_Questions.txt |
52.
Review Figure 3.4 again. Suppose the price of gasoline is \$1.00. Will the quantity demanded be lower or higher than at the equilibrium price of \$1.40 per gallon? Will the quantity supplied be lower or higher? Is there a shortage or a surplus in the market? If so, of how much?
53.
Table 3.8 shows information on the demand and supply for bicycles, where the quantities of bicycles are measured in thousands.
Price Qd Qs
\$120 50 36
\$150 40 40
\$180 32 48
\$210 28 56
\$240 24 70
Table 3.8
1. What is the quantity demanded and the quantity supplied at a price of \$210?
2. At what price is the quantity supplied equal to 48,000?
3. Graph the demand and supply curve for bicycles. How can you determine the equilibrium price and quantity from the graph? How can you determine the equilibrium price and quantity from the table? What are the equilibrium price and equilibrium quantity?
4. If the price was \$120, what would the quantities demanded and supplied be? Would a shortage or surplus exist? If so, how large would the shortage or surplus be?
54.
The computer market in recent years has seen many more computers sell at much lower prices. What shift in demand or supply is most likely to explain this outcome? Sketch a demand and supply diagram and explain your reasoning for each.
1. A rise in demand
2. A fall in demand
3. A rise in supply
4. A fall in supply
55.
Table 3.9 illustrates the market's demand and supply for cheddar cheese. Graph the data and find the equilibrium. Next, create a table showing the change in quantity demanded or quantity supplied, and a graph of the new equilibrium, in each of the following situations:
1. The price of milk, a key input for cheese production, rises, so that the supply decreases by 80 pounds at every price.
2. A new study says that eating cheese is good for your health, so that demand increases by 20% at every price.
Price per Pound Qd Qs
\$3.00 750 540
\$3.20 700 600
\$3.40 650 650
\$3.60 620 700
\$3.80 600 720
\$4.00 590 730
Table 3.9
56.
Table 3.10 shows the supply and demand for movie tickets in a city. Graph demand and supply and identify the equilibrium. Then calculate in a table and graph the effect of the following two changes.
1. Three new nightclubs open. They offer decent bands and have no cover charge, but make their money by selling food and drink. As a result, demand for movie tickets falls by six units at every price.
2. The city eliminates a tax that it placed on all local entertainment businesses. The result is that the quantity supplied of movies at any given price increases by 10%.
Price per Ticket Qd Qs
\$5.00 26 16
\$6.00 24 18
\$7.00 22 20
\$8.00 21 21
\$9.00 20 22
Table 3.10
57.
A low-income country decides to set a price ceiling on bread so it can make sure that bread is affordable to the poor. Table 3.11 provides the conditions of demand and supply. What are the equilibrium price and equilibrium quantity before the price ceiling? What will the excess demand or the shortage (that is, quantity demanded minus quantity supplied) be if the price ceiling is set at \$2.40? At \$2.00? At \$3.60?
Price Qd Qs
\$1.60 9,000 5,000
\$2.00 8,500 5,500
\$2.40 8,000 6,400
\$2.80 7,500 7,500
\$3.20 7,000 9,000
\$3.60 6,500 11,000
\$4.00 6,000 15,000
Table 3.11 | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_3e_(OpenStax)/03%3A_Demand_and_Supply/3.12%3A_Problems.txt |
Chapter Objectives
In this chapter, you will learn about:
• Demand and Supply at Work in Labor Markets
• Demand and Supply in Financial Markets
• The Market System as an Efficient Mechanism for Information
04: Labor and Financial Markets
Figure 4.1 People often think of demand and supply in relation to goods, but labor markets, such as the nursing profession, can also apply to this analysis. (Credit: modification of "Hospital do Subúrbio" by Jaques Wagner Governador/Flickr Creative Commons, CC BY 2.0)
Bring It Home
Baby Boomers Come of Age
According to the 2020 Census, 22% of the U.S. population was 60 years old or older, which means that more than 74 million people have reached an age when they will need increased medical care.
The baby boomer population, the group born between 1946 and 1964, is comprised of more than 71 million people who have already reached retirement age or will soon reach retirement. As this population grows older, they will be faced with common healthcare issues such as heart conditions, arthritis, and Alzheimer’s that may require hospitalization, long-term, or at-home nursing care. Aging baby boomers and advances in life-saving and life-extending technologies will increase the demand for healthcare and nursing. Additionally, the Affordable Care Act, which expands access to healthcare for millions of Americans, has further increased the demand.
These data tell us, as economists, that the market for healthcare professionals, and nurses in particular, will face several challenges. Our study of supply and demand will help us to analyze what might happen in the labor market for nursing and other healthcare professionals, as we will discuss in the second half of this case at the end of the chapter.
The theories of supply and demand do not apply just to markets for goods. They apply to any market, even markets for things we may not think of as goods and services like labor and financial services. Labor markets are markets for employees or jobs. Financial services markets are markets for saving or borrowing.
When we think about demand and supply curves in goods and services markets, it is easy to picture the demanders and suppliers: businesses produce the products and households buy them. Who are the demanders and suppliers in labor and financial service markets? In labor markets job seekers (individuals) are the suppliers of labor, while firms and other employers who hire labor are the demanders for labor. In financial markets, any individual or firm who saves contributes to the supply of money, and any entity that borrows (person, firm, or government) contributes to the demand for money.
As a college student, you most likely participate in both labor and financial markets. Employment is a fact of life for most college students: According to the National Center for Educational Statistics, in 2018 43% of full-time college students and 81% of part-time college students were employed. Most college students are also heavily involved in financial markets, primarily as borrowers. As of the 2018–19 school year, 43% of full-time undergraduate students were receiving loan aid to help finance their education, and those loans averaged \$7,300 per year. Many students also borrow for other expenses, like purchasing a car. As this chapter will illustrate, we can analyze labor markets and financial markets with the same tools we use to analyze demand and supply in the goods markets. | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_3e_(OpenStax)/04%3A_Labor_and_Financial_Markets/4.01%3A_Introduction_to_Labor_and_Financial_Markets.txt |
Learning Objectives
By the end of this section, you will be able to:
• Predict shifts in the demand and supply curves of the labor market
• Explain the impact of new technology on the demand and supply curves of the labor market
• Explain price floors in the labor market such as minimum wage or a living wage
Markets for labor have demand and supply curves, just like markets for goods. The law of demand applies in labor markets this way: A higher salary or wage—that is, a higher price in the labor market—leads to a decrease in the quantity of labor demanded by employers, while a lower salary or wage leads to an increase in the quantity of labor demanded. The law of supply functions in labor markets, too: A higher price for labor leads to a higher quantity of labor supplied; a lower price leads to a lower quantity supplied.
Equilibrium in the Labor Market
In 2020, nearly 41,000 registered nurses worked in the Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington, Minnesota-Wisconsin metropolitan area, according to the BLS. They worked for a variety of employers: hospitals, doctors’ offices, schools, health clinics, and nursing homes. Figure 4.2 illustrates how demand and supply determine equilibrium in this labor market. The demand and supply schedules in Table 4.1 list the quantity supplied and quantity demanded of nurses at different salaries.
Figure 4.2 Labor Market Example: Demand and Supply for Nurses in Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington The demand curve (D) of those employers who want to hire nurses intersects with the supply curve (S) of those who are qualified and willing to work as nurses at the equilibrium point (E). The equilibrium salary is \$85,000 and the equilibrium quantity is 41,000 nurses. At an above-equilibrium salary of \$90,000, quantity supplied increases to 45,000, but the quantity of nurses demanded at the higher pay declines to 40,000. At this above-equilibrium salary, an excess supply or surplus of nurses would exist. At a below-equilibrium salary of \$75,000, quantity supplied declines to 34,000, while the quantity demanded at the lower wage increases to 47,000 nurses. At this below-equilibrium salary, excess demand or a shortage exists.
Annual Salary Quantity Demanded Quantity Supplied
\$70,000 52,000 27,000
\$75,000 47,000 34,000
\$80,000 44,000 38,000
\$85,000 41,000 41,000
\$90,000 40,000 45,000
\$95,000 39,000 48,000
Table 4.1 Demand and Supply of Nurses in Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington
The horizontal axis shows the quantity of nurses hired. In this example we measure labor by number of workers, but another common way to measure the quantity of labor is by the number of hours worked. The vertical axis shows the price for nurses’ labor—that is, how much they are paid. In the real world, this “price” would be total labor compensation: salary plus benefits. It is not obvious, but benefits are a significant part (as high as 30 percent) of labor compensation. In this example we measure the price of labor by salary on an annual basis, although in other cases we could measure the price of labor by monthly or weekly pay, or even the wage paid per hour. As the salary for nurses rises, the quantity demanded will fall. Some hospitals and nursing homes may reduce the number of nurses they hire, or they may lay off some of their existing nurses, rather than pay them higher salaries. Employers who face higher nurses’ salaries may also try to replace some nursing functions by investing in physical equipment, like computer monitoring and diagnostic systems to monitor patients, or by using lower-paid health care aides to reduce the number of nurses they need.
As the salary for nurses rises, the quantity supplied will rise. If nurses’ salaries in Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington are higher than in other cities, more nurses will move to Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington to find jobs, more people will be willing to train as nurses, and those currently trained as nurses will be more likely to pursue nursing as a full-time job. In other words, there will be more nurses looking for jobs in the area.
At equilibrium, the quantity supplied and the quantity demanded are equal. Thus, every employer who wants to hire a nurse at this equilibrium wage can find a willing worker, and every nurse who wants to work at this equilibrium salary can find a job. In Figure 4.2, the supply curve (S) and demand curve (D) intersect at the equilibrium point (E). The equilibrium quantity of nurses in the Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington area is 41,000, and the equilibrium salary is \$86,000 per year. This example simplifies the nursing market by focusing on the “average” nurse. In reality, of course, the market for nurses actually comprises many smaller markets, like markets for nurses with varying degrees of experience and credentials. Many markets contain closely related products that differ in quality. For instance, even a simple product like gasoline comes in regular, premium, and super-premium, each with a different price. Even in such cases, discussing the average price of gasoline, like the average salary for nurses, can still be useful because it reflects what is happening in most of the submarkets.
When the price of labor is not at the equilibrium, economic incentives tend to move salaries toward the equilibrium. For example, if salaries for nurses in Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington were above the equilibrium at \$90,000 per year, then 43,000 people want to work as nurses, but employers want to hire only 39,000 nurses. At that above-equilibrium salary, excess supply or a surplus results. In a situation of excess supply in the labor market, with many applicants for every job opening, employers will have an incentive to offer lower wages than they otherwise would have. Nurses’ salary will move down toward equilibrium.
In contrast, if the salary is below the equilibrium at, say, \$60,000 per year, then a situation of excess demand or a shortage arises. In this case, employers encouraged by the relatively lower wage want to hire 40,000 nurses, but only 27,000 individuals want to work as nurses at that salary in Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington. In response to the shortage, some employers will offer higher pay to attract the nurses. Other employers will have to match the higher pay to keep their own employees. The higher salaries will encourage more nurses to train or work in Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington. Again, price and quantity in the labor market will move toward equilibrium.
Shifts in Labor Demand
The demand curve for labor shows the quantity of labor employers wish to hire at any given salary or wage rate, under the ceteris paribus assumption. A change in the wage or salary will result in a change in the quantity demanded of labor. If the wage rate increases, employers will want to hire fewer employees. The quantity of labor demanded will decrease, and there will be a movement upward along the demand curve. If the wages and salaries decrease, employers are more likely to hire a greater number of workers. The quantity of labor demanded will increase, resulting in a downward movement along the demand curve.
Shifts in the demand curve for labor occur for many reasons. One key reason is that the demand for labor is based on the demand for the good or service that is produced. For example, the more new automobiles consumers demand, the greater the number of workers automakers will need to hire. Therefore the demand for labor is called a “derived demand.” Here are some examples of derived demand for labor:
• The demand for chefs is dependent on the demand for restaurant meals.
• The demand for pharmacists is dependent on the demand for prescription drugs.
• The demand for attorneys is dependent on the demand for legal services.
As the demand for the goods and services increases, the demand for labor will increase, or shift to the right, to meet employers’ production requirements. As the demand for the goods and services decreases, the demand for labor will decrease, or shift to the left. Table 4.2 shows that in addition to the derived demand for labor, demand can also increase or decrease (shift) in response to several factors.
Factors Results
Demand for Output When the demand for the good produced (output) increases, both the output price and profitability increase. As a result, producers demand more labor to ramp up production.
Education and Training A well-trained and educated workforce causes an increase in the demand for that labor by employers. Increased levels of productivity within the workforce will cause the demand for labor to shift to the right. If the workforce is not well-trained or educated, employers will not hire from within that labor pool, since they will need to spend a significant amount of time and money training that workforce. Demand for such will shift to the left.
Technology Technology changes can act as either substitutes for or complements to labor. When technology acts as a substitute, it replaces the need for the number of workers an employer needs to hire. For example, word processing decreased the number of typists needed in the workplace. This shifted the demand curve for typists left. An increase in the availability of certain technologies may increase the demand for labor. Technology that acts as a complement to labor will increase the demand for certain types of labor, resulting in a rightward shift of the demand curve. For example, the increased use of word processing and other software has increased the demand for information technology professionals who can resolve software and hardware issues related to a firm’s network. More and better technology will increase demand for skilled workers who know how to use technology to enhance workplace productivity. Those workers who do not adapt to changes in technology will experience a decrease in demand.
Number of Companies An increase in the number of companies producing a given product will increase the demand for labor resulting in a shift to the right. A decrease in the number of companies producing a given product will decrease the demand for labor resulting in a shift to the left.
Government Regulations Complying with government regulations can increase or decrease the demand for labor at any given wage. In the healthcare industry, government rules may require that nurses be hired to carry out certain medical procedures. This will increase the demand for nurses. Less-trained healthcare workers would be prohibited from carrying out these procedures, and the demand for these workers will shift to the left.
Price and Availability of Other Inputs Labor is not the only input into the production process. For example, a salesperson at a call center needs a telephone and a computer terminal to enter data and record sales. If prices of other inputs fall, production will become more profitable and suppliers will demand more labor to increase production. This will cause a rightward shift in the demand curve for labor. The opposite is also true. Higher prices for other inputs lower demand for labor.
Table 4.2 Factors That Can Shift Demand
Link It Up
Click here to read more about “Trends and Challenges for Work in the 21st Century.”
Shifts in Labor Supply
The supply of labor is upward-sloping and adheres to the law of supply: The higher the price, the greater the quantity supplied and the lower the price, the less quantity supplied. The supply curve models the tradeoff between supplying labor into the market or using time in leisure activities at every given price level. The higher the wage, the more labor is willing to work and forego leisure activities. Table 4.3 lists some of the factors that will cause the supply to increase or decrease.
Factors Results
Number of Workers An increased number of workers will cause the supply curve to shift to the right. An increased number of workers can be due to several factors, such as immigration, increasing population, an aging population, and changing demographics. Policies that encourage immigration will increase the supply of labor, and vice versa. Population grows when birth rates exceed death rates. This eventually increases supply of labor when the former reach working age. Another example of changing demographics is more women working outside of the home, which increases the supply of labor.
Required Education The more required education, the lower the supply. There is a lower supply of PhD mathematicians than of high school mathematics teachers; there is a lower supply of cardiologists than of primary care physicians; and there is a lower supply of physicians than of nurses.
Government Policies Government policies can also affect the supply of labor for jobs. Alternatively, the government may support rules that set high qualifications for certain jobs: academic training, certificates or licenses, or experience. When these qualifications are made tougher, the number of qualified workers will decrease at any given wage. On the other hand, the government may also subsidize training or even reduce the required level of qualifications. For example, government might offer subsidies for nursing schools or nursing students. Such provisions would shift the supply curve of nurses to the right. In addition, government policies that change the relative desirability of working versus not working also affect the labor supply. These include unemployment benefits, maternity leave, child care benefits, and welfare policy. For example, child care benefits may increase the labor supply of working mothers. Long term unemployment benefits may discourage job searching for unemployed workers. All these policies must therefore be carefully designed to minimize any negative labor supply effects.
Table 4.3 Factors that Can Shift Supply
A change in salary will lead to a movement along labor demand or labor supply curves, but it will not shift those curves. However, other events like those we have outlined here will cause either the demand or the supply of labor to shift, and thus will move the labor market to a new equilibrium salary and quantity.
Technology and Wage Inequality: The Four-Step Process
Economic events can change the equilibrium salary (or wage) and quantity of labor. Consider how the wave of new information technologies, like computer and telecommunications networks, has affected low-skill and high-skill workers in the U.S. economy. From the perspective of employers who demand labor, these new technologies are often a substitute for low-skill laborers like file clerks who used to keep file cabinets full of paper records of transactions. However, the same new technologies are a complement to high-skill workers like managers, who benefit from the technological advances by having the ability to monitor more information, communicate more easily, and juggle a wider array of responsibilities. How will the new technologies affect the wages of high-skill and low-skill workers? For this question, the four-step process of analyzing how shifts in supply or demand affect a market (introduced in Demand and Supply) works in this way:
Step 1. What did the markets for low-skill labor and high-skill labor look like before the arrival of the new technologies? In Figure 4.3 (a) and Figure 4.3 (b), S0 is the original supply curve for labor and D0 is the original demand curve for labor in each market. In each graph, the original point of equilibrium, E0, occurs at the price W0 and the quantity Q0.
Figure 4.3 Technology and Wages: Applying Demand and Supply (a) The demand for low-skill labor shifts to the left when technology can do the job previously done by these workers. (b) New technologies can also increase the demand for high-skill labor in fields such as information technology and network administration.
Step 2. Does the new technology affect the supply of labor from households or the demand for labor from firms? The technology change described here affects demand for labor by firms that hire workers.
Step 3. Will the new technology increase or decrease demand? Based on the description earlier, as the substitute for low-skill labor becomes available, demand for low-skill labor will shift to the left, from D0 to D1. As the technology complement for high-skill labor becomes cheaper, demand for high-skill labor will shift to the right, from D0 to D1.
Step 4. The new equilibrium for low-skill labor, shown as point E1 with price W1 and quantity Q1, has a lower wage and quantity hired than the original equilibrium, E0. The new equilibrium for high-skill labor, shown as point E1 with price W1 and quantity Q1, has a higher wage and quantity hired than the original equilibrium (E0).
Thus, the demand and supply model predicts that the new computer and communications technologies will raise the pay of high-skill workers but reduce the pay of low-skill workers. From the 1970s to the mid-2000s, the wage gap widened between high-skill and low-skill labor. According to the National Center for Education Statistics, in 1980, for example, a college graduate earned about 30% more than a high school graduate with comparable job experience, but by 2019, a college graduate earned about 59% more than an otherwise comparable high school graduate. Many economists believe that the trend toward greater wage inequality across the U.S. economy is due to improvements in technology.
Link It Up
Visit this website to read about ten tech skills that have lost relevance in today’s workforce.
Price Floors in the Labor Market: Living Wages and Minimum Wages
In contrast to goods and services markets, price ceilings are rare in labor markets, because rules that prevent people from earning income are not politically popular. There is one exception: boards of trustees or stockholders, as an example, propose limits on the high incomes of top business executives.
The labor market, however, presents some prominent examples of price floors, which are an attempt to increase the wages of low-paid workers. The U.S. government sets a minimum wage, a price floor that makes it illegal for an employer to pay employees less than a certain hourly rate. In mid-2009, the U.S. minimum wage was raised to \$7.25 per hour. Local political movements in a number of U.S. cities have pushed for a higher minimum wage, which they call a living wage. Promoters of living wage laws maintain that the minimum wage is too low to ensure a reasonable standard of living. They base this conclusion on the calculation that, if you work 40 hours a week at a minimum wage of \$7.25 per hour for 50 weeks a year, your annual income is \$14,500, which is less than the official U.S. government definition of what it means for a family to be in poverty. (A family with two adults earning minimum wage and two young children will find it more cost efficient for one parent to provide childcare while the other works for income. Thus the family income would be \$14,500, which is significantly lower than the federal poverty line for a family of four, which was \$26,500 in 2021.)
Supporters of the living wage argue that full-time workers should be assured a high enough wage so that they can afford the essentials of life: food, clothing, shelter, and healthcare. Since Baltimore passed the first living wage law in 1994, several dozen cities enacted similar laws in the late 1990s and the 2000s. The living wage ordinances do not apply to all employers, but they have specified that all employees of the city or employees of firms that the city hires be paid at least a certain wage that is usually a few dollars per hour above the U.S. minimum wage.
Figure 4.4 illustrates the situation of a city considering a living wage law. For simplicity, we assume that there is no federal minimum wage. The wage appears on the vertical axis, because the wage is the price in the labor market. Before the passage of the living wage law, the equilibrium wage is \$10 per hour and the city hires 1,200 workers at this wage. However, a group of concerned citizens persuades the city council to enact a living wage law requiring employers to pay no less than \$12 per hour. In response to the higher wage, 1,600 workers look for jobs with the city. At this higher wage, the city, as an employer, is willing to hire only 700 workers. At the price floor, the quantity supplied exceeds the quantity demanded, and a surplus of labor exists in this market. For workers who continue to have a job at a higher salary, life has improved. For those who were willing to work at the old wage rate but lost their jobs with the wage increase, life has not improved. Table 4.4 shows the differences in supply and demand at different wages.
Figure 4.4 A Living Wage: Example of a Price Floor The original equilibrium in this labor market is a wage of \$10/hour and a quantity of 1,200 workers, shown at point E. Imposing a wage floor at \$12/hour leads to an excess supply of labor. At that wage, the quantity of labor supplied is 1,600 and the quantity of labor demanded is only 700.
Wage Quantity Labor Demanded Quantity Labor Supplied
\$8/hr 1,900 500
\$9/hr 1,500 900
\$10/hr 1,200 1,200
\$11/hr 900 1,400
\$12/hr 700 1,600
\$13/hr 500 1,800
\$14/hr 400 1,900
Table 4.4 Living Wage: Example of a Price Floor
The Minimum Wage as an Example of a Price Floor
The U.S. minimum wage is a price floor that is set either very close to the equilibrium wage or even slightly below it. About 1.5% of hourly workers in the U.S. are paid the minimum wage. In other words, the vast majority of the U.S. labor force has its wages determined in the labor market, not as a result of the government price floor. However, for workers with low skills and little experience, like those without a high school diploma or teenagers, the minimum wage is quite important. In many cities, the federal minimum wage is apparently below the market price for unskilled labor, because employers offer more than the minimum wage to checkout clerks and other low-skill workers without any government prodding.
Economists have attempted to estimate how much the minimum wage reduces the quantity demanded of low-skill labor. A typical result of such studies is that a 10% increase in the minimum wage would decrease the hiring of unskilled workers by 1 to 2%, which seems a relatively small reduction. In fact, some studies have even found no effect of a higher minimum wage on employment at certain times and places—although these studies are controversial. Well-known economists Walter Williams and Thomas Sowell, who both focus on the intersections of race and economics, argue that minimum wages increase discrimination and limit economic mobility. Williams, for example, indicates that higher minimum wages would increase employment barriers for lower-skilled workers, reducing the opportunity for them to learn on the job and gain experience that would give them more choice in employment.
Let’s suppose that the minimum wage lies just slightly below the equilibrium wage level. Wages could fluctuate according to market forces above this price floor, but they would not be allowed to move beneath the floor. In this situation, the price floor minimum wage is nonbinding —that is, the price floor is not determining the market outcome. Even if the minimum wage moves just a little higher, it will still have no effect on the quantity of employment in the economy, as long as it remains below the equilibrium wage. Even if the government increases the minimum wage by enough so that it rises slightly above the equilibrium wage and becomes binding, there will be only a small excess supply gap between the quantity demanded and quantity supplied.
These insights help to explain why U.S. minimum wage laws have historically had only a small impact on employment. Since the minimum wage has typically been set close to the equilibrium wage for low-skill labor and sometimes even below it, it has not had a large effect in creating an excess supply of labor. However, if the minimum wage increased dramatically—say, if it doubled to match the living wages that some U.S. cities have considered—then its impact on reducing the quantity demanded of employment would be far greater. The following Clear It Up feature describes in greater detail some of the arguments for and against changes to the minimum wage.
Clear It Up
What’s the harm in raising the minimum wage?
Because of the law of demand, a higher required wage will reduce the amount of low-skill employment either in terms of employees or in terms of work hours. Although there is controversy over the numbers, let’s say for the sake of the argument that a 10% rise in the minimum wage will reduce the employment of low-skill workers by 2%. Does this outcome mean that raising the minimum wage by 10% is bad public policy? Not necessarily.
If 98% of those receiving the minimum wage have a pay increase of 10%, but 2% of those receiving the minimum wage lose their jobs, are the gains for society as a whole greater than the losses? The answer is not clear, because job losses, even for a small group, may cause more pain than modest income gains for others. For one thing, we need to consider which minimum wage workers are losing their jobs. If the 2% of minimum wage workers who lose their jobs are struggling to support families, that is one thing. If those who lose their job are high school students picking up spending money over summer vacation, that is something else.
Another complexity is that many minimum wage workers do not work full-time for an entire year. Imagine a minimum wage worker who holds different part-time jobs for a few months at a time, with bouts of unemployment in between. The worker in this situation receives the 10% raise in the minimum wage when working, but also ends up working 2% fewer hours during the year because the higher minimum wage reduces how much employers want people to work. Overall, this worker’s income would rise because the 10% pay raise would more than offset the 2% fewer hours worked.
Of course, these arguments do not prove that raising the minimum wage is necessarily a good idea either. There may well be other, better public policy options for helping low-wage workers. (The Poverty and Economic Inequality chapter discusses some possibilities.) The lesson from this maze of minimum wage arguments is that complex social problems rarely have simple answers. Even those who agree on how a proposed economic policy affects quantity demanded and quantity supplied may still disagree on whether the policy is a good idea. | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_3e_(OpenStax)/04%3A_Labor_and_Financial_Markets/4.02%3A_Demand_and_Supply_at_Work_in_Labor_Markets.txt |
Learning Objectives
By the end of this section, you will be able to:
• Identify the demanders and suppliers in a financial market
• Explain how interest rates can affect supply and demand
• Analyze the economic effects of U.S. debt in terms of domestic financial markets
• Explain the role of price ceilings and usury laws in the U.S.
United States' households, institutions, and domestic businesses saved almost \$1.3 trillion in 2015. Where did that savings go and how was it used? Some of the savings ended up in banks, which in turn loaned the money to individuals or businesses that wanted to borrow money. Some was invested in private companies or loaned to government agencies that wanted to borrow money to raise funds for purposes like building roads or mass transit. Some firms reinvested their savings in their own businesses.
In this section, we will determine how the demand and supply model links those who wish to supply financial capital (i.e., savings) with those who demand financial capital (i.e., borrowing). Those who save money (or make financial investments, which is the same thing), whether individuals or businesses, are on the supply side of the financial market. Those who borrow money are on the demand side of the financial market. For a more detailed treatment of the different kinds of financial investments like bank accounts, stocks and bonds, see the Financial Markets chapter.
Who Demands and Who Supplies in Financial Markets?
In any market, the price is what suppliers receive and what demanders pay. In financial markets, those who supply financial capital through saving expect to receive a rate of return, while those who demand financial capital by receiving funds expect to pay a rate of return. This rate of return can come in a variety of forms, depending on the type of investment.
The simplest example of a rate of return is the interest rate. For example, when you supply money into a savings account at a bank, you receive interest on your deposit. The interest the bank pays you as a percent of your deposits is the interest rate. Similarly, if you demand a loan to buy a car or a computer, you will need to pay interest on the money you borrow.
Let’s consider the market for borrowing money with credit cards. In 2021, almost 200 million Americans were cardholders. Credit cards allow you to borrow money from the card's issuer, and pay back the borrowed amount plus interest, although most allow you a period of time in which you can repay the loan without paying interest. A typical credit card interest rate ranges from 12% to 18% per year. In May 2021, Americans had about \$807 billion outstanding in credit card debts. As of 2021, just over 45% of American families carried some credit card debt. Let’s say that, on average, the annual interest rate for credit card borrowing is 15% per year. Thus, Americans pay tens of billions of dollars every year in interest on their credit cards—plus basic fees for the credit card or fees for late payments.
Figure 4.5 illustrates demand and supply in the financial market for credit cards. The horizontal axis of the financial market shows the quantity of money loaned or borrowed in this market. The vertical or price axis shows the rate of return, which in the case of credit card borrowing we can measure with an interest rate. Table 4.5 shows the quantity of financial capital that consumers demand at various interest rates and the quantity that credit card firms (often banks) are willing to supply.
Figure 4.5 Demand and Supply for Borrowing Money with Credit Cards In this market for credit card borrowing, the demand curve (D) for borrowing financial capital intersects the supply curve (S) for lending financial capital at equilibrium E. At the equilibrium, the interest rate (the “price” in this market) is 15% and the quantity of financial capital loaned and borrowed is \$600 billion. The equilibrium price is where the quantity demanded and the quantity supplied are equal. At an above-equilibrium interest rate like 21%, the quantity of financial capital supplied would increase to \$750 billion, but the quantity demanded would decrease to \$480 billion. At a below-equilibrium interest rate like 13%, the quantity of financial capital demanded would increase to \$700 billion, but the quantity of financial capital supplied would decrease to \$510 billion.
Interest Rate (%) Quantity of Financial Capital Demanded (Borrowing) (\$ billions) Quantity of Financial Capital Supplied (Lending) (\$ billions)
11 \$800 \$420
13 \$700 \$510
15 \$600 \$600
17 \$550 \$660
19 \$500 \$720
21 \$480 \$750
Table 4.5 Demand and Supply for Borrowing Money with Credit Cards
The laws of demand and supply continue to apply in the financial markets. According to the law of demand, a higher rate of return (that is, a higher price) will decrease the quantity demanded. As the interest rate rises, consumers will reduce the quantity that they borrow. According to the law of supply, a higher price increases the quantity supplied. Consequently, as the interest rate paid on credit card borrowing rises, more firms will be eager to issue credit cards and to encourage customers to use them. Conversely, if the interest rate on credit cards falls, the quantity of financial capital supplied in the credit card market will decrease and the quantity demanded will increase.
Equilibrium in Financial Markets
In the financial market for credit cards in Figure 4.5, the supply curve (S) and the demand curve (D) cross at the equilibrium point (E). The equilibrium occurs at an interest rate of 15%, where the quantity of funds demanded and the quantity supplied are equal at an equilibrium quantity of \$600 billion.
If the interest rate (remember, this measures the “price” in the financial market) is above the equilibrium level, then an excess supply, or a surplus, of financial capital will arise in this market. For example, at an interest rate of 21%, the quantity of funds supplied increases to \$750 billion, while the quantity demanded decreases to \$480 billion. At this above-equilibrium interest rate, firms are eager to supply loans to credit card borrowers, but relatively few people or businesses wish to borrow. As a result, some credit card firms will lower the interest rates (or other fees) they charge to attract more business. This strategy will push the interest rate down toward the equilibrium level.
If the interest rate is below the equilibrium, then excess demand or a shortage of funds occurs in this market. At an interest rate of 13%, the quantity of funds credit card borrowers demand increases to \$700 billion, but the quantity credit card firms are willing to supply is only \$510 billion. In this situation, credit card firms will perceive that they are overloaded with eager borrowers and conclude that they have an opportunity to raise interest rates or fees. The interest rate will face economic pressures to creep up toward the equilibrium level.
The FRED database publishes some two dozen measures of interest rates, including interest rates on credit cards, automobile loans, personal loans, mortgage loans, and more. You can find these at the FRED website.
Shifts in Demand and Supply in Financial Markets
Those who supply financial capital face two broad decisions: how much to save, and how to divide up their savings among different forms of financial investments. We will discuss each of these in turn.
Participants in financial markets must decide when they prefer to consume goods: now or in the future. Economists call this intertemporal decision making because it involves decisions across time. Unlike a decision about what to buy from the grocery store, people make investment or savings decisions across a period of time, sometimes a long period.
Most workers save for retirement because their income in the present is greater than their needs, while the opposite will be true once they retire. Thus, they save today and supply financial markets. If their income increases, they save more. If their perceived situation in the future changes, they change the amount of their saving. For example, there is some evidence that Social Security, the program that workers pay into in order to qualify for government checks after retirement, has tended to reduce the quantity of financial capital that workers save. If this is true, Social Security has shifted the supply of financial capital at any interest rate to the left.
By contrast, many college students need money today when their income is low (or nonexistent) to pay their college expenses. As a result, they borrow today and demand from financial markets. Once they graduate and become employed, they will pay back the loans. Individuals borrow money to purchase homes or cars. A business seeks financial investment so that it has the funds to build a factory or invest in a research and development project that will not pay off for five years, ten years, or even more. Thus, when consumers and businesses have greater confidence that they will be able to repay in the future, the quantity demanded of financial capital at any given interest rate will shift to the right.
For example, in the technology boom of the late 1990s, many businesses became extremely confident that investments in new technology would have a high rate of return, and their demand for financial capital shifted to the right. Conversely, during the 2008 and 2009 Great Recession, their demand for financial capital at any given interest rate shifted to the left.
To this point, we have been looking at saving in total. Now let us consider what affects saving in different types of financial investments. In deciding between different forms of financial investments, suppliers of financial capital will have to consider the rates of return and the risks involved. Rate of return is a positive attribute of investments, but risk is a negative. If Investment A becomes more risky, or the return diminishes, then savers will shift their funds to Investment B—and the supply curve of financial capital for Investment A will shift back to the left while the supply curve of capital for Investment B shifts to the right.
The United States as a Global Borrower
In the global economy, trillions of dollars of financial investment cross national borders every year. In the early 2000s, financial investors from foreign countries were investing several hundred billion dollars per year more in the U.S. economy than U.S. financial investors were investing abroad. The following Work It Out deals with one of the macroeconomic concerns for the U.S. economy in recent years.
Work It Out
The Effect of Growing U.S. Debt
Imagine that foreign investors viewed the U.S. economy as a less desirable place to put their money because of fears about the growth of the U.S. public debt. Using the four-step process for analyzing how changes in supply and demand affect equilibrium outcomes, how would increased U.S. public debt affect the equilibrium price and quantity for capital in U.S. financial markets?
Step 1. Draw a diagram showing demand and supply for financial capital that represents the original scenario in which foreign investors are pouring money into the U.S. economy. Figure 4.6 shows a demand curve, D, and a supply curve, S, where the supply of capital includes the funds arriving from foreign investors. The original equilibrium E0 occurs at interest rate R0 and quantity of financial investment Q0.
Figure 4.6 The United States as a Global Borrower Before U.S. Debt Uncertainty The graph shows the demand for financial capital from and supply of financial capital into the U.S. financial markets by the foreign sector before the increase in uncertainty regarding U.S. public debt. The original equilibrium (E0) occurs at an equilibrium rate of return (R0) and the equilibrium quantity is at Q0.
Step 2. Will the diminished confidence in the U.S. economy as a place to invest affect demand or supply of financial capital? Yes, it will affect supply. Many foreign investors look to the U.S. financial markets to store their money in safe financial vehicles with low risk and stable returns. Diminished confidence means U.S. financial assets will be seen as more risky.
Step 3. Will supply increase or decrease? When the enthusiasm of foreign investors’ for investing their money in the U.S. economy diminishes, the supply of financial capital shifts to the left. Figure 4.7 shows the supply curve shift from S0 to S1.
Figure 4.7 The United States as a Global Borrower Before and After U.S. Debt Uncertainty The graph shows the demand for financial capital and supply of financial capital into the U.S. financial markets by the foreign sector before and after the increase in uncertainty regarding U.S. public debt. The original equilibrium (E0) occurs at an equilibrium rate of return (R0) and the equilibrium quantity is at Q0.
Step 4. Thus, foreign investors’ diminished enthusiasm leads to a new equilibrium, E1, which occurs at the higher interest rate, R1, and the lower quantity of financial investment, Q1. In short, U.S. borrowers will have to pay more interest on their borrowing.
The economy has experienced an enormous inflow of foreign capital. According to the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, by the third quarter of 2021, U.S. investors had accumulated \$34.45 trillion of foreign assets, but foreign investors owned a total of \$50.53 trillion of U.S. assets. If foreign investors were to pull their money out of the U.S. economy and invest elsewhere in the world, the result could be a significantly lower quantity of financial investment in the United States, available only at a higher interest rate. This reduced inflow of foreign financial investment could impose hardship on U.S. consumers and firms interested in borrowing.
In a modern, developed economy, financial capital often moves invisibly through electronic transfers between one bank account and another. Yet we can analyze these flows of funds with the same tools of demand and supply as markets for goods or labor.
Price Ceilings in Financial Markets: Usury Laws
As we noted earlier, about 200 million Americans own credit cards, and their interest payments and fees total tens of billions of dollars each year. It is little wonder that political pressures sometimes arise for setting limits on the interest rates or fees that credit card companies charge. The firms that issue credit cards, including banks, oil companies, phone companies, and retail stores, respond that the higher interest rates are necessary to cover the losses created by those who borrow on their credit cards and who do not repay on time or at all. These companies also point out that cardholders can avoid paying interest if they pay their bills on time.
Consider the credit card market as Figure 4.8 illustrates. In this financial market, the vertical axis shows the interest rate (which is the price in the financial market). Demanders in the credit card market are households and businesses. Suppliers are the companies that issue credit cards. This figure does not use specific numbers, which would be hypothetical in any case, but instead focuses on the underlying economic relationships. Imagine a law imposes a price ceiling that holds the interest rate charged on credit cards at the rate Rc, which lies below the interest rate R0 that would otherwise have prevailed in the market. The horizontal dashed line at interest rate Rc in Figure 4.8 shows the price ceiling. The demand and supply model predicts that at the lower price ceiling interest rate, the quantity demanded of credit card debt will increase from its original level of Q0 to Qd; however, the quantity supplied of credit card debt will decrease from the original Q0 to Qs. At the price ceiling (Rc), quantity demanded will exceed quantity supplied. Consequently, a number of people who want to have credit cards and are willing to pay the prevailing interest rate will find that companies are unwilling to issue cards to them. The result will be a credit shortage.
Figure 4.8 Credit Card Interest Rates: Another Price Ceiling Example The original intersection of demand D and supply S occurs at equilibrium E0. However, a price ceiling is set at the interest rate Rc, below the equilibrium interest rate R0, and so the interest rate cannot adjust upward to the equilibrium. At the price ceiling, the quantity demanded, Qd, exceeds the quantity supplied, Qs. There is excess demand, also called a shortage.
Many states do have usury laws, which impose an upper limit on the interest rate that lenders can charge. However, in many cases these upper limits are well above the market interest rate. For example, if the interest rate is not allowed to rise above 30% per year, it can still fluctuate below that level according to market forces. A price ceiling that is set at a relatively high level is nonbinding, and it will have no practical effect unless the equilibrium price soars high enough to exceed the price ceiling. | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_3e_(OpenStax)/04%3A_Labor_and_Financial_Markets/4.03%3A_Demand_and_Supply_in_Financial_Markets.txt |
Learning Objectives
By the end of this section, you will be able to:
• Apply demand and supply models to analyze prices and quantities
• Explain the effects of price controls on the equilibrium of prices and quantities
Prices exist in markets for goods and services, for labor, and for financial capital. In all of these markets, prices serve as a remarkable social mechanism for collecting, combining, and transmitting information that is relevant to the market—namely, the relationship between demand and supply—and then serving as messengers to convey that information to buyers and sellers. In a market-oriented economy, no government agency or guiding intelligence oversees the set of responses and interconnections that result from a change in price. Instead, each consumer reacts according to that person’s preferences and budget set, and each profit-seeking producer reacts to the impact on its expected profits. The following Clear It Up feature examines the demand and supply models.
Clear It Up
Why are demand and supply curves important?
The demand and supply model is the second fundamental diagram for this course. (The opportunity set model that we introduced in the Choice in a World of Scarcity chapter was the first.) Just as it would be foolish to try to learn the arithmetic of long division by memorizing every possible combination of numbers that can be divided by each other, it would be foolish to try to memorize every specific example of demand and supply in this chapter, this textbook, or this course. Demand and supply is not primarily a list of examples. It is a model to analyze prices and quantities. Even though demand and supply diagrams have many labels, they are fundamentally the same in their logic. Your goal should be to understand the underlying model so you can use it to analyze any market.
Figure 4.9 displays a generic demand and supply curve. The horizontal axis shows the different measures of quantity: a quantity of a good or service, or a quantity of labor for a given job, or a quantity of financial capital. The vertical axis shows a measure of price: the price of a good or service, the wage in the labor market, or the rate of return (like the interest rate) in the financial market.
The demand and supply model can explain the existing levels of prices, wages, and rates of return. To carry out such an analysis, think about the quantity that will be demanded at each price and the quantity that will be supplied at each price—that is, think about the shape of the demand and supply curves—and how these forces will combine to produce equilibrium.
We can also use demand and supply to explain how economic events will cause changes in prices, wages, and rates of return. There are only four possibilities: the change in any single event may cause the demand curve to shift right or to shift left, or it may cause the supply curve to shift right or to shift left. The key to analyzing the effect of an economic event on equilibrium prices and quantities is to determine which of these four possibilities occurred. The way to do this correctly is to think back to the list of factors that shift the demand and supply curves. Note that if more than one variable is changing at the same time, the overall impact will depend on the degree of the shifts. When there are multiple variables, economists isolate each change and analyze it independently.
Figure 4.9 Demand and Supply Curves The figure displays a generic demand and supply curve. The horizontal axis shows the different measures of quantity: a quantity of a good or service, a quantity of labor for a given job, or a quantity of financial capital. The vertical axis shows a measure of price: the price of a good or service, the wage in the labor market, or the rate of return (like the interest rate) in the financial market. We can use the demand and supply curves explain how economic events will cause changes in prices, wages, and rates of return.
An increase in the price of some product signals consumers that there is a shortage; therefore, they may want to economize on buying this product. For example, if you are thinking about taking a plane trip to Hawaii, but the ticket turns out to be expensive during the week you intend to go, you might consider other weeks when the ticket might be cheaper. The price could be high because you were planning to travel during a holiday when demand for traveling is high. Maybe the cost of an input like jet fuel increased or the airline has raised the price temporarily to see how many people are willing to pay it. Perhaps all of these factors are present at the same time. You do not need to analyze the market and break down the price change into its underlying factors. You just have to look at the ticket price and decide whether and when to fly.
In the same way, price changes provide useful information to producers. Imagine the situation of a farmer who grows oats and learns that the price of oats has risen. The higher price could be due to an increase in demand caused by a new scientific study proclaiming that eating oats is especially healthful. Perhaps the price of a substitute grain, like corn, has risen, and people have responded by buying more oats. The oat farmer does not need to know the details. The farmer only needs to know that the price of oats has risen and that it will be profitable to expand production as a result.
The actions of individual consumers and producers as they react to prices overlap and interlock in markets for goods, labor, and financial capital. A change in any single market is transmitted through these multiple interconnections to other markets. The vision of the role of flexible prices helping markets to reach equilibrium and linking different markets together helps to explain why price controls can be so counterproductive. Price controls are government laws that serve to regulate prices rather than allow the various markets to determine prices. There is an old proverb: “Don’t kill the messenger.” In ancient times, messengers carried information between distant cities and kingdoms. When they brought bad news, there was an emotional impulse to kill the messenger. However, killing the messenger did not kill the bad news. Moreover, killing the messenger had an undesirable side effect: Other messengers would refuse to bring news to that city or kingdom, depriving its citizens of vital information.
Those who seek price controls are trying to kill the messenger—or at least to stifle an unwelcome message that prices are bringing about the equilibrium level of price and quantity. However, price controls do nothing to affect the underlying forces of demand and supply, and this can have serious repercussions. During China’s “Great Leap Forward” in the late 1950s, the government kept food prices artificially low, with the result that 30 to 40 million people died of starvation because the low prices depressed farm production. This was communist party leader Mao Zedong's social and economic campaign to rapidly transform the country from an agrarian economy to a socialist society through rapid industrialization and collectivization. Changes in demand and supply will continue to reveal themselves through consumers’ and producers’ behavior. Immobilizing the price messenger through price controls will deprive everyone in the economy of critical information. Without this information, it becomes difficult for everyone—buyers and sellers alike—to react in a flexible and appropriate manner as changes occur throughout the economy.
Bring It Home
Baby Boomers Come of Age
The theory of supply and demand can explain what happens in the labor markets and suggests that the demand for nurses will increase as healthcare needs of baby boomers increase, as Figure 4.10 shows. The impact of that increase will result in an average salary higher than the \$75,330 earned in 2020 referenced in the first part of this case. The new equilibrium (E1) will be at the new equilibrium price (Pe1).Equilibrium quantity will also increase from Qe0 to Qe1.
Figure 4.10 Impact of Increasing Demand for Nurses 2020–2030 In 2020, the median salary for nurses was \$75,330. As demand for services increases, the demand curve shifts to the right (from D0 to D1) and the equilibrium quantity of nurses increases from Qe0 to Qe1. The equilibrium salary increases from Pe0 to Pe1.
Suppose that as the demand for nurses increases, the supply shrinks due to an increasing number of nurses entering retirement and increases in the tuition of nursing degrees. The leftward shift of the supply curve in Figure 4.11 captures the impact of a decreasing supply of nurses. The shifts in the two curves result in higher salaries for nurses, but the overall impact on the quantity of nurses is uncertain, as it depends on the relative shifts of supply and demand.
Figure 4.11 Impact of Decreasing Supply of Nurses between 2020 and 2030 The increase in demand for nurses shown in Figure 4.10 leads to both higher prices and higher quantities demanded. As nurses retire from the work force, the supply of nurses decreases, causing a leftward shift in the supply curve and higher salaries for nurses at Pe2. The net effect on the equilibrium quantity of nurses is uncertain, which in this representation is less than Qe1, but more than the initial Qe0.
While we do not know if the number of nurses will increase or decrease relative to their initial employment, we know they will have higher salaries. | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_3e_(OpenStax)/04%3A_Labor_and_Financial_Markets/4.04%3A_The_Market_System_as_an_Efficient_Mechanism_for_Information.txt |
interest rate
the “price” of borrowing in the financial market; a rate of return on an investment
minimum wage
a price floor that makes it illegal for an employer to pay employees less than a certain hourly rate
usury laws
laws that impose an upper limit on the interest rate that lenders can charge
4.06: Key Concepts and Summary
4.1 Demand and Supply at Work in Labor Markets
In the labor market, households are on the supply side of the market and firms are on the demand side. In the market for financial capital, households and firms can be on either side of the market: they are suppliers of financial capital when they save or make financial investments, and demanders of financial capital when they borrow or receive financial investments.
In the demand and supply analysis of labor markets, we can measure the price by the annual salary or hourly wage received. We can measure the quantity of labor various ways, like number of workers or the number of hours worked.
Factors that can shift the demand curve for labor include: a change in the quantity demanded of the product that the labor produces; a change in the production process that uses more or less labor; and a change in government policy that affects the quantity of labor that firms wish to hire at a given wage. Demand can also increase or decrease (shift) in response to: workers’ level of education and training, technology, the number of companies, and availability and price of other inputs.
The main factors that can shift the supply curve for labor are: how desirable a job appears to workers relative to the alternatives, government policy that either restricts or encourages the quantity of workers trained for the job, the number of workers in the economy, and required education.
4.2 Demand and Supply in Financial Markets
In the demand and supply analysis of financial markets, the “price” is the rate of return or the interest rate received. We measure the quantity by the money that flows from those who supply financial capital to those who demand it.
Two factors can shift the supply of financial capital to a certain investment: if people want to alter their existing levels of consumption, and if the riskiness or return on one investment changes relative to other investments. Factors that can shift demand for capital include business confidence and consumer confidence in the future—since financial investments received in the present are typically repaid in the future.
4.3 The Market System as an Efficient Mechanism for Information
The market price system provides a highly efficient mechanism for disseminating information about relative scarcities of goods, services, labor, and financial capital. Market participants do not need to know why prices have changed, only that the changes require them to revisit previous decisions they made about supply and demand. Price controls hide information about the true scarcity of products and thereby cause misallocation of resources.
4.07: Self-Check Questions
1.
In the labor market, what causes a movement along the demand curve? What causes a shift in the demand curve?
2.
In the labor market, what causes a movement along the supply curve? What causes a shift in the supply curve?
3.
Why is a living wage considered a price floor? Does imposing a living wage have the same outcome as a minimum wage?
4.
In the financial market, what causes a movement along the demand curve? What causes a shift in the demand curve?
5.
In the financial market, what causes a movement along the supply curve? What causes a shift in the supply curve?
6.
If a usury law limits interest rates to no more than 35%, what would the likely impact be on the amount of loans made and interest rates paid?
7.
Which of the following changes in the financial market will lead to a decline in interest rates:
1. a rise in demand
2. a fall in demand
3. a rise in supply
4. a fall in supply
8.
Which of the following changes in the financial market will lead to an increase in the quantity of loans made and received:
1. a rise in demand
2. a fall in demand
3. a rise in supply
4. a fall in supply
9.
Identify the most accurate statement. A price floor will have the largest effect if it is set:
1. substantially above the equilibrium price
2. slightly above the equilibrium price
3. slightly below the equilibrium price
4. substantially below the equilibrium price
Sketch all four of these possibilities on a demand and supply diagram to illustrate your answer.
10.
A price ceiling will have the largest effect:
1. substantially below the equilibrium price
2. slightly below the equilibrium price
3. substantially above the equilibrium price
4. slightly above the equilibrium price
Sketch all four of these possibilities on a demand and supply diagram to illustrate your answer.
11.
Select the correct answer. A price floor will usually shift:
1. demand
2. supply
3. both
4. neither
Illustrate your answer with a diagram.
12.
Select the correct answer. A price ceiling will usually shift:
1. demand
2. supply
3. both
4. neither
4.08: Review Questions
13.
What is the “price” commonly called in the labor market?
14.
Are households demanders or suppliers in the goods market? Are firms demanders or suppliers in the goods market? What about the labor market and the financial market?
15.
Name some factors that can cause a shift in the demand curve in labor markets.
16.
Name some factors that can cause a shift in the supply curve in labor markets.
17.
How do economists define equilibrium in financial markets?
18.
What would be a sign of a shortage in financial markets?
19.
Would usury laws help or hinder resolution of a shortage in financial markets?
20.
Whether the product market or the labor market, what happens to the equilibrium price and quantity for each of the four possibilities: increase in demand, decrease in demand, increase in supply, and decrease in supply.
4.09: Critical Thinking Questions
21.
Other than the demand for labor, what would be another example of a “derived demand?”
22.
Suppose that a 5% increase in the minimum wage causes a 5% reduction in employment. How would this affect employers and how would it affect workers? In your opinion, would this be a good policy?
23.
Under what circumstances would a minimum wage be a nonbinding price floor? Under what circumstances would a living wage be a binding price floor?
24.
Suppose the U.S. economy began to grow more rapidly than other countries in the world. What would be the likely impact on U.S. financial markets as part of the global economy?
25.
If the government imposed a federal interest rate ceiling of 20% on all loans, who would gain and who would lose?
26.
Why are the factors that shift the demand for a product different from the factors that shift the demand for labor? Why are the factors that shift the supply of a product different from those that shift the supply of labor?
27.
During a discussion several years ago on building a pipeline to Alaska to carry natural gas, the U.S. Senate passed a bill stipulating that there should be a guaranteed minimum price for the natural gas that would flow through the pipeline. The thinking behind the bill was that if private firms had a guaranteed price for their natural gas, they would be more willing to drill for gas and to pay to build the pipeline.
1. Using the demand and supply framework, predict the effects of this price floor on the price, quantity demanded, and quantity supplied.
2. With the enactment of this price floor for natural gas, what are some of the likely unintended consequences in the market?
3. Suggest some policies other than the price floor that the government can pursue if it wishes to encourage drilling for natural gas and for a new pipeline in Alaska. | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_3e_(OpenStax)/04%3A_Labor_and_Financial_Markets/4.05%3A_Key_Terms.txt |
28.
Identify each of the following as involving either demand or supply. Draw a circular flow diagram and label the flows A through F. (Some choices can be on both sides of the goods market.)
1. Households in the labor market
2. Firms in the goods market
3. Firms in the financial market
4. Households in the goods market
5. Firms in the labor market
6. Households in the financial market
29.
Predict how each of the following events will raise or lower the equilibrium wage and quantity of oil workers in Texas. In each case, sketch a demand and supply diagram to illustrate your answer.
1. The price of oil rises.
2. New oil-drilling equipment is invented that is cheap and requires few workers to run.
3. Several major companies that do not drill oil open factories in Texas, offering many well-paid jobs outside the oil industry.
4. Government imposes costly new regulations to make oil-drilling a safer job.
30.
Predict how each of the following economic changes will affect the equilibrium price and quantity in the financial market for home loans. Sketch a demand and supply diagram to support your answers.
1. The number of people at the most common ages for home-buying increases.
2. People gain confidence that the economy is growing and that their jobs are secure.
3. Banks that have made home loans find that a larger number of people than they expected are not repaying those loans.
4. Because of a threat of a war, people become uncertain about their economic future.
5. The overall level of saving in the economy diminishes.
6. The federal government changes its bank regulations in a way that makes it cheaper and easier for banks to make home loans.
31.
Table 4.6 shows the amount of savings and borrowing in a market for loans to purchase homes, measured in millions of dollars, at various interest rates. What is the equilibrium interest rate and quantity in the capital financial market? How can you tell? Now, imagine that because of a shift in the perceptions of foreign investors, the supply curve shifts so that there will be \$10 million less supplied at every interest rate. Calculate the new equilibrium interest rate and quantity, and explain why the direction of the interest rate shift makes intuitive sense.
Interest Rate Qs Qd
5% 130 170
6% 135 150
7% 140 140
8% 145 135
9% 150 125
10% 155 110
Table 4.6
32.
Imagine that to preserve the traditional way of life in small fishing villages, a government decides to impose a price floor that will guarantee all fishermen a certain price for their catch.
1. Using the demand and supply framework, predict the effects on the price, quantity demanded, and quantity supplied.
2. With the enactment of this price floor for fish, what are some of the likely unintended consequences in the market?
3. Suggest some policies other than the price floor to make it possible for small fishing villages to continue.
33.
What happens to the price and the quantity bought and sold in the cocoa market if countries producing cocoa experience a drought and a new study is released demonstrating the health benefits of cocoa? Illustrate your answer with a demand and supply graph. | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_3e_(OpenStax)/04%3A_Labor_and_Financial_Markets/4.10%3A_Problems.txt |
Chapter Objectives
In this chapter, you will learn about:
• Price Elasticity of Demand and Price Elasticity of Supply
• Polar Cases of Elasticity and Constant Elasticity
• Elasticity and Pricing
• Elasticity in Areas Other Than Price
05: Elasticity
Figure 5.1 On-Demand Media Pricing Many on-demand Internet streaming media providers, such as Netflix, have introduced tiered pricing for levels of access to services, begging the question, how will these prices affect buyer’s purchasing choices? (Credit: modification of “160906_FF_CreditCardAgreements” by kdiwavvou/Flickr, Public Domain)
Bring It Home
That Will Be How Much?
Imagine going to your favorite coffee shop and having the waiter inform you the pricing has changed. Instead of \$3 for a cup of coffee, you will now be charged \$2 for coffee, \$1 for creamer, and \$1 for your choice of sweetener. If you pay your usual \$3 for a cup of coffee, you must choose between creamer and sweetener. If you want both, you now face an extra charge of \$1. Sound absurd? Well, that is similar to the situation Netflix customers found themselves in—they faced a 60% price hike to retain the same service in 2011.
In early 2011, Netflix consumers paid about \$10 a month for a package consisting of streaming video and DVD rentals. In July 2011, the company announced a packaging change. Customers wishing to retain both streaming video and DVD rental would be charged \$15.98 per month, a price increase of about 60%. In 2014, Netflix also raised its streaming video subscription price from \$7.99 to \$8.99 per month for new U.S. customers. The company also changed its policy of 4K streaming content from \$9.00 to \$12.00 per month that year.
How would customers of the 18-year-old firm react? Would they abandon Netflix? Would the ease of access to other venues make a difference in how consumers responded to the Netflix price change? At the time, Netflix had few competitors; in the intervening years, the field has grown to ten major competitors and nearly 200 smaller ones. Is that likely to have a greater impact than the price changes? We will explore the answers to those questions in this chapter, which focuses on the change in quantity with respect to a change in price, a concept economists call elasticity.
Anyone who has studied economics knows the law of demand: a higher price will lead to a lower quantity demanded. What you may not know is how much lower the quantity demanded will be. Similarly, the law of supply states that a higher price will lead to a higher quantity supplied. The question is: How much higher? This chapter will explain how to answer these questions and why they are critically important in the real world.
To find answers to these questions, we need to understand the concept of elasticity. Elasticity is an economics concept that measures responsiveness of one variable to changes in another variable. Suppose you drop two items from a second-floor balcony. The first item is a tennis ball. The second item is a brick. Which will bounce higher? Obviously, the tennis ball. We would say that the tennis ball has greater elasticity.
Consider an economic example. Cigarette taxes are an example of a “sin tax,” a tax on something that is bad for you, like alcohol. Governments tax cigarettes at the state and national levels. As of 2021, state taxes ranged from a low of 17 cents per pack in Missouri to \$4.35 per pack in Connecticut and New York. The average state cigarette tax is \$1.76 per pack. The 2021 federal tax rate on cigarettes was \$1.01 per pack. In 2015, the Obama Administration proposed raising the federal tax nearly a dollar to \$1.95 per pack. The key question is: How much would cigarette purchases decline?
Taxes on cigarettes serve two purposes: to raise tax revenue for government and to discourage cigarette consumption. However, if a higher cigarette tax discourages consumption considerably, meaning a greatly reduced quantity of cigarette sales, then the cigarette tax on each pack will not raise much revenue for the government. Alternatively, a higher cigarette tax that does not discourage consumption by much will actually raise more tax revenue for the government. Thus, when a government agency tries to calculate the effects of altering its cigarette tax, it must analyze how much the tax affects the quantity of cigarettes consumed. This issue reaches beyond governments and taxes. Every firm faces a similar issue. When a firm considers raising the sales price, it must consider how much a price increase will reduce the quantity demanded of what it sells. Conversely, when a firm puts its products on sale, it must expect (or hope) that the lower price will lead to a significantly higher quantity demanded. | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_3e_(OpenStax)/05%3A_Elasticity/5.01%3A_Introduction_to_Elasticity.txt |
Learning Objectives
By the end of this section, you will be able to:
• Calculate the price elasticity of demand
• Calculate the price elasticity of supply
Both the demand and supply curve show the relationship between price and the number of units demanded or supplied. Price elasticity is the ratio between the percentage change in the quantity demanded (Qd) or supplied (Qs) and the corresponding percent change in price. The price elasticity of demand is the percentage change in the quantity demanded of a good or service divided by the percentage change in the price. The price elasticity of supply is the percentage change in quantity supplied divided by the percentage change in price.
We can usefully divide elasticities into three broad categories: elastic, inelastic, and unitary. Because price and quantity demanded move in opposite directions, price elasticity of demand is always a negative number. Therefore, price elasticity of demand is usually reported as its absolute value, without a negative sign. The summary in Table 5.1 is assuming absolute values for price elasticity of demand. An elastic demand or elastic supply is one in which the elasticity is greater than one, indicating a high responsiveness to changes in price. Elasticities that are less than one indicate low responsiveness to price changes and correspond to inelastic demand or inelastic supply. Unitary elasticities indicate proportional responsiveness of either demand or supply, as Table 5.1 summarizes.
If . . . Then . . . And It Is Called . . .
$% change in quantity>% change in price% change in quantity>% change in price$ $% change in quantity% change in price>1% change in quantity% change in price>1$ Elastic
$% change in quantity=% change in price% change in quantity=% change in price$ $% change in quantity% change in price=1% change in quantity% change in price=1$ Unitary
$% change in quantity<% change in price% change in quantity<% change in price$ $% change in quantity% change in price<1% change in quantity% change in price<1$ Inelastic
Table 5.1 Elastic, Inelastic, and Unitary: Three Cases of Elasticity
Link It Up
Before we delve into the details of elasticity, enjoy this article on elasticity and ticket prices at the Super Bowl.
To calculate elasticity along a demand or supply curve economists use the average percent change in both quantity and price. This is called the Midpoint Method for Elasticity, and is represented in the following equations:
$% change in quantity=Q2–Q1Q2+ Q1/2 × 100% change in price=P2– P1P2+ P1/2 × 100 % change in quantity=Q2–Q1Q2+ Q1/2 × 100% change in price=P2– P1P2+ P1/2 × 100$
The advantage of the Midpoint Method is that one obtains the same elasticity between two price points whether there is a price increase or decrease. This is because the formula uses the same base (average quantity and average price) for both cases.
Calculating Price Elasticity of Demand
Let’s calculate the elasticity between points A and B and between points G and H as Figure 5.2 shows.
Figure 5.2 Calculating the Price Elasticity of Demand We calculate the price elasticity of demand as the percentage change in quantity divided by the percentage change in price.
First, apply the formula to calculate the elasticity as price decreases from \$70 at point B to \$60 at point A:
Work It Out
Finding the Price Elasticity of Demand
Calculate the price elasticity of demand using the data in Figure 5.2 for an increase in price from G to H. Has the elasticity increased or decreased?
Step 1. We know that:
$Price Elasticity of Demand=% change in quantity% change in pricePrice Elasticity of Demand=% change in quantity% change in price$
Step 2. From the Midpoint Formula we know that:
$% change in quantity=Q2–Q1(Q2+Q1)/2 × 100% change in price=P2–P1(P2+P1)/2 × 100% change in quantity=Q2–Q1(Q2+Q1)/2 × 100% change in price=P2–P1(P2+P1)/2 × 100$
Step 3. So we can use the values provided in the figure in each equation:
$% change in quantity=1,600–1,800(1,600+1,800)/2 × 100=–2001,700 × 100=–11.76% change in price=130–120(130+120)/2 × 100=10125 × 100=8.0% change in quantity=1,600–1,800(1,600+1,800)/2 × 100=–2001,700 × 100=–11.76% change in price=130–120(130+120)/2 × 100=10125 × 100=8.0$
Step 4. Then, we can use those values to determine the price elasticity of demand:
$Price Elasticity of Demand=% change in quantity% change in price=–11.768=1.47Price Elasticity of Demand=% change in quantity% change in price=–11.768=1.47$
Therefore, the elasticity of demand from G to is H 1.47. The magnitude of the elasticity has increased (in absolute value) as we moved up along the demand curve from points A to B. Recall that the elasticity between these two points was 0.45. Demand was inelastic between points A and B and elastic between points G and H. This shows us that price elasticity of demand changes at different points along a straight-line demand curve.
Calculating the Price Elasticity of Supply
Assume that an apartment rents for \$650 per month and at that price the landlord rents 10,000 units as Figure 5.3 shows. When the price increases to \$700 per month, the landlord supplies 13,000 units into the market. By what percentage does apartment supply increase? What is the price sensitivity?
Figure 5.3 Price Elasticity of Supply We calculate the price elasticity of supply as the percentage change in quantity divided by the percentage change in price.
Using the Midpoint Method,
Clear It Up
Is the elasticity the slope?
It is a common mistake to confuse the slope of either the supply or demand curve with its elasticity. The slope is the rate of change in units along the curve, or the rise/run (change in y over the change in x). For example, in Figure 5.2, at each point shown on the demand curve, price drops by \$10 and the number of units demanded increases by 200 compared to the point to its left. The slope is –10/200 along the entire demand curve and does not change. The price elasticity, however, changes along the curve. Elasticity between points A and B was 0.45 and increased to 1.47 between points G and H. Elasticity is the percentage change, which is a different calculation from the slope and has a different meaning.
When we are at the upper end of a demand curve, where price is high and the quantity demanded is low, a small change in the quantity demanded, even in, say, one unit, is pretty big in percentage terms. A change in price of, say, a dollar, is going to be much less important in percentage terms than it would have been at the bottom of the demand curve. Likewise, at the bottom of the demand curve, that one unit change when the quantity demanded is high will be small as a percentage.
Thus, at one end of the demand curve, where we have a large percentage change in quantity demanded over a small percentage change in price, the elasticity value would be high, or demand would be relatively elastic. Even with the same change in the price and the same change in the quantity demanded, at the other end of the demand curve the quantity is much higher, and the price is much lower, so the percentage change in quantity demanded is smaller and the percentage change in price is much higher. That means at the bottom of the curve we'd have a small numerator over a large denominator, so the elasticity measure would be much lower, or inelastic.
As we move along the demand curve, the values for quantity and price go up or down, depending on which way we are moving, so the percentages for, say, a \$1 difference in price or a one unit difference in quantity, will change as well, which means the ratios of those percentages and hence the elasticity will change. | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_3e_(OpenStax)/05%3A_Elasticity/5.02%3A_Price_Elasticity_of_Demand_and_Price_Elasticity_of_Supply.txt |
Learning Objectives
By the end of this section, you will be able to:
• Differentiate between infinite and zero elasticity
• Analyze graphs in order to classify elasticity as constant unitary, infinite, or zero
There are two extreme cases of elasticity: when elasticity equals zero and when it is infinite. A third case of interest is that of constant unitary elasticity. We will describe each case. Infinite elasticity or perfect elasticity refers to the extreme case where either the quantity demanded (Qd) or supplied (Qs) changes by an infinite amount in response to any change in price at all. In both cases, the supply and the demand curve are horizontal as Figure 5.4 shows. While perfectly elastic supply curves are for the most part unrealistic, goods with readily available inputs and whose production can easily expand will feature highly elastic supply curves. Examples include pizza, bread, books, and pencils. Similarly, perfectly elastic demand is an extreme example. However, luxury goods, items that take a large share of individuals’ income, and goods with many substitutes are likely to have highly elastic demand curves. Examples of such goods are Caribbean cruises and sports vehicles.
Figure 5.4 Infinite Elasticity The horizontal lines show that an infinite quantity will be demanded or supplied at a specific price. This illustrates the cases of a perfectly (or infinitely) elastic demand curve and supply curve. The quantity supplied or demanded is extremely responsive to price changes, moving from zero for prices close to P to infinite when prices reach P.
Zero elasticity or perfect inelasticity, as Figure 5.5 depicts, refers to the extreme case in which a percentage change in price, no matter how large, results in zero change in quantity. While a perfectly inelastic supply is an extreme example, goods with limited supply of inputs are likely to feature highly inelastic supply curves. Examples include diamond rings or housing in prime locations such as apartments facing Central Park in New York City. Similarly, while perfectly inelastic demand is an extreme case, necessities with no close substitutes are likely to have highly inelastic demand curves. This is the case of life-saving drugs and gasoline.
Figure 5.5 Zero Elasticity The vertical supply curve and vertical demand curve show that there will be zero percentage change in quantity (a) demanded or (b) supplied, regardless of the price.
Constant unitary elasticity, in either a supply or demand curve, occurs when a price change of one percent results in a quantity change of one percent. Figure 5.6 shows a demand curve with constant unit elasticity. Using the midpoint method, you can calculate that between points A and B on the demand curve, the price changes by 66.7% and quantity demanded also changes by 66.7%. Hence, the elasticity equals 1. Between points B and C, price again changes by 66.7% as does quantity, while between points C and D the corresponding percentage changes are again 66.7% for both price and quantity. In each case, then, the percentage change in price equals the percentage change in quantity, and consequently elasticity equals 1. Notice that in absolute value, the declines in price, as you step down the demand curve, are not identical. Instead, the price falls by \$8.00 from A to B, by a smaller amount of \$4.00 from B to C, and by a still smaller amount of \$2.00 from C to D. As a result, a demand curve with constant unitary elasticity moves from a steeper slope on the left and a flatter slope on the right—and a curved shape overall.
Figure 5.6 A Constant Unitary Elasticity Demand Curve A demand curve with constant unitary elasticity will be a curved line. Notice how price and quantity demanded change by an identical percentage amount between each pair of points on the demand curve.
Unlike the demand curve with unitary elasticity, the supply curve with unitary elasticity is represented by a straight line, and that line goes through the origin. In each pair of points on the supply curve there is an equal difference in quantity of 30. However, in percentage value, using the midpoint method, the steps are decreasing as one moves from left to right, from 28.6% to 22.2% to 18.2%, because the quantity points in each percentage calculation are getting increasingly larger, which expands the denominator in the elasticity calculation of the percentage change in quantity.
Consider the price changes moving up the supply curve in Figure 5.7. From points D to E to F and to G on the supply curve, each step of \$1.50 is the same in absolute value. However, if we measure the price changes in percentage change terms, using the midpoint method, they are also decreasing, from 28.6% to 22.2% to 18.2%, because the original price points in each percentage calculation are getting increasingly larger in value, increasing the denominator in the calculation of the percentage change in price. Along the constant unitary elasticity supply curve, the percentage quantity increases on the horizontal axis exactly match the percentage price increases on the vertical axis—so this supply curve has a constant unitary elasticity at all points.
Figure 5.7 A Constant Unitary Elasticity Supply Curve A constant unitary elasticity supply curve is a straight line reaching up from the origin. Between each pair of points, the percentage increase in quantity supplied is the same as the percentage increase in price. | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_3e_(OpenStax)/05%3A_Elasticity/5.03%3A_Polar_Cases_of_Elasticity_and_Constant_Elasticity.txt |
Learning Objectives
By the end of this section, you will be able to:
• Analyze how price elasticities impact revenue
• Evaluate how elasticity can cause shifts in demand and supply
• Predict how the long-run and short-run impacts of elasticity affect equilibrium
• Explain how the elasticity of demand and supply determine the incidence of a tax on buyers and sellers
Studying elasticities is useful for a number of reasons, pricing being most important. Let’s explore how elasticity relates to revenue and pricing, both in the long and short run. First, let’s look at the elasticities of some common goods and services.
Table 5.2 shows a selection of demand elasticities for different goods and services drawn from a variety of different studies by economists, listed in order of increasing elasticity.
Goods and Services Elasticity of Price
Housing 0.12
Transatlantic air travel (economy class) 0.12
Rail transit (rush hour) 0.15
Electricity 0.20
Taxi cabs 0.22
Gasoline 0.35
Transatlantic air travel (first class) 0.40
Wine 0.55
Beef 0.59
Transatlantic air travel (business class) 0.62
Kitchen and household appliances 0.63
Cable TV (basic rural) 0.69
Chicken 0.64
Soft drinks 0.70
Beer 0.80
New vehicle 0.87
Rail transit (off-peak) 1.00
Computer 1.44
Cable TV (basic urban) 1.51
Cable TV (premium) 1.77
Restaurant meals 2.27
Table 5.2 Some Selected Elasticities of Demand
Note that demand for necessities such as housing and electricity is inelastic, while items that are not necessities such as restaurant meals are more price-sensitive. If the price of a restaurant meal increases by 10%, the quantity demanded will decrease by 22.7%. A 10% increase in the price of housing will cause only a slight decrease of 1.2% in the quantity of housing demanded.
Link It Up
Read this article for an example of price elasticity that may have affected you.
Does Raising Price Bring in More Revenue?
Imagine that a band on tour is playing in an indoor arena with 15,000 seats. To keep this example simple, assume that the band keeps all the money from ticket sales. Assume further that the band pays the costs for its appearance, but that these costs, like travel, and setting up the stage, are the same regardless of how many people are in the audience. Finally, assume that all the tickets have the same price. (The same insights apply if ticket prices are more expensive for some seats than for others, but the calculations become more complicated.) The band knows that it faces a downward-sloping demand curve; that is, if the band raises the ticket price, it will sell fewer seats. How should the band set the ticket price to generate the most total revenue, which in this example, because costs are fixed, will also mean the highest profits for the band? Should the band sell more tickets at a lower price or fewer tickets at a higher price?
The key concept in thinking about collecting the most revenue is the price elasticity of demand. Total revenue is price times the quantity of tickets sold. Imagine that the band starts off thinking about a certain price, which will result in the sale of a certain quantity of tickets. The three possibilities are in Table 5.3. If demand is elastic at that price level, then the band should cut the price, because the percentage drop in price will result in an even larger percentage increase in the quantity sold—thus raising total revenue. However, if demand is inelastic at that original quantity level, then the band should raise the ticket price, because a certain percentage increase in price will result in a smaller percentage decrease in the quantity sold—and total revenue will rise. If demand has a unitary elasticity at that quantity, then an equal percentage change in quantity will offset a moderate percentage change in the price—so the band will earn the same revenue whether it (moderately) increases or decreases the ticket price.
If Demand Is . . . Then . . . Therefore . . .
Elastic $% change in Qd>% change in P% change in Qd>% change in P$ A given % rise in P will be more than offset by a larger % fall in Q so that total revenue (P × Q) falls.
Unitary $% change in Qd=% change in P% change in Qd=% change in P$ A given % rise in P will be exactly offset by an equal % fall in Q so that total revenue (P × Q) is unchanged.
Inelastic $% change in Qd<% change in P% change in Qd<% change in P$ A given % rise in P will cause a smaller % fall in Q so that total revenue (P × Q) rises.
Table 5.3 Will the Band Earn More Revenue by Changing Ticket Prices?
What if the band keeps cutting price, because demand is elastic, until it reaches a level where it sells all 15,000 seats in the available arena? If demand remains elastic at that quantity, the band might try to move to a bigger arena, so that it could slash ticket prices further and see a larger percentage increase in the quantity of tickets sold. However, if the 15,000-seat arena is all that is available or if a larger arena would add substantially to costs, then this option may not work.
Conversely, a few bands are so famous, or have such fanatical followings, that demand for tickets may be inelastic right up to the point where the arena is full. These bands can, if they wish, keep raising the ticket price. Ironically, some of the most popular bands could make more revenue by setting prices so high that the arena is not full—but those who buy the tickets would have to pay very high prices. However, bands sometimes choose to sell tickets for less than the absolute maximum they might be able to charge, often in the hope that fans will feel happier and spend more on recordings, T-shirts, and other paraphernalia.
Can Businesses Pass Costs on to Consumers?
Most businesses face a day-to-day struggle to figure out ways to produce at a lower cost, as one pathway to their goal of earning higher profits. However, in some cases, the price of a key input over which the firm has no control may rise. For example, many chemical companies use petroleum as a key input, but they have no control over the world market price for crude oil. Coffee shops use coffee as a key input, but they have no control over the world market price of coffee. If the cost of a key input rises, can the firm pass those higher costs along to consumers in the form of higher prices? Conversely, if new and less expensive ways of producing are invented, can the firm keep the benefits in the form of higher profits, or will the market pressure them to pass the gains along to consumers in the form of lower prices? The price elasticity of demand plays a key role in answering these questions.
Imagine that as a consumer of legal pharmaceutical products, you read a newspaper story that a technological breakthrough in the production of aspirin has occurred, so that every aspirin factory can now produce aspirin more cheaply. What does this discovery mean to you? Figure 5.8 illustrates two possibilities. In Figure 5.8 (a), the demand curve is highly inelastic. In this case, a technological breakthrough that shifts supply to the right, from S0 to S1, so that the equilibrium shifts from E0 to E1, creates a substantially lower price for the product with relatively little impact on the quantity sold. In Figure 5.8 (b), the demand curve is highly elastic. In this case, the technological breakthrough leads to a much greater quantity sold in the market at very close to the original price. Consumers benefit more, in general, when the demand curve is more inelastic because the shift in the supply results in a much lower price for consumers.
Figure 5.8 Passing along Cost Savings to Consumers Cost-saving gains cause supply to shift out to the right from S0 to S1; that is, at any given price, firms will be willing to supply a greater quantity. If demand is inelastic, as in (a), the result of this cost-saving technological improvement will be substantially lower prices. If demand is elastic, as in (b), the result will be only slightly lower prices. Consumers benefit in either case, from a greater quantity at a lower price, but the benefit is greater when demand is inelastic, as in (a).
Aspirin producers may find themselves in a nasty bind here. The situation in Figure 5.8, with extremely inelastic demand, means that a new invention may cause the price to drop dramatically while quantity changes little. As a result, the new production technology can lead to a drop in the revenue that firms earn from aspirin sales. However, if strong competition exists between aspirin producers, each producer may have little choice but to search for and implement any breakthrough that allows it to reduce production costs. After all, if one firm decides not to implement such a cost-saving technology, other firms that do can drive them out of business.
Since demand for food is generally inelastic, farmers may often face the situation in Figure 5.8 (a). That is, a surge in production leads to a severe drop in price that can actually decrease the total revenue that farmers receive. Conversely, poor weather or other conditions that cause a terrible year for farm production can sharply raise prices so that the total revenue that the farmer receives increases. The Clear It Up box discusses how these issues relate to coffee.
Clear It Up
How do coffee prices fluctuate?
Coffee is an international crop. The top five coffee-exporting nations are Brazil, Vietnam, Colombia, Indonesia, and Ethiopia. In these nations and others, 20 million families depend on selling coffee beans as their main source of income. These families are exposed to enormous risk, because the world price of coffee bounces up and down. For example, in 1993, the world price of coffee was about 50 cents per pound. In 1995 it was four times as high, at \$2 per pound. By 1997 it had fallen by half to \$1.00 per pound. In 1998 it leaped back up to \$2 per pound. By 2001 it had fallen back to 46 cents a pound. By early 2011 it rose to about \$2.31 per pound. By the end of 2012, the price had fallen back to about \$1.31 per pound. Since then, the price of coffee has continued to fluctuate.
The reason for these price fluctuations lies in a combination of inelastic demand and shifts in supply. The elasticity of coffee demand is only about 0.3; that is, a 10% rise in the price of coffee leads to a decline of about 3% in the quantity of coffee consumed. When a major frost hit the Brazilian coffee crop in 1994, coffee supply shifted to the left with an inelastic demand curve, leading to much higher prices. Conversely, when Vietnam entered the world coffee market as a major producer in the late 1990s, the supply curve shifted out to the right. With a highly inelastic demand curve, coffee prices fell dramatically. Figure 5.8 (a) illustrates this situation.
Elasticity also reveals whether firms can pass higher costs that they incur on to consumers. Addictive substances, for which demand is inelastic, are products for which producers can pass higher costs on to consumers. For example, the demand for cigarettes is relatively inelastic among regular smokers who are somewhat addicted. Economic research suggests that increasing cigarette prices by 10% leads to about a 3% reduction in the quantity of cigarettes that adults smoke, so the elasticity of demand for cigarettes is 0.3. If society increases taxes on companies that produce cigarettes, the result will be, as in Figure 5.9 (a), that the supply curve shifts from S0 to S1. However, as the equilibrium moves from E0 to E1, governments mainly pass along these taxes to consumers in the form of higher prices. These higher taxes on cigarettes will raise tax revenue for the government, but they will not much affect the quantity of smoking.
If the goal is to reduce the quantity of cigarettes demanded, we must achieve it by shifting this inelastic demand back to the left, perhaps with public programs to discourage cigarette use or to help people to quit. For example, anti-smoking advertising campaigns have shown some ability to reduce smoking. However, if cigarette demand were more elastic, as in Figure 5.9 (b), then an increase in taxes that shifts supply from S0 to S1 and equilibrium from E0 to E1 would reduce the quantity of cigarettes smoked substantially. Youth smoking seems to be more elastic than adult smoking—that is, the quantity of youth smoking will fall by a greater percentage than the quantity of adult smoking in response to a given percentage increase in price.
Figure 5.9 Passing along Higher Costs to Consumers Higher costs, like a higher tax on cigarette companies for the example we gave in the text, lead supply to shift to the left. This shift is identical in (a) and (b). However, in (a), where demand is inelastic, companies largely can pass the cost increase along to consumers in the form of higher prices, without much of a decline in equilibrium quantity. In (b), demand is elastic, so the shift in supply results primarily in a lower equilibrium quantity. Consumers do not benefit in either case, but in (a), they pay a higher price for the same quantity, while in (b), they must buy a lower quantity (and presumably needing to shift their consumption elsewhere).
Elasticity and Tax Incidence
The example of cigarette taxes demonstrated that because demand is inelastic, taxes are not effective at reducing the equilibrium quantity of smoking, and they are mainly passed along to consumers in the form of higher prices. The analysis, or manner, of how a tax burden is divided between consumers and producers is called tax incidence. Typically, the tax incidence, or burden, falls both on the consumers and producers of the taxed good. However, if one wants to predict which group will bear most of the burden, all one needs to do is examine the elasticity of demand and supply. In the tobacco example, the tax burden falls on the most inelastic side of the market.
If demand is more inelastic than supply, consumers bear most of the tax burden, and if supply is more inelastic than demand, sellers bear most of the tax burden.
The intuition for this is simple. When the demand is inelastic, consumers are not very responsive to price changes, and the quantity demanded reduces only modestly when the tax is introduced. In the case of smoking, the demand is inelastic because consumers are addicted to the product. The government can then pass the tax burden along to consumers in the form of higher prices, without much of a decline in the equilibrium quantity.
Similarly, when a government introduces a tax in a market with an inelastic supply, such as, for example, beachfront hotels, and sellers have no alternative than to accept lower prices for their business, taxes do not greatly affect the equilibrium quantity. The tax burden now passes on to the sellers. If the supply was elastic and sellers had the possibility of reorganizing their businesses to avoid supplying the taxed good, the tax burden on the sellers would be much smaller. The tax would result in a much lower quantity sold instead of lower prices received. Figure 5.10 illustrates this relationship between the tax incidence and elasticity of demand and supply.
Figure 5.10 Elasticity and Tax Incidence An excise tax introduces a wedge between the price paid by consumers (Pc) and the price received by producers (Pp). The vertical distance between Pc and Pp is the amount of the tax per unit. Pe is the equilibrium price prior to introduction of the tax. (a) When the demand is more elastic than supply, the tax incidence on consumers Pc – Pe is lower than the tax incidence on producers Pe – Pp. (b) When the supply is more elastic than demand, the tax incidence on consumers Pc – Pe is larger than the tax incidence on producers Pe – Pp. The more elastic the demand and supply curves, the lower the tax revenue.
In Figure 5.10 (a), the supply is inelastic and the demand is elastic, such as in the example of beachfront hotels. While consumers may have other vacation choices, sellers can’t easily move their businesses. By introducing a tax, the government essentially creates a wedge between the price paid by consumers Pc and the price received by producers Pp. In other words, of the total price paid by consumers, part is retained by the sellers and part is paid to the government in the form of a tax. The distance between Pc and Pp is the tax rate. The new market price is Pc, but sellers receive only Pp per unit sold, as they pay Pc-Pp to the government. Since we can view a tax as raising the costs of production, this could also be represented by a leftward shift of the supply curve, where the new supply curve would intercept the demand at the new quantity Qt. For simplicity, Figure 5.10 omits the shift in the supply curve.
The tax revenue is given by the shaded area, which we obtain by multiplying the tax per unit by the total quantity sold Qt. The tax incidence on the consumers is given by the difference between the price paid Pc and the initial equilibrium price Pe. The tax incidence on the sellers is given by the difference between the initial equilibrium price Pe and the price they receive after the tax is introduced Pp. In Figure 5.10 (a), the tax burden falls disproportionately on the sellers, and a larger proportion of the tax revenue (the shaded area) is due to the resulting lower price received by the sellers than by the resulting higher prices paid by the buyers. Figure 5.10 (b) describes the example of the tobacco excise tax where the supply is more elastic than demand. The tax incidence now falls disproportionately on consumers, as shown by the large difference between the price they pay, Pc, and the initial equilibrium price, Pe. Sellers receive a lower price than before the tax, but this difference is much smaller than the change in consumers’ price. From this analysis one can also predict whether a tax is likely to create a large revenue or not. The more elastic the demand curve, the more likely that consumers will reduce quantity instead of paying higher prices. The more elastic the supply curve, the more likely that sellers will reduce the quantity sold, instead of taking lower prices. In a market where both the demand and supply are very elastic, the imposition of an excise tax generates low revenue.
Some believe that excise taxes hurt mainly the specific industries they target. For example, the medical device excise tax, which was implemented in 2013, has been controversial for it can delay industry profitability and therefore hamper start-ups and medical innovation. The tax was repealed in late 2019. However, whether the tax burden falls mostly on the medical device industry or on the patients depends simply on the elasticity of demand and supply.
Long-Run vs. Short-Run Impact
Elasticities are often lower in the short run than in the long run. On the demand side of the market, it can sometimes be difficult to change Qd in the short run, but easier in the long run. Consumption of energy is a clear example. In the short run, it is not easy for a person to make substantial changes in energy consumption. Maybe you can carpool to work sometimes or adjust your home thermostat by a few degrees if the cost of energy rises, but that is about all. However, in the long run you can purchase a car that gets more miles to the gallon, choose a job that is closer to where you live, buy more energy-efficient home appliances, or install more insulation in your home. As a result, the elasticity of demand for energy is somewhat inelastic in the short run, but much more elastic in the long run.
Figure 5.11 is an example, based roughly on historical experience, for the responsiveness of Qd to price changes. In 1973, the price of crude oil was \$12 per barrel and total consumption in the U.S. economy was 17 million barrels per day. That year, the nations who were members of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) cut off oil exports to the United States for six months because the Arab members of OPEC disagreed with the U.S. support for Israel. OPEC did not bring exports back to their earlier levels until 1975—a policy that we can interpret as a shift of the supply curve to the left in the U.S. petroleum market. Figure 5.11 (a) and Figure 5.11 (b) show the same original equilibrium point and the same identical shift of a supply curve to the left from S0 to S1.
Figure 5.11 How a Shift in Supply Can Affect Price or Quantity The intersection (E0) between demand curve D and supply curve S0 is the same in both (a) and (b). The shift of supply to the left from S0 to S1 is identical in both (a) and (b). The new equilibrium (E1) has a higher price and a lower quantity than the original equilibrium (E0) in both (a) and (b). However, the shape of the demand curve D is different in (a) and (b), being more elastic in (b) than in (a). As a result, the shift in supply can result either in a new equilibrium with a much higher price and an only slightly smaller quantity, as in (a), with more inelastic demand, or in a new equilibrium with only a small increase in price and a relatively larger reduction in quantity, as in (b), with more elastic demand.
Figure 5.11 (a) shows inelastic demand for oil in the short run similar to that which existed for the United States in 1973. In Figure 5.11 (a), the new equilibrium (E1) occurs at a price of \$25 per barrel, roughly double the price before the OPEC shock, and an equilibrium quantity of 16 million barrels per day. Figure 5.11 (b) shows what the outcome would have been if the U.S. demand for oil had been more elastic, a result more likely over the long term. This alternative equilibrium (E1) would have resulted in a smaller price increase to \$14 per barrel and larger reduction in equilibrium quantity to 13 million barrels per day. In 1983, for example, U.S. petroleum consumption was 15.3 million barrels a day, which was lower than in 1973 or 1975. U.S. petroleum consumption was down even though the U.S. economy was about one-fourth larger in 1983 than it had been in 1973. The primary reason for the lower quantity was that higher energy prices spurred conservation efforts, and after a decade of home insulation, more fuel-efficient cars, more efficient appliances and machinery, and other fuel-conserving choices, the demand curve for energy had become more elastic.
On the supply side of markets, producers of goods and services typically find it easier to expand production in the long term of several years rather than in the short run of a few months. After all, in the short run it can be costly or difficult to build a new factory, hire many new workers, or open new stores. However, over a few years, all of these are possible.
In most markets for goods and services, prices bounce up and down more than quantities in the short run, but quantities often move more than prices in the long run. The underlying reason for this pattern is that supply and demand are often inelastic in the short run, so that shifts in either demand or supply can cause a relatively greater change in prices. However, since supply and demand are more elastic in the long run, the long-run movements in prices are more muted, while quantity adjusts more easily in the long run. | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_3e_(OpenStax)/05%3A_Elasticity/5.04%3A_Elasticity_and_Pricing.txt |
Learning Objectives
By the end of this section, you will be able to:
• Calculate the income elasticity of demand and the cross-price elasticity of demand
• Calculate the elasticity in labor and financial capital markets through an understanding of the elasticity of labor supply and the elasticity of savings
• Apply concepts of price elasticity to real-world situations
The basic idea of elasticity—how a percentage change in one variable causes a percentage change in another variable—does not just apply to the responsiveness of quantity supplied and quantity demanded to changes in the price of a product. Recall that quantity demanded (Qd) depends on income, tastes and preferences, the prices of related goods, and so on, as well as price. Similarly, quantity supplied (Qs) depends on factors such as the cost of production, as well as price. We can measure elasticity for any determinant of quantity supplied and quantity demanded, not just the price.
Income Elasticity of Demand
The income elasticity of demand is the percentage change in quantity demanded divided by the percentage change in income.
$Income elasticity of demand=% change in quantity demanded% change in incomeIncome elasticity of demand=% change in quantity demanded% change in income$
For most products, most of the time, the income elasticity of demand is positive: that is, a rise in income will cause an increase in the quantity demanded. This pattern is common enough that we refer to these goods as normal goods. However, for a few goods, an increase in income means that one might purchase less of the good. For example, those with a higher income might buy fewer hamburgers, because they are buying more steak instead, or those with a higher income might buy less cheap wine and more imported beer. When the income elasticity of demand is negative, we call the good an inferior good.
We introduced the concepts of normal and inferior goods in Demand and Supply. A higher level of income causes a demand curve to shift to the right for a normal good, which means that the income elasticity of demand is positive. How far the demand shifts depends on the income elasticity of demand. A higher income elasticity means a larger shift. However, for an inferior good, that is, when the income elasticity of demand is negative, a higher level of income would cause the demand curve for that good to shift to the left. Again, how much it shifts depends on how large the (negative) income elasticity is.
Cross-Price Elasticity of Demand
A change in the price of one good can shift the quantity demanded for another good. If the two goods are complements, like bread and peanut butter, then a drop in the price of one good will lead to an increase in the quantity demanded of the other good. However, if the two goods are substitutes, like plane tickets and train tickets, then a drop in the price of one good will cause people to substitute toward that good, and to reduce consumption of the other good. Cheaper plane tickets lead to fewer train tickets, and vice versa.
The cross-price elasticity of demand puts some meat on the bones of these ideas. The term “cross-price” refers to the idea that the price of one good is affecting the quantity demanded of a different good. Specifically, the cross-price elasticity of demand is the percentage change in the quantity of good A that is demanded as a result of a percentage change in the price of good B.
$Cross-price elasticity of demand=% change in Qd of good A% change in price of good BCross-price elasticity of demand=% change in Qd of good A% change in price of good B$
Substitute goods have positive cross-price elasticities of demand: if good A is a substitute for good B, like coffee and tea, then a higher price for B will mean a greater quantity consumed of A. Complement goods have negative cross-price elasticities: if good A is a complement for good B, like coffee and sugar, then a higher price for B will mean a lower quantity consumed of A.
Elasticity in Labor and Financial Capital Markets
The concept of elasticity applies to any market, not just markets for goods and services. In the labor market, for example, the wage elasticity of labor supply—that is, the percentage change in hours worked divided by the percentage change in wages—will reflect the shape of the labor supply curve. Specifically:
$Elasticity of labor supply=% change in quantity of labor supplied% change in wageElasticity of labor supply=% change in quantity of labor supplied% change in wage$
The wage elasticity of labor supply for teenage workers is generally fairly elastic: that is, a certain percentage change in wages will lead to a larger percentage change in the quantity of hours worked. Conversely, the wage elasticity of labor supply for adult workers in their thirties and forties is fairly inelastic. When wages move up or down by a certain percentage amount, the quantity of hours that adults in their prime earning years are willing to supply changes but by a lesser percentage amount.
In markets for financial capital, the elasticity of savings—that is, the percentage change in the quantity of savings divided by the percentage change in interest rates—will describe the shape of the supply curve for financial capital. That is:
$Elasticity of savings=% change in quantity of financial savings% change in interest rateElasticity of savings=% change in quantity of financial savings% change in interest rate$
Sometimes laws are proposed that seek to increase the quantity of savings by offering tax breaks so that the return on savings is higher. Such a policy will have a comparatively large impact on increasing the quantity saved if the supply curve for financial capital is elastic, because then a given percentage increase in the return to savings will cause a higher percentage increase in the quantity of savings. However, if the supply curve for financial capital is highly inelastic, then a percentage increase in the return to savings will cause only a small increase in the quantity of savings. The evidence on the supply curve of financial capital is controversial but, at least in the short run, the elasticity of savings with respect to the interest rate appears fairly inelastic.
Expanding the Concept of Elasticity
The elasticity concept does not even need to relate to a typical supply or demand curve at all. For example, imagine that you are studying whether the Internal Revenue Service should spend more money on auditing tax returns. We can frame the question in terms of the elasticity of tax collections with respect to spending on tax enforcement; that is, what is the percentage change in tax collections derived from a given percentage change in spending on tax enforcement?
With all of the elasticity concepts that we have just described, some of which are in Table 5.4, the possibility of confusion arises. When you hear the phrases “elasticity of demand” or “elasticity of supply,” they refer to the elasticity with respect to price. Sometimes, either to be extremely clear or because economists are discussing a wide variety of elasticities, we will call the elasticity of demand or the demand elasticity the price elasticity of demand or the “elasticity of demand with respect to price.” Similarly, economists sometimes use the term elasticity of supply or the supply elasticity, to avoid any possibility of confusion, the price elasticity of supply or “the elasticity of supply with respect to price.” However, in whatever context, the idea of elasticity always refers to percentage change in one variable, almost always a price or money variable, and how it causes a percentage change in another variable, typically a quantity variable of some kind.
$Income elasticity of demand=% change in Qd% change in incomeIncome elasticity of demand=% change in Qd% change in income$
$Cross-price elasticity of demand=% change in Qd of good A% change in price of good BCross-price elasticity of demand=% change in Qd of good A% change in price of good B$
$Wage elasticity of labor supply=% change in quantity of labor supplied% change in wageWage elasticity of labor supply=% change in quantity of labor supplied% change in wage$
$Wage elasticity of labor demand=% change in quantity of labor demanded% change in wageWage elasticity of labor demand=% change in quantity of labor demanded% change in wage$
$Interest rate elasticity of savings=% change in quantity of savings% change in interest rateInterest rate elasticity of savings=% change in quantity of savings% change in interest rate$
$Interest rate elasticity of borrowing=% change in quantity of borrowing% change in interest rateInterest rate elasticity of borrowing=% change in quantity of borrowing% change in interest rate$
Table 5.4 Formulas for Calculating Elasticity
Bring It Home
That Will Be How Much?
How did the 60% price increase in 2011 end up for Netflix? It has been a very bumpy ride.
Before the price increase, there were about 24.6 million U.S. subscribers. After the price increase, 810,000 infuriated U.S. consumers canceled their Netflix subscriptions, dropping the total number of subscribers to 23.79 million. Fast forward to June 2013, when there were 36 million streaming Netflix subscribers in the United States. This was an increase of 11.4 million subscribers since the price increase—an average per quarter growth of about 1.6 million. This growth is less than the 2 million per quarter increases Netflix experienced in the fourth quarter of 2010 and the first quarter of 2011.
During the first year after the price increase, the firm’s stock price (a measure of future expectations for the firm) fell from about \$33.60 per share per share to just under \$7.80. By the end of 2016, however, the stock price was at \$123 per share. By the end of 2021, the stock price was just over \$600 per share, and Netflix had more than 214 million subscribers in fifty countries.
What happened? Obviously, Netflix company officials understood the law of demand. Company officials reported, when announcing the price increase, this could result in the loss of about 600,000 existing subscribers. Using the elasticity of demand formula, it is easy to see company officials expected an inelastic response:
$=–600,000/[(24 million + 24.6 million)/2]6/[(10 + 16)/2]=–600,000/24.3 million6/13=–0.0250.46=–0.05=–600,000/[(24 million + 24.6 million)/2]6/[(10 + 16)/2]=–600,000/24.3 million6/13=–0.0250.46=–0.05$
In addition, Netflix officials had anticipated the price increase would have little impact on attracting new customers. Netflix anticipated adding up to 1.29 million new subscribers in the third quarter of 2011. It is true this was slower growth than the firm had experienced—about 2 million per quarter.
Why was the estimate of customers leaving so far off? In the more than two decades since Netflix had been founded, there was an increase in the number of close, but not perfect, substitutes. Consumers now had choices ranging from Vudu, Amazon Prime, Hulu, and Redbox, to retail stores. Jaime Weinman reported in Maclean’s that Redbox kiosks are “a five-minute drive for less from 68 percent of Americans, and it seems that many people still find a five-minute drive more convenient than loading up a movie online.” It seems that in 2012, many consumers still preferred a physical DVD disk over streaming video.
What missteps did the Netflix management make? In addition to misjudging the elasticity of demand, by failing to account for close substitutes, it seems they may have also misjudged customers’ preferences and tastes. However, the very substantial increase over time in the number of Netflix subscribers suggests that the preference for streaming video may well have overtaken the preference for physical DVD disks. Netflix, the source of numerous late night talk show laughs and jabs in 2011, may yet have the last laugh. | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_3e_(OpenStax)/05%3A_Elasticity/5.05%3A_Elasticity_in_Areas_Other_Than_Price.txt |
constant unitary elasticity
when a given percent price change in price leads to an equal percentage change in quantity demanded or supplied
cross-price elasticity of demand
the percentage change in the quantity of good A that is demanded as a result of a percentage change in the price of good B
elastic demand
when the elasticity of demand is greater than one, indicating a high responsiveness of quantity demanded or supplied to changes in price
elastic supply
when the elasticity of either supply is greater than one, indicating a high responsiveness of quantity demanded or supplied to changes in price
elasticity
an economics concept that measures responsiveness of one variable to changes in another variable
elasticity of savings
the percentage change in the quantity of savings divided by the percentage change in interest rates
inelastic demand
when the elasticity of demand is less than one, indicating that a 1 percent increase in price paid by the consumer leads to less than a 1 percent change in purchases (and vice versa); this indicates a low responsiveness by consumers to price changes
inelastic supply
when the elasticity of supply is less than one, indicating that a 1 percent increase in price paid to the firm will result in a less than 1 percent increase in production by the firm; this indicates a low responsiveness of the firm to price increases (and vice versa if prices drop)
infinite elasticity
the extremely elastic situation of demand or supply where quantity changes by an infinite amount in response to any change in price; horizontal in appearance
perfect elasticity
see infinite elasticity
perfect inelasticity
see zero elasticity
price elasticity
the relationship between the percent change in price resulting in a corresponding percentage change in the quantity demanded or supplied
price elasticity of demand
percentage change in the quantity demanded of a good or service divided the percentage change in price
price elasticity of supply
percentage change in the quantity supplied divided by the percentage change in price
tax incidence
manner in which the tax burden is divided between buyers and sellers
unitary elasticity
when the calculated elasticity is equal to one indicating that a change in the price of the good or service results in a proportional change in the quantity demanded or supplied
wage elasticity of labor supply
the percentage change in hours worked divided by the percentage change in wages
zero inelasticity
the highly inelastic case of demand or supply in which a percentage change in price, no matter how large, results in zero change in the quantity; vertical in appearance
5.07: Key Concepts and Summary
5.1 Price Elasticity of Demand and Price Elasticity of Supply
Price elasticity measures the responsiveness of the quantity demanded or supplied of a good to a change in its price. We compute it as the percentage change in quantity demanded (or supplied) divided by the percentage change in price. We can describe elasticity as elastic (or very responsive), unit elastic, or inelastic (not very responsive). Elastic demand or supply curves indicate that quantity demanded or supplied respond to price changes in a greater than proportional manner. An inelastic demand or supply curve is one where a given percentage change in price will cause a smaller percentage change in quantity demanded or supplied. A unitary elasticity means that a given percentage change in price leads to an equal percentage change in quantity demanded or supplied.
5.2 Polar Cases of Elasticity and Constant Elasticity
Infinite or perfect elasticity refers to the extreme case where either the quantity demanded or supplied changes by an infinite amount in response to any change in price at all. Zero elasticity refers to the extreme case in which a percentage change in price, no matter how large, results in zero change in quantity. Constant unitary elasticity in either a supply or demand curve refers to a situation where a price change of one percent results in a quantity change of one percent.
5.3 Elasticity and Pricing
In the market for goods and services, quantity supplied and quantity demanded are often relatively slow to react to changes in price in the short run, but react more substantially in the long run. As a result, demand and supply often (but not always) tend to be relatively inelastic in the short run and relatively elastic in the long run. A tax incidence depends on the relative price elasticity of supply and demand. When supply is more elastic than demand, buyers bear most of the tax burden, and when demand is more elastic than supply, producers bear most of the cost of the tax. Tax revenue is larger the more inelastic the demand and supply are.
5.4 Elasticity in Areas Other Than Price
Elasticity is a general term, that reflects responsiveness. It refers to the change of one variable divided by the percentage change of a related variable that we can apply to many economic connections. For instance, the income elasticity of demand is the percentage change in quantity demanded divided by the percentage change in income. The cross-price elasticity of demand is the percentage change in the quantity demanded of a good divided by the percentage change in the price of another good. Elasticity applies in labor markets and financial capital markets just as it does in markets for goods and services. The wage elasticity of labor supply is the percentage change in the quantity of hours supplied divided by the percentage change in the wage. The elasticity of savings with respect to interest rates is the percentage change in the quantity of savings divided by the percentage change in interest rates.
5.08: Self-Check Questions
1.
From the data in Table 5.5 about demand for smart phones, calculate the price elasticity of demand from: point B to point C, point D to point E, and point G to point H. Classify the elasticity at each point as elastic, inelastic, or unit elastic.
Points P Q
A 60 3,000
B 70 2,800
C 80 2,600
D 90 2,400
E 100 2,200
F 110 2,000
G 120 1,800
H 130 1,600
Table 5.5
2.
From the data in Table 5.6 about supply of alarm clocks, calculate the price elasticity of supply from: point J to point K, point L to point M, and point N to point P. Classify the elasticity at each point as elastic, inelastic, or unit elastic.
Point Price Quantity Supplied
J \$8 50
K \$9 70
L \$10 80
M \$11 88
N \$12 95
P \$13 100
Table 5.6
3.
Why is the demand curve with constant unitary elasticity concave?
4.
Why is the supply curve with constant unitary elasticity a straight line?
5.
The federal government decides to require that automobile manufacturers install new anti-pollution equipment that costs \$2,000 per car. Under what conditions can carmakers pass almost all of this cost along to car buyers? Under what conditions can carmakers pass very little of this cost along to car buyers?
6.
Suppose you are in charge of sales at a pharmaceutical company, and your firm has a new drug that causes bald men to grow hair. Assume that the company wants to earn as much revenue as possible from this drug. If the elasticity of demand for your company’s product at the current price is 1.4, would you advise the company to raise the price, lower the price, or to keep the price the same? What if the elasticity were 0.6? What if it were 1? Explain your answer.
7.
What would the gasoline price elasticity of supply mean to UPS or FedEx?
8.
The average annual income rises from \$25,000 to \$38,000, and the quantity of bread consumed in a year by the average person falls from 30 loaves to 22 loaves. What is the income elasticity of bread consumption? Is bread a normal or an inferior good?
9.
Suppose the cross-price elasticity of apples with respect to the price of oranges is 0.4, and the price of oranges falls by 3%. What will happen to the demand for apples? | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_3e_(OpenStax)/05%3A_Elasticity/5.06%3A_Key_Terms.txt |
10.
What is the formula for calculating elasticity?
11.
What is the price elasticity of demand? Can you explain it in your own words?
12.
What is the price elasticity of supply? Can you explain it in your own words?
13.
Describe the general appearance of a demand or a supply curve with zero elasticity.
14.
Describe the general appearance of a demand or a supply curve with infinite elasticity.
15.
If demand is elastic, will shifts in supply have a larger effect on equilibrium quantity or on price?
16.
If demand is inelastic, will shifts in supply have a larger effect on equilibrium price or on quantity?
17.
If supply is elastic, will shifts in demand have a larger effect on equilibrium quantity or on price?
18.
If supply is inelastic, will shifts in demand have a larger effect on equilibrium price or on quantity?
19.
Would you usually expect elasticity of demand or supply to be higher in the short run or in the long run? Why?
20.
Under which circumstances does the tax burden fall entirely on consumers?
21.
What is the formula for the income elasticity of demand?
22.
What is the formula for the cross-price elasticity of demand?
23.
What is the formula for the wage elasticity of labor supply?
24.
What is the formula for elasticity of savings with respect to interest rates?
5.10: Critical Thinking Questions
25.
Transatlantic air travel in business class has an estimated elasticity of demand of 0.62, while transatlantic air travel in economy class has an estimated price elasticity of 0.12. Why do you think this is the case?
26.
What is the relationship between price elasticity and position on the demand curve? For example, as you move up the demand curve to higher prices and lower quantities, what happens to the measured elasticity? How would you explain that?
27.
Can you think of an industry (or product) with near infinite elasticity of supply in the short term? That is, what is an industry that could increase Qs almost without limit in response to an increase in the price?
28.
Would you expect supply to play a more significant role in determining the price of a basic necessity like food or a luxury like perfume? Explain. Hint: Think about how the price elasticity of demand will differ between necessities and luxuries.
29.
A city has built a bridge over a river and it decides to charge a toll to everyone who crosses. For one year, the city charges a variety of different tolls and records information on how many drivers cross the bridge. The city thus gathers information about elasticity of demand. If the city wishes to raise as much revenue as possible from the tolls, where will the city decide to charge a toll: in the inelastic portion of the demand curve, the elastic portion of the demand curve, or the unit elastic portion? Explain.
30.
In a market where the supply curve is perfectly inelastic, how does an excise tax affect the price paid by consumers and the quantity bought and sold?
31.
Economists define normal goods as having a positive income elasticity. We can divide normal goods into two types: Those whose income elasticity is less than one and those whose income elasticity is greater than one. Think about products that would fall into each category. Can you come up with a name for each category?
32.
Suppose you could buy shoes one at a time, rather than in pairs. What do you predict the cross-price elasticity for left shoes and right shoes would be?
5.11: Problems
33.
The equation for a demand curve is P = 48 – 3Q. What is the elasticity in moving from a quantity of 5 to a quantity of 6?
34.
The equation for a demand curve is P = 2/Q. What is the elasticity of demand as price falls from 5 to 4? What is the elasticity of demand as the price falls from 9 to 8? Would you expect these answers to be the same?
35.
The equation for a supply curve is 4P = Q. What is the elasticity of supply as price rises from 3 to 4? What is the elasticity of supply as the price rises from 7 to 8? Would you expect these answers to be the same?
36.
The equation for a supply curve is P = 3Q – 8. What is the elasticity in moving from a price of 4 to a price of 7?
37.
The supply of paintings by Leonardo Da Vinci, who painted the Mona Lisa and The Last Supper and died in 1519, is highly inelastic. Sketch a supply and demand diagram, paying attention to the appropriate elasticities, to illustrate that demand for these paintings will determine the price.
38.
Say that a certain stadium for professional football has 70,000 seats. What is the shape of the supply curve for tickets to football games at that stadium? Explain.
39.
When someone’s kidneys fail, the person needs to have medical treatment with a dialysis machine (unless or until they receive a kidney transplant) or they will die. Sketch a supply and demand diagram, paying attention to the appropriate elasticities, to illustrate that the supply of such dialysis machines will primarily determine the price.
40.
Assume that the supply of low-skilled workers is fairly elastic, but the employers’ demand for such workers is fairly inelastic. If the policy goal is to expand employment for low-skilled workers, is it better to focus on policy tools to shift the supply of unskilled labor or on tools to shift the demand for unskilled labor? What if the policy goal is to raise wages for this group? Explain your answers with supply and demand diagrams. | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_3e_(OpenStax)/05%3A_Elasticity/5.09%3A_Review_Questions.txt |
Macroeconomics focuses on the economy as a whole (or on whole economies as they interact). What causes recessions? What makes unemployment stay high when recessions are supposed to be over? Why do some countries grow faster than others? Why do some countries have higher standards of living than others? These are all questions that macroeconomics addresses. Macroeconomics involves adding up the economic activity of all households and all businesses in all markets to get the overall demand and supply in the economy. However, when we do that, something curious happens. It is not unusual that what results at the macro level is different from the sum of the microeconomic parts. Indeed, what seems sensible from a microeconomic point of view can have unexpected or counterproductive results at the macroeconomic level.
06: The Macroeconomic Perspective
Figure 6.1 The Great Depression At times, such as when many people having trouble making ends meet, it is easy to tell how the economy is doing. This photograph shows people lined up during the Great Depression, waiting for relief checks. At other times, when some are doing well and others are not, it is more difficult to ascertain how the economy of a country is doing. (Credit: modification of “Waiting for relief checks. Calipatria, California” by Dorothea Lange/Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Division Washington, D.C. 20540 USA, Public Domain)
Chapter Objectives
In this chapter, you will learn about:
• Measuring the Size of the Economy: Gross Domestic Product
• Adjusting Nominal Values to Real Values
• Tracking Real GDP over Time
• Comparing GDP among Countries
• How Well GDP Measures the Well-Being of Society
Bring It Home
How is the Economy Doing? How Does One Tell?
The 1990s were boom years for the U.S. economy. Beginning in the late 2000s, from 2007 to 2014, economic performance in the U.S. was poor. The economy experienced another period of strong growth between 2014 and 2019, before COVID-19 rocked the world economy in March and April of 2020. What causes the economy to expand or contract? Why do businesses fail when they are making all the right decisions? Why do workers lose their jobs when they are hardworking and productive? Are bad economic times a failure of the market system? Are they a failure of the government? These are all questions of macroeconomics, which we will begin to address in this chapter. We will not be able to answer all of these questions here, but we will start with the basics: How is the economy doing? How can we tell?
The macro economy includes all buying and selling, all production and consumption; everything that goes on in every market in the economy. How can we get a handle on that? The answer begins more than 80 years ago, during the Great Depression. President Franklin D. Roosevelt and his economic advisers knew things were bad—but how could they express and measure just how bad it was? An economist named Simon Kuznets, who later won the Nobel Prize for his work, came up with a way to track what the entire economy is producing. In this chapter, you will learn how the government constructs GDP, how we use it, and why it is so important.
Macroeconomics focuses on the economy as a whole (or on whole economies as they interact). What causes recessions? What makes unemployment stay high when recessions are supposed to be over? Why do some countries grow faster than others? Why do some countries have higher standards of living than others? These are all questions that macroeconomics addresses. Macroeconomics involves adding up the economic activity of all households and all businesses in all markets to obtain the overall demand and supply in the economy. However, when we do that, something curious happens. It is not unusual that what results at the macro level is different from the sum of the microeconomic parts. What seems sensible from a microeconomic point of view can have unexpected or counterproductive results at the macroeconomic level. Imagine that you are sitting at an event with a large audience, like a live concert or a basketball game. A few people decide that they want a better view, and so they stand up. However, when these people stand up, they block the view for other people, and the others need to stand up as well if they wish to see. Eventually, nearly everyone is standing up, and as a result, no one can see much better than before. The rational decision of some individuals at the micro level—to stand up for a better view—ended up as self-defeating at the macro level. This is not macroeconomics, but it is an apt analogy.
Macroeconomics is a rather massive subject. How are we going to tackle it? Figure 6.2 illustrates the structure we will use. We will study macroeconomics from three different perspectives:
1. What are the macroeconomic goals? (Macroeconomics as a discipline does not have goals, but we do have goals for the macro economy.)
2. What are the frameworks economists can use to analyze the macroeconomy?
3. Finally, what are the policy tools governments can use to manage the macroeconomy?
Figure 6.2 Macroeconomic Goals, Framework, and Policies This chart shows what macroeconomics is about. The box on the left indicates a consensus of what are the most important goals for the macro economy, the middle box lists the frameworks economists use to analyze macroeconomic changes (such as inflation or recession), and the box on the right indicates the two tools the federal government uses to influence the macro economy.
Goals
In thinking about the macroeconomy's overall health, it is useful to consider three primary goals: economic growth, low unemployment, and low inflation.
• Economic growth ultimately determines the prevailing standard of living in a country. Economists measure growth by the percentage change in real (inflation-adjusted) gross domestic product. A growth rate of more than 3% is considered good.
• Unemployment, as measured by the unemployment rate, is the percentage of people in the labor force who do not have a job. When people lack jobs, the economy is wasting a precious resource-labor, and the result is lower goods and services produced. Unemployment, however, is more than a statistic—it represents people’s livelihoods. While measured unemployment is unlikely to ever be zero, economists consider a measured unemployment rate of 5% or less low (good).
• Inflation is a sustained increase in the overall level of prices, and is measured by the consumer price index. If many people face a situation where the prices that they pay for food, shelter, and healthcare are rising much faster than the wages they receive for their labor, there will be widespread unhappiness as their standard of living declines. For that reason, low inflation—an inflation rate of 1–2%—is a major goal.
Frameworks
As you learn in the micro part of this book, principal tools that economists use are theories and models (see Welcome to Economics! for more on this). In microeconomics, we used the theories of supply and demand. In macroeconomics, we use the theories of aggregate demand (AD) and aggregate supply (AS). This book presents two perspectives on macroeconomics: the Neoclassical perspective and the Keynesian perspective, each of which has its own version of AD and AS. Between the two perspectives, you will obtain a good understanding of what drives the macroeconomy.
Policy Tools
National governments have two tools for influencing the macroeconomy. The first is monetary policy, which involves managing the money supply and interest rates. The second is fiscal policy, which involves changes in government spending/purchases and taxes.
We will explain each of the items in Figure 6.2 in detail in one or more other chapters. As you learn these things, you will discover that the goals and the policy tools are in the news almost every day. | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_3e_(OpenStax)/06%3A_The_Macroeconomic_Perspective/6.01%3A_Introduction_to_the_Macroeconomic_Perspective.txt |
Learning Objectives
By the end of this section, you will be able to:
• Identify the components of GDP on the demand side and on the supply side
• Evaluate how economists measure gross domestic product (GDP)
• Contrast and calculate GDP, net exports, and net national product
Macroeconomics is an empirical subject, so the first step toward understanding it is to measure the economy.
How large is the U.S. economy? Economists typically measure the size of a nation’s overall economy by its gross domestic product (GDP), which is the value of all final goods and services produced within a country in a given year. Measuring GDP involves counting the production of millions of different goods and services—smart phones, cars, music downloads, computers, steel, bananas, college educations, and all other new goods and services that a country produced in the current year—and summing them into a total dollar value. This task is straightforward: take the quantity of everything produced, multiply it by the price at which each product sold, and add up the total. In 2020, the U.S. GDP totaled \$20.9 trillion, the largest GDP in the world.
Each of the market transactions that enter into GDP must involve both a buyer and a seller. We can measure an economy's GDP either by the total dollar value of what consumers purchase in the economy, or by the total dollar value of what is the country produces. There is even a third way, as we will explain later.
GDP Measured by Components of Demand
Who buys all of this production? We can divide this demand into four main parts: consumer spending (consumption), business spending (investment), government spending on goods and services, and spending on net exports. (See the following Clear It Up feature to understand what we mean by investment.) Table 6.1 shows how these four components added up to the GDP in 2020, Figure 6.4 (a) shows the levels of consumption, investment, and government purchases over time, expressed as a percentage of GDP, while Figure 6.4 (b) shows the levels of exports and imports as a percentage of GDP over time. A few patterns about each of these components are worth noticing. Table 6.1 shows the components of GDP from the demand side.
Components of GDP on the Demand Side (in trillions of dollars) Percentage of Total
Consumption \$14.0 67.2%
Investment \$3.6 17.4%
Government \$3.9 18.5%
Exports \$2.1 10.2%
Imports –\$2.7 –13.3%
Total GDP \$20.9 100%
Table 6.1 Components of U.S. GDP in 2022: From the Demand Side (Source: bea.gov/iTable/index_nipa.cfm, Table 1.1.5)
Figure 6.3 Percentage of Components of U.S. GDP on the Demand Side Consumption makes up over half of the demand side components of the GDP. Totals in the chart do not add to 100% due to rounding. (Source: bea.gov/iTable/index_nipa.cfm, Table 1.1.10)
Clear It Up
What does the word “investment” mean?
What do economists mean by investment, or business spending? In calculating GDP, investment does not refer to purchasing stocks and bonds or trading financial assets. It refers to purchasing new capital goods, that is, new commercial real estate (such as buildings, factories, and stores) and equipment, residential housing construction, and inventories. Inventories that manufacturers produce this year are included in this year’s GDP—even if they are not yet sold. From the accountant’s perspective, it is as if the firm invested in its own inventories. Business investment in 2020 was \$3.6 trillion, according to the Bureau of Economic Analysis.
Figure 6.4 Components of GDP on the Demand Side (a) Consumption is about two-thirds of GDP, and it has been on a slight upward trend over time. Business investment hovers around 15% of GDP, but it fluctuates more than consumption. Government spending on goods and services is slightly under 20% of GDP and has declined modestly over time. (b) Exports are added to total demand for goods and services, while imports are subtracted from total demand. If exports exceed imports, as in most of the 1960s and 1970s in the U.S. economy, a trade surplus exists. If imports exceed exports, as in recent years, then a trade deficit exists. (Source: bea.gov/iTable/index_nipa.cfm, Table 1.1.10)
Consumption expenditure by households is the largest component of GDP, accounting for about two-thirds of the GDP in any year. This tells us that consumers’ spending decisions are a major driver of the economy. However, consumer spending is a gentle elephant: when viewed over time, it does not jump around too much, and has increased modestly from about 60% of GDP in the 1960s and 1970s.
Investment expenditure refers to purchases of physical plant and equipment, primarily by businesses. If Starbucks builds a new store, or Amazon buys robots, they count these expenditures under business investment. Investment demand is far smaller than consumption demand, typically accounting for only about 15–18% of GDP, but it is very important for the economy because this is where jobs are created. However, it fluctuates more noticeably than consumption. Business investment is volatile. New technology or a new product can spur business investment, but then confidence can drop and business investment can pull back sharply.
If you have noticed any of the infrastructure projects (new bridges, highways, airports) launched during the 2009 recession, or if you received a stimulus check during the pandemic-induced recession of 2020–2021, you have seen how important government spending can be for the economy. Government expenditure in the United States is close to 20% of GDP, and includes spending by all three levels of government: federal, state, and local. The only part of government spending counted in demand is government purchases of goods or services produced in the economy. Examples include the government buying a new fighter jet for the Air Force (federal government spending), building a new highway (state government spending), or a new school (local government spending). A significant portion of government budgets consists of transfer payments, like unemployment benefits, veteran’s benefits, and Social Security payments to retirees. The government excludes these payments from GDP because it does not receive a new good or service in return or exchange. Instead they are transfers of income from taxpayers to others. If you are curious about the awesome undertaking of adding up GDP, read the following Clear It Up feature.
Clear It Up
How do statisticians measure GDP?
Government economists at the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA), within the U.S. Department of Commerce, piece together estimates of GDP from a variety of sources.
Once every five years, in the second and seventh year of each decade, the Bureau of the Census carries out a detailed census of businesses throughout the United States. In between, the Census Bureau carries out a monthly survey of retail sales. The government adjusts these figures with foreign trade data to account for exports that are produced in the United States and sold abroad and for imports that are produced abroad and sold here. Once every ten years, the Census Bureau conducts a comprehensive survey of housing and residential finance. Together, these sources provide the main basis for figuring out what is produced for consumers.
For investment, the Census Bureau carries out a monthly survey of construction and an annual survey of expenditures on physical capital equipment.
For what the federal government purchases, the statisticians rely on the U.S. Department of the Treasury. An annual Census of Governments gathers information on state and local governments. Because the government spends a considerable amount at all levels hiring people to provide services, it also tracks a large portion of spending through payroll records that state governments and the Social Security Administration collect.
With regard to foreign trade, the Census Bureau compiles a monthly record of all import and export documents. Additional surveys cover transportation and travel, and make adjustments for financial services that are produced in the United States for foreign customers.
Many other sources contribute to GDP estimates. Information on energy comes from the U.S. Department of Transportation and Department of Energy. The Agency for Health Care Research and Quality collects information on healthcare. Surveys of landlords find out about rental income. The Department of Agriculture collects statistics on farming.
All these bits and pieces of information arrive in different forms, at different time intervals. The BEA melds them together to produce GDP estimates on a quarterly basis (every three months). The BEA then "annualizes" these numbers by multiplying by four. As more information comes in, the BEA updates and revises these estimates. BEA releases the GDP “advance” estimate for a certain quarter one month after a quarter. The “preliminary” estimate comes out one month after that. The BEA publishes the “final” estimate one month later, but it is not actually final. In July, the BEA releases roughly updated estimates for the previous calendar year. Then, once every five years, after it has processed all the results of the latest detailed five-year business census, the BEA revises all of the past GDP estimates according to the newest methods and data, going all the way back to 1929.
Link It Up
Visit this website to read FAQs on the BEA site. You can even email your own questions!
When thinking about the demand for domestically produced goods in a global economy, it is important to count spending on exports—domestically produced goods that a country sells abroad. Similarly, we must also subtract spending on imports—goods that a country produces in other countries that residents of this country purchase. The GDP net export component is equal to the dollar value of exports (X) minus the dollar value of imports (M), (X – M). We call the gap between exports and imports the trade balance. If a country’s exports are larger than its imports, then a country has a trade surplus. In the United States, exports typically exceeded imports in the 1960s and 1970s, as Figure 6.4(b) shows.
Since the early 1980s, imports have typically exceeded exports, and so the United States has experienced a trade deficit in most years. The trade deficit grew quite large in the late 1990s and in the mid-2000s. Figure 6.4 (b) also shows that imports and exports have both risen substantially in recent decades, even after the declines during the Great Recession between 2008 and 2009. As we noted before, if exports and imports are equal, foreign trade has no effect on total GDP. However, even if exports and imports are balanced overall, foreign trade might still have powerful effects on particular industries and workers by causing nations to shift workers and physical capital investment toward one industry rather than another.
Based on these four components of demand, we can measure GDP as:
$GDP = Consumption + Investment + Government + Trade balanceGDP = C + I + G + (X – M)GDP = Consumption + Investment + Government + Trade balanceGDP = C + I + G + (X – M)$
Understanding how to measure GDP is important for analyzing connections in the macro economy and for thinking about macroeconomic policy tools.
GDP Measured by What is Produced
Everything that we purchase somebody must first produce. Table 6.2 breaks down what a country produces into five categories: durable goods, nondurable goods, services, structures, and the change in inventories. Before going into detail about these categories, notice that total GDP measured according to what is produced is exactly the same as the GDP measured by looking at the five components of demand. Figure 6.5 provides a visual representation of this information.
Components of GDP on the Supply Side (in trillions of dollars) Percentage of Total
Goods
Durable goods \$3.5 16.7%
Nondurable goods \$2.8 13.4%
Services \$12.7 60.8%
Structures \$1.9 9.1%
Change in inventories \$0.0 0.0%
Total GDP \$20.9 100%
Table 6.2 Components of U.S. GDP on the Production Side, 2020 (Source: bea.gov/iTable/index_nipa.cfm, Table 1.2.5)
Figure 6.5 Percentage of Components of GDP on the Production Side Services make up over 60 percent of the production side components of GDP in the United States.
Since every market transaction must have both a buyer and a seller, GDP must be the same whether measured by what is demanded or by what is produced. Figure 6.6 shows these components of what is produced, expressed as a percentage of GDP, since 1950.
Figure 6.6 Types of Production Services are the largest single component of total supply, representing over 60 percent of GDP, up from about 45 percent in the early 1950s. Durable and nondurable goods constitute the manufacturing sector, and they have declined from 40 percent of GDP in 1950 to about 30 percent in 2016. Nondurable goods used to be larger than durable goods, but in recent years, nondurable goods have been dropping to below the share of durable goods, which is less than 20% of GDP. Structures hover around 10% of GDP. We do not show here the change in inventories, the final component of aggregate supply. It is typically less than 1% of GDP.
In thinking about what is produced in the economy, many non-economists immediately focus on solid, long-lasting goods, like cars and computers. By far the largest part of GDP, however, is services. Moreover, services have been a growing share of GDP over time. A detailed breakdown of the leading service industries would include healthcare, education, and legal and financial services. It has been decades since most of the U.S. economy involved making solid objects. Instead, the most common jobs in a modern economy involve a worker looking at pieces of paper or a computer screen; meeting with co-workers, customers, or suppliers; or making phone calls.
Even within the overall category of goods, long-lasting durable goods like cars and refrigerators are about the same share of the economy as short-lived nondurable goods like food and clothing. The category of structures includes everything from homes, to office buildings, shopping malls, and factories. Inventories is a small category that refers to the goods that one business has produced but has not yet sold to consumers, and are still sitting in warehouses and on shelves. The amount of inventories sitting on shelves tends to decline if business is better than expected, or to rise if business is worse than expected.
Another Way to Measure GDP: The National Income Approach
GDP is a measure of what is produced in a nation. The primary way GDP is estimated is with the Expenditure Approach we discussed above, but there is another way. Everything a firm produces, when sold, becomes revenues to the firm. Businesses use revenues to pay their bills: Wages and salaries for labor, interest and dividends for capital, rent for land, profit to the entrepreneur, etc. So adding up all the income produced in a year provides a second way of measuring GDP. This is why the terms GDP and national income are sometimes used interchangeably. The total value of a nation’s output is equal to the total value of a nation’s income.
The Problem of Double Counting
We define GDP as the current value of all final goods and services produced in a nation in a year. What are final goods? They are goods at the furthest stage of production at the end of a year. Statisticians who calculate GDP must avoid the mistake of double counting, in which they count output more than once as it travels through the production stages. For example, imagine what would happen if government statisticians first counted the value of tires that a tire manufacturer produces, and then counted the value of a new truck that an automaker sold that contains those tires. In this example, the statisticians would have counted the value of the tires twice-because the truck's price includes the value of the tires.
To avoid this problem, which would overstate the size of the economy considerably, government statisticians count just the value of final goods and services in the chain of production that are sold for consumption, investment, government, and trade purposes. Statisticians exclude intermediate goods, which are goods that go into producing other goods, from GDP calculations. From the example above, they will only count the Ford truck's value. The value of what businesses provide to other businesses is captured in the final products at the end of the production chain.
The concept of GDP is fairly straightforward: it is just the dollar value of all final goods and services produced in the economy in a year. In our decentralized, market-oriented economy, actually calculating the more than \$21 trillion-dollar U.S. GDP—along with how it is changing every few months—is a full-time job for a brigade of government statisticians.
What is Counted in GDP What is not included in GDP
Consumption Intermediate goods
Business investment Transfer payments and non-market activities
Government spending on goods and services Used goods
Net exports Illegal goods
Table 6.3 Counting GDP
Notice the items that are not counted into GDP, as Table 6.3 outlines. The sales of used goods are not included because they were produced in a previous year and are part of that year’s GDP. The entire underground economy of services paid “under the table” and illegal sales should be counted, but is not, because it is impossible to track these sales. In Friedrich Schneider's recent study of shadow economies, he estimated the underground economy in the United States to be 6.6% of GDP, or close to \$2 trillion dollars in 2013 alone. Transfer payments, such as payment by the government to individuals, are not included, because they do not represent production. Also, production of some goods—such as home production as when you make your breakfast—is not counted because these goods are not sold in the marketplace.
Link It Up
Visit this website to read about the “New Underground Economy.”
Other Ways to Measure the Economy
Besides GDP, there are several different but closely related ways of measuring the size of the economy. We mentioned above that we can think of GDP as total production and as total purchases. We can also think of it as total income since anything one produces and sells yields income.
One of the closest cousins of GDP is the gross national product (GNP). GDP includes only what country produces within its borders. GNP adds what domestic businesses and labor abroad produces, and subtracts any payments that foreign labor and businesses located in the United States send home to other countries. In other words, GNP is based more on what a country's citizens and firms produce, wherever they are located, and GDP is based on what happens within a certain county's geographic boundaries. For the United States, the gap between GDP and GNP is relatively small; in recent years, only about 0.2%. For small nations, which may have a substantial share of their population working abroad and sending money back home, the difference can be substantial.
We calculate net national product (NNP) by taking GNP and then subtracting the value of how much physical capital is worn out, or reduced in value because of aging, over the course of a year. The process by which capital ages and loses value is called depreciation. We can further subdivide NNP into national income, which includes all income to businesses and individuals, and personal income, which includes only income to people.
The gross national income (GNI) includes the value of all goods and services produced by people from a country—whether in the country or not. Unlike the other methods, GNI essentially measures the wealth of a nation because it focuses on income, not output. As you will see in the discussion regarding global economic diversity, the World Bank now uses GNI to classify nations according to economic status.
For practical purposes, it is not vital to memorize these definitions. However, it is important to be aware that these differences exist and to know what statistic you are examining, so that you do not accidentally compare, say, GDP in one year or for one country with GNP or NNP in another year or another country. To get an idea of how these calculations work, follow the steps in the following Work It Out feature.
Work It Out
Calculating GDP, Net Exports, and NNP
Based on the information in Table 6.4:
1. What is the value of GDP?
2. What is the value of net exports?
3. What is the value of NNP?
Government purchases \$120 billion
Depreciation \$40 billion
Consumption \$400 billion
Business Investment \$60 billion
Exports \$100 billion
Imports \$120 billion
Income receipts from rest of the world \$10 billion
Income payments to rest of the world \$8 billion
Table 6.4
Step 1. To calculate GDP use the following formula:
$GDP = Consumption + Investment + Government spending + (Exports – Imports) = C + I + G + (X – M) = 400 + 60 + 120 + (100 – 120) = 560 billionGDP = Consumption + Investment + Government spending + (Exports – Imports) = C + I + G + (X – M) = 400 + 60 + 120 + (100 – 120) = 560 billion$
Step 2. To calculate net exports, subtract imports from exports.
$Net exports = X – M = 100 – 120 = –20 billionNet exports = X – M = 100 – 120 = –20 billion$
Step 3. To calculate NNP, use the following formula:
$NNP = GDP + Income receipts from the rest of the world – Income payments to the rest of the world – Depreciation = 560 + 10 – 8 – 40 = 522 billion NNP = GDP + Income receipts from the rest of the world – Income payments to the rest of the world – Depreciation = 560 + 10 – 8 – 40 = 522 billion$ | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_3e_(OpenStax)/06%3A_The_Macroeconomic_Perspective/6.02%3A_Measuring_the_Size_of_the_Economy-_Gross_Domestic_Product.txt |
Learning Objectives
By the end of this section, you will be able to:
• Contrast nominal GDP and real GDP
• Explain GDP deflator
• Calculate real GDP based on nominal GDP values
When examining economic statistics, there is a crucial distinction worth emphasizing. The distinction is between nominal and real measurements, which refer to whether or not inflation has distorted a given statistic. Looking at economic statistics without considering inflation is like looking through a pair of binoculars and trying to guess how close something is: unless you know how strong the lenses are, you cannot guess the distance very accurately. Similarly, if you do not know the inflation rate, it is difficult to figure out if a rise in GDP is due mainly to a rise in the overall level of prices or to a rise in quantities of goods produced. The nominal value of any economic statistic means that we measure the statistic in terms of actual prices that exist at the time. The real value refers to the same statistic after it has been adjusted for inflation. Generally, it is the real value that is more important.
Converting Nominal to Real GDP
Table 6.5 shows U.S. GDP at five-year intervals since 1960 in nominal dollars; that is, GDP measured using the actual market prices prevailing in each stated year. Figure 6.7 also reflects this data in a graph.
Year Nominal GDP (billions of dollars) GDP Deflator (2005 = 100)
1960 542.4 16.6
1965 742.3 17.8
1970 1,073.3 21.7
1975 1,684.9 29.8
1980 2,857.3 42.2
1985 4,339.0 54.5
1990 5,963.1 63.6
1995 7,639.7 71.8
2000 10,251.0 78.0
2005 13,039.2 87.5
2010 15,049.0 96.2
2015 18,206.0 10.47
2020 20,893.7 113.6
Table 6.5 U.S. Nominal GDP and the GDP Deflator (Source: https://apps.bea.gov/itable/index.cfm, Table 1.1.5 and Table 1.1.9)
Figure 6.7 U.S. Nominal GDP, 1960–2020 Nominal GDP values have risen exponentially from 1960 through 2020, according to the BEA.
If an unwary analyst compared nominal GDP in 1960 to nominal GDP in 2010, it might appear that national output had risen by a factor of more than 38 over this time (that is, GDP of \$20.9 trillion in 2020 divided by GDP of \$543 billion in 1960 = 38). This conclusion would be highly misleading. Recall that we define nominal GDP as the quantity of every final good or service produced multiplied by the price at which it was sold, summed up for all goods and services. In order to see how much production has actually increased, we need to extract the effects of higher prices on nominal GDP. We can easily accomplish this using the GDP deflator.
The GDP deflator is a price index measuring the average prices of all final goods and services included in the economy. We explore price indices in detail and how we compute them in Inflation, but this definition will do in the context of this chapter. Table 6.5 provides the GDP deflator data and Figure 6.8 shows it graphically.
Figure 6.8 U.S. GDP Deflator, 1960–2020 Much like nominal GDP, the GDP deflator has risen exponentially from 1960 through 2010. (Source: BEA https://apps.bea.gov/itable/index.cfm, Table 1.1.9)
Figure 6.8 shows that the price level has risen dramatically since 1960. The price level in 2020 was seven times higher than in 1960 (the deflator for 2020 was 113 versus a level of 17 in 1960). Clearly, much of the growth in nominal GDP was due to inflation, not an actual change in the quantity of goods and services produced, in other words, not in real GDP. Recall that nominal GDP can rise for two reasons: an increase in output, and/or an increase in prices. What is needed is to extract the increase in prices from nominal GDP so as to measure only changes in output. After all, the dollars used to measure nominal GDP in 1960 are worth more than the inflated dollars of 2020—and the price index tells exactly how much more. This adjustment is easy to do if you understand that nominal measurements are in value terms, where
$Value = Price × Quantity orNominal GDP = GDP Deflator × Real GDPValue = Price × Quantity orNominal GDP = GDP Deflator × Real GDP$
Let’s look at an example at the micro level. Suppose the t-shirt company, Coolshirts, sells 10 t-shirts at a price of \$9 each.
$Coolshirt's nominal revenue from sales = Price × Quantity = 9 × 10 = 90Coolshirt's nominal revenue from sales = Price × Quantity = 9 × 10 = 90$
Then,
$Coolshirt's real income = Nominal revenuePrice = 909 = 10Coolshirt's real income = Nominal revenuePrice = 909 = 10$
In other words, when we compute “real” measurements we are trying to obtain actual quantities, in this case, 10 t-shirts.
With GDP, it is just a tiny bit more complicated. We start with the same formula as above:
$Real GDP = Nominal GDPPrice IndexReal GDP = Nominal GDPPrice Index$
For reasons that we will explain in more detail below, mathematically, a price index is a two-digit decimal number like 1.00 or 0.85 or 1.25. Because some people have trouble working with decimals, when the price index is published, it has traditionally been multiplied by 100 to get integer numbers like 100, 85, or 125. What this means is that when we “deflate” nominal figures to get real figures (by dividing the nominal by the price index). We also need to remember to divide the published price index by 100 to make the math work. Thus, the formula becomes:
$Real GDP = Nominal GDPPrice Index / 100Real GDP = Nominal GDPPrice Index / 100$
Now read the following Work It Out feature for more practice calculating real GDP.
Work It Out
Computing GDP
It is possible to use the data in Table 6.5 to compute real GDP.
Step 1. Look at Table 6.5, to see that, in 1960, nominal GDP was \$543.3 billion and the price index (GDP deflator) was 19.0.
Step 2. To calculate the real GDP in 1960, use the formula:
$Real GDP = Nominal GDPPrice Index / 100 = 543.3 billion19 / 100 = 2,859.5 billionReal GDP = Nominal GDPPrice Index / 100 = 543.3 billion19 / 100 = 2,859.5 billion$
We’ll do this in two parts to make it clear. First adjust the price index: 19 divided by 100 = 0.19. Then divide into nominal GDP: \$543.3 billion / 0.19 = \$2,859.5 billion.
Step 3. Use the same formula to calculate the real GDP in 1965.
$Real GDP = Nominal GDPPrice Index / 100 = 743.7 billion20.3 / 100 = 3,663.5 billionReal GDP = Nominal GDPPrice Index / 100 = 743.7 billion20.3 / 100 = 3,663.5 billion$
Step 4. Continue using this formula to calculate all of the real GDP values from 1960 through 2010. The calculations and the results are in Table 6.6.
Year Nominal GDP (billions of dollars) GDP Deflator (2005 = 100) Calculations Real GDP (billions of 2005 dollars)
1960 543.3 19.0 543.3 / (19.0/100) 2859.5
1965 743.7 20.3 743.7 / (20.3/100) 3663.5
1970 1075.9 24.8 1,075.9 / (24.8/100) 4338.3
1975 1688.9 34.1 1,688.9 / (34.1/100) 4952.8
1980 2862.5 48.3 2,862.5 / (48.3/100) 5926.5
1985 4346.7 62.3 4,346.7 / (62.3/100) 6977.0
1990 5979.6 72.7 5,979.6 / (72.7/100) 8225.0
1995 7664.0 82.0 7,664 / (82.0/100) 9346.3
2000 10289.7 89.0 10,289.7 / (89.0/100) 11561.5
2005 13095.4 100.0 13,095.4 / (100.0/100) 13095.4
2010 14958.3 110.0 14,958.3 / (110.0/100) 13598.5
Table 6.6 Converting Nominal to Real GDP (Source: Bureau of Economic Analysis, www.bea.gov)
There are a couple things to notice here. Whenever you compute a real statistic, one year (or period) plays a special role. It is called the base year (or base period). The base year is the year whose prices we use to compute the real statistic. When we calculate real GDP, for example, we take the quantities of goods and services produced in each year (for example, 1960 or 1973) and multiply them by their prices in the base year (in this case, 2005), so we get a measure of GDP that uses prices that do not change from year to year. That is why real GDP is labeled “Constant Dollars” or, in this example, “2005 Dollars,” which means that real GDP is constructed using prices that existed in 2005. While the example here uses 2005 as the base year, more generally, you can use any year as the base year. The formula is:
$GDP deflator = Nominal GDPReal GDP × 100GDP deflator = Nominal GDPReal GDP × 100$
Rearranging the formula and using the data from 2005:
$Real GDP = Nominal GDPPrice Index / 100 = 13,095.4 billion100 / 100 = 13,095.4 billionReal GDP = Nominal GDPPrice Index / 100 = 13,095.4 billion100 / 100 = 13,095.4 billion$
Comparing real GDP and nominal GDP for 2005, you see they are the same. This is no accident. It is because we have chosen 2005 as the “base year” in this example. Since the price index in the base year always has a value of 100 (by definition), nominal and real GDP are always the same in the base year.
Look at the data for 2010.
$Real GDP = Nominal GDPPrice Index / 100 = 14,958.3 billion110 / 100 = 13,598.5 billionReal GDP = Nominal GDPPrice Index / 100 = 14,958.3 billion110 / 100 = 13,598.5 billion$
Use this data to make another observation: As long as inflation is positive, meaning prices increase on average from year to year, real GDP should be less than nominal GDP in any year after the base year. The reason for this should be clear: The value of nominal GDP is “inflated” by inflation. Similarly, as long as inflation is positive, real GDP should be greater than nominal GDP in any year before the base year.
Figure 6.9 shows the U.S. nominal and real GDP since 1960. Because 2005 is the base year, the nominal and real values are exactly the same in that year. However, over time, the rise in nominal GDP looks much larger than the rise in real GDP (that is, the nominal GDP line rises more steeply than the real GDP line), because the presence of inflation, especially in the 1970s exaggerates the rise in nominal GDP.
Figure 6.9 U.S. Nominal and Real GDP, 1960–2020 The red line measures U.S. GDP in nominal dollars. The black line measures U.S. GDP in real dollars, where all dollar values are converted to 2012 dollars. Since we express real GDP in 2012 dollars, the two lines cross in 2012. However, real GDP will appear higher than nominal GDP in the years before 2012, because dollars were worth less in 2012 than in previous years. Conversely, real GDP will appear lower in the years after 2012, because dollars were worth more in 2012 than in later years.
Let’s return to the question that we posed originally: How much did GDP increase in real terms? What was the real GDP growth rate from 1960 to 2012? To find the real growth rate, we apply the formula for percentage change:
$2020 real GDP – 1960 real GDP1960 real GDP × 100 = % change13,598.5 – 2,859.52,859.5 × 100 = 376%2020 real GDP – 1960 real GDP1960 real GDP × 100 = % change13,598.5 – 2,859.52,859.5 × 100 = 376%$
In other words, the U.S. economy has increased real production of goods and services by nearly a factor of five since 1960. Of course, that understates the material improvement since it fails to capture improvements in the quality of products and the invention of new products.
There is a quicker way to answer this question approximately, using another math trick. Because:
$Nominal = Price × Quantity % change in Nominal = % change in Price + % change in Quantity OR % change in Quantity = % change in Nominal – % change in PriceNominal = Price × Quantity % change in Nominal = % change in Price + % change in Quantity OR % change in Quantity = % change in Nominal – % change in Price$
Therefore, real GDP growth rate (% change in quantity) equals the growth rate in nominal GDP (% change in value) minus the inflation rate (% change in price).
Note that using this equation provides an approximation for small changes in the levels. For more accurate measures, one should use the first formula. | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_3e_(OpenStax)/06%3A_The_Macroeconomic_Perspective/6.03%3A_Adjusting_Nominal_Values_to_Real_Values.txt |
Learning Objectives
By the end of this section, you will be able to:
• Explain recessions, depressions, peaks, and troughs
• Evaluate the importance of tracking real GDP over time
When news reports indicate that “the economy grew 1.2% in the first quarter,” the reports are referring to the percentage change in real GDP. By convention, governments report GDP growth at an annualized rate: Whatever the calculated growth in real GDP was for the quarter, we multiply it by four when it is reported as if the economy were growing at that rate for a full year.
Figure 6.10 U.S. GDP, 1930–2020 Real GDP in the United States in 2020 (in 2012 dollars) was about \$18.4 trillion. After adjusting to remove the effects of inflation, this represents a roughly 20-fold increase in the economy’s production of goods and services since 1930. (Source: bea.gov)
Figure 6.10 shows the pattern of U.S. real GDP since 1930. Short term declines have regularly interrupted the generally upward long-term path of GDP. We call a significant decline in real GDP a recession. We call an especially lengthy and deep recession a depression. The severe drop in GDP that occurred during the 1930s Great Depression is clearly visible in the figure, as is the 2008–2009 Great Recession and the recession induced by COVID-19 in 2020.
Real GDP is important because it is highly correlated with other measures of economic activity, like employment and unemployment. When real GDP rises, so does employment.
The most significant human problem associated with recessions (and their larger, uglier cousins, depressions) is that a slowdown in production means that firms need to lay off or fire some of their workers. Losing a job imposes painful financial and personal costs on workers, and often on their extended families as well. In addition, even those who keep their jobs are likely to find that wage raises are scanty at best—or their employers may ask them to take pay cuts.
Table 6.7 lists the pattern of recessions and expansions in the U.S. economy since 1900. We call the highest point of the economy, before the recession begins, the peak. Conversely, the lowest point of a recession, before a recovery begins, is the trough. Thus, a recession lasts from peak to trough, and an economic upswing runs from trough to peak. We call the economy's movement from peak to trough and trough to peak the business cycle. It is intriguing to notice that the three longest trough-to-peak expansions of the twentieth century have happened since 1960. The most recent recession was caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. It started in February 2020 and ended formally in May 2020. This was the most severe recession since the 1930s Great Depression, but also the shortest. The previous recession, called the Great Recession, was also very severe and lasted about 18 months. The expansion starting in June 2009, the trough from the Great Recession, was the longest on record—ending 128 months with the pandemic-induced recession.
Trough Peak Months of Contraction Months of Expansion
December 1900 September 1902 18 21
August 1904 May 1907 23 33
June 1908 January 1910 13 19
January 1912 January 1913 24 12
December 1914 August 1918 23 44
March 1919 January 1920 7 10
July 1921 May 1923 18 22
July 1924 October 1926 14 27
November 1927 August 1929 23 21
March 1933 May 1937 43 50
June 1938 February 1945 13 80
October 1945 November 1948 8 37
October 1949 July 1953 11 45
May 1954 August 1957 10 39
April 1958 April 1960 8 24
February 1961 December 1969 10 106
November 1970 November 1973 11 36
March 1975 January 1980 16 58
July 1980 July 1981 6 12
November 1982 July 1990 16 92
March 1991 March 2001 8 120
November 2001 December 2007 8 73
January 2009 February 2020 2 128
April 2020 TBD TBD TBD
Table 6.7 U.S. Business Cycles since 1900 (Source: http://www.nber.org/cycles/main.html)
A private think tank, the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER), tracks business cycles for the U.S. economy. However, the effects of a severe recession often linger after the official ending date assigned by the NBER. | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_3e_(OpenStax)/06%3A_The_Macroeconomic_Perspective/6.04%3A_Tracking_Real_GDP_over_Time.txt |
Learning Objectives
By the end of this section, you will be able to:
• Explain how we can use GDP to compare the economic welfare of different nations
• Calculate the conversion of GDP to a common currency by using exchange rates
• Calculate GDP per capita using population data
It is common to use GDP as a measure of economic welfare or standard of living in a nation. When comparing the GDP of different nations for this purpose, two issues immediately arise. First, we measure a country's GDP in its own currency: the United States uses the U.S. dollar; Canada, the Canadian dollar; most countries of Western Europe, the euro; Japan, the yen; Mexico, the peso; and so on. Thus, comparing GDP between two countries requires converting to a common currency. A second issue is that countries have very different numbers of people. For instance, the United States has a much larger economy than Mexico or Canada, but it also has almost three times as many people as Mexico and nine times as many people as Canada. Thus, if we are trying to compare standards of living across countries, we need to divide GDP by population.
Converting Currencies with Exchange Rates
To compare the GDP of countries with different currencies, it is necessary to convert to a “common denominator” using an exchange rate, which is the value of one currency in terms of another currency. We express exchange rates either as the units of country A’s currency that need to be traded for a single unit of country B’s currency (for example, Japanese yen per British pound), or as the inverse (for example, British pounds per Japanese yen). We can use two types of exchange rates for this purpose, market exchange rates and purchasing power parity (PPP) equivalent exchange rates. Market exchange rates vary on a day-to-day basis depending on supply and demand in foreign exchange markets. PPP-equivalent exchange rates provide a longer run measure of the exchange rate. For this reason, economists typically use PPP-equivalent exchange rates for GDP cross country comparisons. We will discuss exchange rates in more detail in Exchange Rates and International Capital Flows. The following Work It Out feature explains how to convert GDP to a common currency.
Work It Out
Converting GDP to a Common Currency
Using the exchange rate to convert GDP from one currency to another is straightforward. Say that the task is to compare Brazil’s GDP in 2020 of 7.4 trillion reals with the U.S. GDP of \$20.9 trillion for the same year.
Step 1. Determine the exchange rate for the specified year. In 2020, the exchange rate was 2.362 reals = \$1. (These numbers are realistic, but rounded off to simplify the calculations.)
Step 2. Convert Brazil’s GDP into U.S. dollars:
$Brazil's GDP in U.S. = Brazil's GDP in realsExchange rate (reals/ U.S.) = 7.4 trillion reals2.362 reals per U.S. = 3.1 trillionBrazil's GDP in U.S. = Brazil's GDP in realsExchange rate (reals/ U.S.) = 7.4 trillion reals2.362 reals per U.S. = 3.1 trillion$
Step 3. Compare this value to the GDP in the United States in the same year. The U.S. GDP was \$20.9 trillion in 2020, which is almost seven times that of GDP in Brazil.
Step 4. View Table 6.8 which shows the size of and variety of GDPs of different countries in 2020, all expressed in U.S. dollars. We calculate each using the process that we explained above.
Country GDP in Billions of Domestic Currency Domestic Currency/U.S. Dollars (PPP Equivalent) GDP (in billions of U.S. dollars)
Brazil 7,447.86 reals 2.362 3,153.60
Canada 2,204.91 dollars 1.206 1,827.70
China 101,598.62 yuan 4.186 24,273.31
Egypt 5,820.00 pounds 4.511 1,290.21
Germany 3,367.56 euros 0.746 4,516.93
India 195,861.61 rupees 21.990 8,907.02
Japan 531,247.88 yen 102.835 5,166.00
Mexico 23,122.02 pesos 9.522 2,428.20
South Korea 1,924,452.90 won 861.824 2,233.00
United Kingdom 2,112.04 pounds 0.700 3,019.06
United States 20,936.60 dollars 1.000 20,936.60
Table 6.8 Comparing GDPs Across Countries, 2020
GDP Per Capita
The U.S. economy has the largest GDP in the world, by a considerable amount. The United States is also a populous country; in fact, it is the third largest country by population in the world, although well behind China and India. Is the U.S. economy larger than other countries just because the United States has more people than most other countries, or because the U.S. economy is actually larger on a per-person basis? We can answer this question by calculating a country’s GDP per capita; that is, the GDP divided by the population.
$GDP per capita = GDP/populationGDP per capita = GDP/population$
The second column of Table 6.9 lists the GDP of the same selection of countries that appeared in the previous Tracking Real GDP over Time and Table 6.8, showing their GDP as converted into U.S. dollars (which is the same as the last column of the previous table). The third column gives the population for each country. The fourth column lists the GDP per capita. We obtain GDP per capita in two steps: First, by multiplying column two (GDP, in billions of dollars) by 1000 so it has the same units as column three (Population, in millions). Then divide the result (GDP in millions of dollars) by column three (Population, in millions).
Country GDP (in billions of U.S. dollars) Population (in millions) Per Capita GDP (in U.S. dollars)
Brazil 3,153.60 212.56 14,836.27
Canada 1,827.71 38.00 48,097.62
China 24,273.36 1,402.11 17,312.02
Egypt 1,290.21 102.33 12,608.30
Germany 4,516.94 83.24 54,263.99
India 8,907.03 1,380.00 6,454.37
Japan 5,166.00 125.84 41,052.13
Mexico 2,428.20 128.93 18,833.48
South Korea 2,233.00 51.78 43,124.78
United Kingdom 3,019.60 67.22 44,913.08
United States 20,936.60 329.48 63,544.37
Table 6.9 GDP Per Capita, 2020
Notice that the rankings by GDP in billions of U.S. dollars, and by GDP per capita, are different than the ranking of GDP by each country’s currency. Measured by its own currency, the rupee, India has a somewhat larger GDP than Germany. On a per capita basis in U.S. dollars, Germany has more than 9 times India’s per capita GDP on PPP terms.
Clear It Up
Is China going to surpass the United States in terms of standard of living?
China has the largest GDP in PPP terms: \$24 trillion compared to the United States’ \$21 trillion. But China has a much larger population so that in per capita terms, its GDP is less than one fourth that of the United States (\$17,000 compared to \$63,000). The Chinese people are still quite poor relative to the United States and other developed countries. One caveat: For reasons we will discuss shortly, GDP per capita can give us only a rough idea of the differences in living standards across countries.
The world’s high-income nations—including the United States, Canada, the Western European countries, and Japan—typically have GDP per capita in the range of \$20,000 to \$50,000. Middle-income countries, which include much of Latin America, Eastern Europe, and some countries in East Asia, have GDP per capita in the range of \$6,000 to \$12,000. The world's low-income countries, many of them located in Africa and Asia, often have GDP per capita of less than \$2,000 per year. | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_3e_(OpenStax)/06%3A_The_Macroeconomic_Perspective/6.05%3A_Comparing_GDP_among_Countries.txt |
Learning Objectives
By the end of this section, you will be able to:
• Discuss how productivity influences the standard of living
• Explain the limitations of GDP as a measure of the standard of living
• Analyze the relationship between GDP data and fluctuations in the standard of living
The level of GDP per capita clearly captures some of what we mean by the phrase “standard of living.” Most of the migration in the world, for example, involves people who are moving from countries with relatively low GDP per capita to countries with relatively high GDP per capita.
“Standard of living” is a broader term than GDP. While GDP focuses on production that is bought and sold in markets, standard of living includes all elements that affect people’s well-being, whether they are bought and sold in the market or not. To illuminate the difference between GDP and standard of living, it is useful to spell out some things that GDP does not cover that are clearly relevant to standard of living.
Limitations of GDP as a Measure of the Standard of Living
GDP measures economic activity, not all activity. As a result, economists like Kate Raworth see it as a somewhat outdated and limited indication of well-being and prosperity. While GDP measures output of work done at home, as well as spending on travel, it doesn't capture unpaid work or leisure time. So, two countries may have equal GDP, but one nation's workers may have an average workday of eight hours, while the other has an average workday of twelve hours. In that case, is their equal GDP truly measuring the prosperity of those nations? The GDP per capita of the U.S. economy is larger than the GDP per capita of Germany, as Table 6.9 showed, but does that prove that the standard of living in the United States is higher? Not necessarily, since it is also true that the average U.S. worker works several hundred hours more per year more than the average German worker. Calculating GDP does not account for the German worker’s extra vacation weeks.
While GDP includes what a country spends on environmental protection, healthcare, and education, it does not include actual levels of environmental cleanliness, health, and learning. GDP includes the cost of buying pollution-control equipment, but it does not address whether the air and water are actually cleaner or dirtier. GDP includes spending on medical care, but does not address whether life expectancy or infant mortality have risen or fallen. Similarly, it counts spending on education, but does not address directly how much of the population can read, write, or do basic mathematics.
GDP includes production that is exchanged in the market, but it does not cover production that is not exchanged in the market. For example, hiring someone to mow your lawn or clean your house is part of GDP, but doing these tasks yourself is not part of GDP. One remarkable change in the U.S. economy in recent decades is the growth in women’s participation in the labor force. As of 1970, only about 42% of women participated in the paid labor force. By the second decade of the 2000s, nearly 60% of women participated in the paid labor force according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. As women are now in the labor force, many of the services they used to produce in the non-market economy like food preparation and child care have shifted to some extent into the market economy, which makes the GDP appear larger even if people actually are not consuming more services. However, as Raworth points out and was explored in the chapter on the labor market, even women who are fully employed expend significant effort (generally more than men) in raising children and maintaining a home. Raworth advocates that economic measures include monetized and un-monetized goods and services, so that the status and contributors to each economy are more accurate.
GDP has nothing to say about the level of inequality in society. GDP per capita is only an average. When GDP per capita rises by 5%, it could mean that GDP for everyone in the society has risen by 5%, or that GDP of some groups has risen by more while that of others has risen by less—or even declined. GDP also has nothing in particular to say about the amount of variety available. If a family buys 100 loaves of bread in a year, GDP does not care whether they are all white bread, or whether the family can choose from wheat, rye, pumpernickel, and many others—it just looks at the total amount the family spends on bread.
Likewise, GDP has nothing much to say about what technology and products are available. The standard of living in, for example, 1950 or 1900 was not affected only by how much money people had—it was also affected by what they could buy. No matter how much money you had in 1950, you could not buy an iPhone or a personal computer.
In certain cases, it is not clear that a rise in GDP is even a good thing. If a city is wrecked by a hurricane, and then experiences a surge of rebuilding construction activity, it would be peculiar to claim that the hurricane was therefore economically beneficial. If people are led by a rising fear of crime, to pay for installing bars and burglar alarms on all their windows, it is hard to believe that this increase in GDP has made them better off. Similarly, some people would argue that sales of certain goods, like pornography or extremely violent movies, do not represent a gain to society’s standard of living.
Does a Rise in GDP Overstate or Understate the Rise in the Standard of Living?
The fact that GDP per capita does not fully capture the broader idea of standard of living has led to a concern that the increases in GDP over time are illusory. It is theoretically possible that while GDP is rising, the standard of living could be falling if human health, environmental cleanliness, and other factors that are not included in GDP are worsening. Fortunately, this fear appears to be overstated.
In some ways, the rise in GDP understates the actual rise in the standard of living. For example, the typical workweek for a U.S. worker has fallen over the last century from about 60 hours per week to less than 40 hours per week. Life expectancy and health have risen dramatically, and so has the average level of education. Since 1970, the air and water in the United States have generally been getting cleaner. Companies have developed new technologies for entertainment, travel, information, and health. A much wider variety of basic products like food and clothing is available today than several decades ago. Because GDP does not capture leisure, health, a cleaner environment, the possibilities that new technology creates, or an increase in variety, the actual rise in the standard of living for Americans in recent decades has exceeded the rise in GDP.
On the other side, crime rates, traffic congestion levels, and income inequality are higher in the United States now than they were in the 1960s. Moreover, a substantial number of services that women primarily provided in the non-market economy are now part of the market economy that GDP counts. By ignoring these factors, GDP would tend to overstate the true rise in the standard of living.
Link It Up
Visit this website to read about the American Dream and standards of living.
GDP is Rough, but Useful
A high level of GDP should not be the only goal of macroeconomic policy, or government policy more broadly. Even though GDP does not measure the broader standard of living with any precision, it does measure production well and it does indicate when a country is materially better or worse off in terms of jobs and incomes. In most countries, a significantly higher GDP per capita occurs hand in hand with other improvements in everyday life along many dimensions, like education, health, and environmental protection.
No single number can capture all the elements of a term as broad as “standard of living.” Nonetheless, GDP per capita is a reasonable, rough-and-ready measure of the standard of living.
Bring It Home
How is the Economy Doing? How Does One Tell?
To determine the state of the economy, one needs to examine economic indicators, such as GDP. To calculate GDP is quite an undertaking. It is the broadest measure of a nation’s economic activity and we owe a debt to Simon Kuznets, the creator of the measurement, for that.
The sheer size of the U.S. economy as measured by nominal GDP is huge—as of the third quarter of 2021, \$23.2 trillion worth of goods and services were produced annually. During the COVID-19-induced recession, which lasted just two months according to NBER and was concentrated across Quarters 1 and 2 of 2020, real GDP dropped 9%—much larger and quicker of a drop than during the previous economic downturn, the Great Recession (2007–2009). The economy quickly bounced back, and as of Quarter 1 of 2021, real GDP had slightly surpassed the level it was at prior to the start of the pandemic. These statistics show the severity of the pandemic-induced recession, and while real GDP fully recovered, there are other ways in which the economy has not. While GDP and GDP per capita give us a rough estimate of a nation's standard of living, there are many other ways to track the health of the economy. This chapter is the building block for other chapters that explore more economic indicators such as unemployment, inflation, or interest rates, and perhaps more importantly, will explain how they are related and what causes them to rise or fall. | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_3e_(OpenStax)/06%3A_The_Macroeconomic_Perspective/6.06%3A_How_Well_GDP_Measures_the_Well-Being_of_Society.txt |
business cycle
the economy's relatively short-term movement in and out of recession
depreciation
the process by which capital ages over time and therefore loses its value
depression
an especially lengthy and deep decline in output
double counting
a potential mistake to avoid in measuring GDP, in which output is counted more than once as it travels through the stages of production
durable good
long-lasting good like a car or a refrigerator
exchange rate
the price of one currency in terms of another currency
final good and service
output used directly for consumption, investment, government, and trade purposes; contrast with “intermediate good”
GDP per capita
GDP divided by the population
gross domestic product (GDP)
the value of the output of all final goods and services produced within a country in a year
gross national product (GNP)
includes what is produced domestically and what is produced by domestic labor and business abroad in a year
intermediate good
output provided to other businesses at an intermediate stage of production, not for final users; contrast with “final good and service”
inventory
good that has been produced, but not yet been sold
national income
includes all income earned: wages, profits, rent, and profit income
net national product (NNP)
GNP minus depreciation
nominal value
the economic statistic actually announced at that time, not adjusted for inflation; contrast with real value
nondurable good
short-lived good like food and clothing
peak
during the business cycle, the highest point of output before a recession begins
real value
an economic statistic after it has been adjusted for inflation; contrast with nominal value
recession
a significant decline in national output
service
product which is intangible (in contrast to goods) such as entertainment, healthcare, or education
standard of living
all elements that affect people’s happiness, whether people buy or sell these elements in the market or not
structure
building used as residence, factory, office building, retail store, or for other purposes
trade balance
gap between exports and imports
trade deficit
exists when a nation's imports exceed its exports and it calculates them as imports –exports
trade surplus
exists when a nation's exports exceed its imports and it calculates them as exports – imports
trough
during the business cycle, the lowest point of output in a recession, before a recovery begins
6.08: Key Concepts and Summary
6.1 Measuring the Size of the Economy: Gross Domestic Product
Economists generally express the size of a nation’s economy as its gross domestic product (GDP), which measures the value of the output of all goods and services produced within the country in a year. Economists measure GDP by taking the quantities of all goods and services produced, multiplying them by their prices, and summing the total. Since GDP measures what is bought and sold in the economy, we can measure it either by the sum of what is purchased in the economy or what is produced.
We can divide demand into consumption, investment, government, exports, and imports. We can divide what is produced in the economy into durable goods, nondurable goods, services, structures, and inventories. To avoid double counting, GDP counts only final output of goods and services, not the production of intermediate goods or the value of labor in the chain of production.
6.2 Adjusting Nominal Values to Real Values
The nominal value of an economic statistic is the commonly announced value. The real value is the value after adjusting for changes in inflation. To convert nominal economic data from several different years into real, inflation-adjusted data, the starting point is to choose a base year arbitrarily and then use a price index to convert the measurements so that economists measure them in the money prevailing in the base year.
6.3 Tracking Real GDP over Time
Over the long term, U.S. real GDP have increased dramatically. At the same time, GDP has not increased the same amount each year. The speeding up and slowing down of GDP growth represents the business cycle. When GDP declines significantly, a recession occurs. A longer and deeper decline is a depression. Recessions begin at the business cycle's peak and end at the trough.
6.4 Comparing GDP among Countries
Since we measure GDP in a country’s currency, in order to compare different countries’ GDPs, we need to convert them to a common currency. One way to do that is with the exchange rate, which is the price of one country’s currency in terms of another. Once we express GDPs in a common currency, we can compare each country’s GDP per capita by dividing GDP by population. Countries with large populations often have large GDPs, but GDP alone can be a misleading indicator of a nation's wealth. A better measure is GDP per capita.
6.5 How Well GDP Measures the Well-Being of Society
GDP is an indicator of a society’s standard of living, but it is only a rough indicator. GDP does not directly take account of leisure, environmental quality, levels of health and education, activities conducted outside the market, changes in inequality of income, increases in variety, increases in technology, or the (positive or negative) value that society may place on certain types of output.
6.09: Self-Check Questions
1.
Country A has export sales of \$20 billion, government purchases of \$1,000 billion, business investment is \$50 billion, imports are \$40 billion, and consumption spending is \$2,000 billion. What is the dollar value of GDP?
2.
Which of the following are included in GDP, and which are not?
1. The cost of hospital stays
2. The rise in life expectancy over time
3. Child care provided by a licensed day care center
4. Child care provided by a grandmother
5. A used car sale
6. A new car sale
7. The greater variety of cheese available in supermarkets
8. The iron that goes into the steel that goes into a refrigerator bought by a consumer.
3.
Using data from Table 6.5 how much of the nominal GDP growth from 1980 to 1990 was real GDP and how much was inflation?
4.
Without looking at Table 6.7, return to Figure 6.10. If we define a recession as a significant decline in national output, can you identify any post-1960 recessions in addition to the 2008-2009 recession? (This requires a judgment call.)
5.
According to Table 6.7, how often have recessions occurred since the end of World War II (1945)?
6.
According to Table 6.7, how long has the average recession lasted since the end of World War II?
7.
According to Table 6.7, how long has the average expansion lasted since the end of World War II?
8.
Is it possible for GDP to rise while at the same time per capita GDP is falling? Is it possible for GDP to fall while per capita GDP is rising?
9.
The Central African Republic has a GDP of 1,107,689 million CFA francs and a population of 4.862 million. The exchange rate is 284.681CFA francs per dollar. Calculate the GDP per capita of Central African Republic.
10.
Explain briefly whether each of the following would cause GDP to overstate or understate the degree of change in the broad standard of living.
1. The environment becomes dirtier
2. The crime rate declines
3. A greater variety of goods become available to consumers
4. Infant mortality declines | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_3e_(OpenStax)/06%3A_The_Macroeconomic_Perspective/6.07%3A_Key_Terms.txt |
11.
What are the main components of measuring GDP with what is demanded?
12.
What are the main components of measuring GDP with what is produced?
13.
Would you usually expect GDP as measured by what is demanded to be greater than GDP measured by what is supplied, or the reverse?
14.
Why must you avoid double counting when measuring GDP?
15.
What is the difference between a series of economic data over time measured in nominal terms versus the same data series over time measured in real terms?
16.
How do you convert a series of nominal economic data over time to real terms?
17.
What are typical GDP patterns for a high-income economy like the United States in the long run and the short run?
18.
What are the two main difficulties that arise in comparing different countries's GDP?
19.
List some of the reasons why economists should not consider GDP an effective measure of the standard of living in a country.
6.11: Critical Thinking Questions
20.
U.S. macroeconomic data are among the best in the world. Given what you learned in the Clear It Up "How do statisticians measure GDP?", does this surprise you, or does this simply reflect the complexity of a modern economy?
21.
What does GDP not tell us about the economy?
22.
Should people typically pay more attention to their real income or their nominal income? If you choose the latter, why would that make sense in today’s world? Would your answer be the same for the 1970s?
23.
Why do you suppose that U.S. GDP is so much higher today than 50 or 100 years ago?
24.
Why do you think that GDP does not grow at a steady rate, but rather speeds up and slows down?
25.
Cross country comparisons of GDP per capita typically use purchasing power parity equivalent exchange rates, which are a measure of the long run equilibrium value of an exchange rate. In fact, we used PPP equivalent exchange rates in this module. Why could using market exchange rates, which sometimes change dramatically in a short period of time, be misleading?
26.
Why might per capita GDP be only an imperfect measure of a country’s standard of living?
27.
How might you measure a “green” GDP?
6.12: Problems
28.
Last year, a small nation with abundant forests cut down \$200 worth of trees. It then turned \$100 worth of trees into \$150 worth of lumber. It used \$100 worth of that lumber to produce \$250 worth of bookshelves. Assuming the country produces no other outputs, and there are no other inputs used in producing trees, lumber, and bookshelves, what is this nation's GDP? In other words, what is the value of the final goods the nation produced including trees, lumber and bookshelves?
29.
The “prime” interest rate is the rate that banks charge their best customers. Based on the nominal interest rates and inflation rates in Table 6.10, in which of the years would it have been best to be a lender? Based on the nominal interest rates and inflation rates in Table 6.10, in which of the years given would it have been best to be a borrower?
Year Prime Interest Rate Inflation Rate
1970 7.9% 5.7%
1974 10.8% 11.0%
1978 9.1% 7.6%
1981 18.9% 10.3%
Table 6.10
30.
A mortgage loan is a loan that a person makes to purchase a house. Table 6.11 provides a list of the mortgage interest rate for several different years and the rate of inflation for each of those years. In which years would it have been better to be a person borrowing money from a bank to buy a home? In which years would it have been better to be a bank lending money?
Year Mortgage Interest Rate Inflation Rate
1984 12.4% 4.3%
1990 10% 5.4%
2001 7.0% 2.8%
Table 6.11
31.
Ethiopia has a GDP of \$8 billion (measured in U.S. dollars) and a population of 55 million. Costa Rica has a GDP of \$9 billion (measured in U.S. dollars) and a population of 4 million. Calculate the per capita GDP for each country and identify which one is higher.
32.
In 1980, Denmark had a GDP of \$70 billion (measured in U.S. dollars) and a population of 5.1 million. In 2000, Denmark had a GDP of \$160 billion (measured in U.S. dollars) and a population of 5.3 million. By what percentage did Denmark’s GDP per capita rise between 1980 and 2000?
33.
The Czech Republic has a GDP of 1,800 billion koruny. The exchange rate is 25 koruny/U.S. dollar. The Czech population is 20 million. What is the GDP per capita of the Czech Republic expressed in U.S. dollars? | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_3e_(OpenStax)/06%3A_The_Macroeconomic_Perspective/6.10%3A_Review_Questions.txt |
Figure 7.1 Average Daily Calorie Consumption Not only has the number of calories that people consume per day increased, so has the amount of food calories that people are able to afford based on their working wages. (Credit: modification of "Daily Calorie Intake" by Lauren Manning/Flickr Creative Commons, CC BY 2.0)
Chapter Objectives
In this chapter, you will learn about:
• The Relatively Recent Arrival of Economic Growth
• Labor Productivity and Economic Growth
• Components of Economic Growth
• Economic Convergence
Bring It Home
Calories and Economic Growth
On average, humans need about 2,500 calories a day to survive, depending on height, weight, and gender. The economist Brad DeLong estimates that the average worker in the early 1600s earned wages that could afford him 2,500 food calories. This worker lived in Western Europe. Two hundred years later, that same worker could afford 3,000 food calories. However, between 1800 and 1875, just a time span of just 75 years, economic growth was so rapid that western European workers could purchase 5,000 food calories a day. By 2012, a low skilled worker in an affluent Western European/North American country could afford to purchase 2.4 million food calories per day.
What caused such a rapid rise in living standards between 1800 and 1875 and thereafter? Why is it that many countries, especially those in Western Europe, North America, and parts of East Asia, can feed their populations more than adequately, while others cannot? We will look at these and other questions as we examine long-run economic growth.
Every country worries about economic growth. In the United States and other high-income countries, the question is whether economic growth continues to provide the same remarkable gains in our standard of living as it did during the twentieth century. Meanwhile, can middle-income countries like Brazil, Egypt, or Poland catch up to the higher-income countries, or must they remain in the second tier of per capita income? Of the world’s population of roughly 7.5 billion people, about 1.1 billion are scraping by on incomes that average less than \$2 per day, not that different from the standard of living 2,000 years ago. Can the world’s poor be lifted from their fearful poverty? As the 1995 Nobel laureate in economics, Robert E. Lucas Jr., once noted: “The consequences for human welfare involved in questions like these are simply staggering: Once one starts to think about them, it is hard to think about anything else.”
Dramatic improvements in a nation’s standard of living are possible. After the Korean War in the late 1950s, the Republic of Korea, often called South Korea, was one of the poorest economies in the world. Most South Koreans worked in peasant agriculture. According to the British economist Angus Maddison, who devoted life’s work to measuring GDP and population in the world economy, GDP per capita in 1990 international dollars was \$854 per year. From the 1960s to the early twenty-first century, a time period well within the lifetime and memory of many adults, the South Korean economy grew rapidly. Over these four decades, GDP per capita increased by more than 6% per year. According to the World Bank, GDP for South Korea now exceeds \$30,000 in nominal terms, placing it firmly among high-income countries like Italy, New Zealand, and Israel. Measured by total GDP in 2015, South Korea is the eleventh-largest economy in the world. For a nation of 50 million people, this transformation is extraordinary.
South Korea is a standout example, but it is not the only case of rapid and sustained economic growth. Other East Asian nations, like Thailand and Indonesia, have seen very rapid growth as well. China has grown enormously since it enacted market-oriented economic reforms around 1980. GDP per capita in high-income economies like the United States also has grown dramatically albeit over a longer time frame. Since the Civil War, the U.S. economy has transformed from a primarily rural and agricultural economy to an economy based on services, manufacturing, and technology. | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_3e_(OpenStax)/07%3A_Economic_Growth/7.01%3A_Introduction_to_Economic_Growth.txt |
Learning Objectives
By the end of this section, you will be able to:
• Explain the conditions that have allowed for modern economic growth in the last two centuries
• Analyze the influence of public policies on an economy's long-run economic growth
Let’s begin with a brief overview of spectacular economic growth patterns around the world in the last two centuries. We commonly refer to this as the period of modern economic growth. (Later in the chapter we will discuss lower economic growth rates and some key ingredients for economic progress.) Rapid and sustained economic growth is a relatively recent experience for the human race. Before the last two centuries, although rulers, nobles, and conquerors could afford some extravagances and although economies rose above the subsistence level, the average person’s standard of living had not changed much for centuries.
Progressive, powerful economic and institutional changes started to have a significant effect in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries. According to the Dutch economic historian Jan Luiten van Zanden, slavery-based societies, favorable demographics, global trading routes, and standardized trading institutions that spread with different empires set the stage for the Industrial Revolution to succeed. The Industrial Revolution refers to the widespread use of power-driven machinery and the economic and social changes that resulted in the first half of the 1800s. Ingenious machines—the steam engine, the power loom, and the steam locomotive—performed tasks that otherwise would have taken vast numbers of workers to do. The Industrial Revolution began in Great Britain, and soon spread to the United States, Germany, and other countries.
The jobs for ordinary people working with these machines were often dirty and dangerous by modern standards, but the alternative jobs of that time in peasant agriculture and small-village industry were often dirty and dangerous, too. The new jobs of the Industrial Revolution typically offered higher pay and a chance for social mobility. A self-reinforcing cycle began: New inventions and investments generated profits, the profits provided funds for more new investment and inventions, and the investments and inventions provided opportunities for further profits. Slowly, a group of national economies in Europe and North America emerged from centuries of sluggishness into a period of rapid modern growth. During the last two centuries, the average GDP growth rate per capita in the leading industrialized countries has been about 2% per year. What were times like before then? Read the following Clear It Up feature for the answer.
Clear It Up
What were economic conditions like before 1870?
Angus Maddison, a quantitative economic historian, led the most systematic inquiry into national incomes before 1870. Economists recently have refined and used his methods to compile GDP per capita estimates from year 1 C.E. to 1348. Table 7.1 is an important counterpoint to most of the narrative in this chapter. It shows that nations can decline as well as rise. A wide array of forces, such as epidemics, natural and weather-related disasters, the inability to govern large empires, and the remarkably slow pace of technological and institutional progress explain declines in income. Institutions are the traditions and laws by which people in a community agree to behave and govern themselves. Such institutions include marriage, religion, education, and laws of governance. Institutional progress is the development and codification of these institutions to reinforce social order, and thus, economic growth.
One example of such an institution is the Magna Carta (Great Charter), which the English nobles forced King John to sign in 1215. The Magna Carta codified the principles of due process, whereby a free man could not be penalized unless his peers had made a lawful judgment against him. The United States in its own constitution later adopted this concept. This social order may have contributed to England’s GDP per capita in 1348, which was second to that of northern Italy.
In studying economic growth, a country’s institutional framework plays a critical role. Table 7.1 also shows relative global equality for almost 1,300 years. After this, we begin to see significant divergence in income (not in the table).
Year Northern Italy Spain England Holland Byzantium Iraq Egypt Japan
1 \$800 \$600 \$600 \$600 \$700 \$700 \$700 -
730 - - - - - \$920 \$730 \$402
1000 - - - - \$600 \$820 \$600 -
1150 - - - - \$580 \$680 \$660 \$520
1280 - - - - - - \$670 \$527
1300 \$1,588 \$864 \$892 - - - \$610 -
1348 \$1,486 \$907 \$919 - - - - -
Table 7.1 GDP Per Capita Estimates in Current International Dollars from AD 1 to 1348 (Source: Bolt and van Zanden. “The First Update of the Maddison Project. Re-Estimating Growth Before 1820.” 2013)
Another fascinating and underreported fact is the high levels of income, compared to others at that time, attained by the Islamic Empire Abbasid Caliphate—which was founded in present-day Iraq in 730 C.E. At its height, the empire spanned large regions of the Middle East, North Africa, and Spain until its gradual decline over 200 years.
The Industrial Revolution led to increasing inequality among nations. Some economies took off, whereas others, like many of those in Africa or Asia, remained close to a subsistence standard of living. General calculations show that the 17 countries of the world with the most-developed economies had, on average, 2.4 times the GDP per capita of the world’s poorest economies in 1870. By 1960, the most developed economies had 4.2 times the GDP per capita of the poorest economies.
However, by the middle of the twentieth century, some countries had shown that catching up was possible. Japan’s economic growth took off in the 1960s and 1970s, with a growth rate of real GDP per capita averaging 11% per year during those decades. Certain countries in Latin America experienced a boom in economic growth in the 1960s as well. In Brazil, for example, GDP per capita expanded by an average annual rate of 11.1% from 1968 to 1973. In the 1970s, some East Asian economies, including South Korea, Thailand, and Taiwan, saw rapid growth. In these countries, growth rates of 11% to 12% per year in GDP per capita were not uncommon. More recently, China, with its population of nearly 1.4 billion people, grew at a per capita rate 9% per year from 1984 into the 2000s and still average high rates of growth (more than 5% today). India, with a population of 1.4 billion, has shown promising signs of economic growth, with growth in GDP per capita of about 4% per year during the 1990s and climbing toward 7% to 8% per year in the 2000s and 2010s.
Link It Up
Visit this website to read about the Asian Development Bank.
These waves of catch-up economic growth have not reached all shores. In certain African countries like Niger, Tanzania, and Sudan, for example, GDP per capita at the start of the 2000s was still less than \$300, not much higher than it was in the nineteenth century and for centuries before that. In the context of the overall situation of low-income people around the world, the good economic news from China (population: 1.4 billion) and India (population: 1.3 billion) is, nonetheless, astounding and heartening.
Economic growth in the last two centuries has made a striking change in the human condition. Richard Easterlin, an economist at the University of Southern California, wrote in 2000:
By many measures, a revolution in the human condition is sweeping the world. Most people today are better fed, clothed, and housed than their predecessors two centuries ago. They are healthier, live longer, and are better educated. Women’s lives are less centered on reproduction and political democracy has gained a foothold. Although Western Europe and its offshoots have been the leaders of this advance, most of the less developed nations have joined in during the 20th century, with the newly emerging nations of sub-Saharan Africa the latest to participate. Although the picture is not one of universal progress, it is the greatest advance in the human condition of the world’s population ever achieved in such a brief span of time.
Rule of Law and Economic Growth
Economic growth depends on many factors. Key among those factors is adherence to the rule of law and protection of property rights and contractual rights by a country’s government so that markets can work effectively and efficiently. Laws must be clear, public, fair, enforced, and equally applicable to all members of society. Property rights, as you might recall from Environmental Protection and Negative Externalities are the rights of individuals and firms to own property and use it as they see fit. If you have \$100, you have the right to use that money, whether you spend it, lend it, or keep it in a jar. It is your property. The definition of property includes physical property as well as the right to your training and experience, especially since your training is what determines your livelihood. Using this property includes the right to enter into contracts with other parties with your property. Individuals or firms must own the property to enter into a contract.
Contractual rights, then, are based on property rights and they allow individuals to enter into agreements with others regarding the use of their property providing recourse through the legal system in the event of noncompliance. One example is the employment agreement: a skilled surgeon operates on an ill person and expects payment. Failure to pay would constitute property theft by the patient. The theft is property the services that the surgeon provided. In a society with strong property rights and contractual rights, the terms of the patient–surgeon contract will be fulfilled, because the surgeon would have recourse through the court system to extract payment from that individual. Without a legal system that enforces contracts, people would not be likely to enter into contracts for current or future services because of the risk of non-payment. This would make it difficult to transact business and would slow economic growth.
The World Bank considers a country’s legal system effective if it upholds property rights and contractual rights. The World Bank has developed a ranking system for countries’ legal systems based on effective protection of property rights and rule-based governance using a scale from 1 to 6, with 1 being the lowest and 6 the highest rating. In 2020, the world average ranking was 2.9. The three countries with the lowest ranking of 1.0 were Somalia and Eritrea, with South Sudan at 1.5. Their GDP per capita was \$875, \$1,625, and \$1,234.70 respectively. The World Bank also cites Afghanistan (GDP per capita \$2,087.60) as having a low standard of living, weak government structure, and lack of adherence to the rule of law, which has stymied its economic growth. The landlocked Central African Republic (GDP per capita \$979.60) has poor economic resources as well as political instability and is a source of children used in human trafficking. Zimbabwe (GDP per capita \$2,895.40) has had declining and often negative growth for much of the period since 1998. Land redistribution and price controls have disrupted the economy, and corruption and violence have dominated the political process. Although global economic growth has increased, those countries lacking a clear system of property rights and an independent court system free from corruption have lagged far behind. | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_3e_(OpenStax)/07%3A_Economic_Growth/7.02%3A_The_Relatively_Recent_Arrival_of_Economic_Growth.txt |
Learning Objectives
By the end of this section, you will be able to:
• Identify the role of labor productivity in promoting economic growth
• Analyze the sources of economic growth using the aggregate production function
• Measure an economy’s rate of productivity growth
• Evaluate the power of sustained growth
Sustained long-term economic growth comes from increases in worker productivity, which essentially means how well we do things. In other words, how efficient is your nation with its time and workers? Labor productivity is the value that each employed person creates per unit of their input. The easiest way to comprehend labor productivity is to imagine a Canadian worker who can make 10 loaves of bread in an hour versus a U.S. worker who in the same hour can make only two loaves of bread. In this fictional example, the Canadians are more productive. More productivity essentially means you can do more in the same amount of time. This in turn frees up resources for workers to use elsewhere.
What determines how productive workers are? The answer is pretty intuitive. The first determinant of labor productivity is human capital. Human capital is the accumulated knowledge (from education and experience), skills, and expertise that the average worker in an economy possesses. Typically the higher the average level of education in an economy, the higher the accumulated human capital and the higher the labor productivity.
The second factor that determines labor productivity is technological change. Technological change is a combination of invention—advances in knowledge—and innovation, which is putting those advances to use in a new product or service. For example, the transistor was invented in 1947. It allowed us to miniaturize the footprint of electronic devices and use less power than the tube technology that came before it. Innovations since then have produced smaller and better transistors that are ubiquitous in products as varied as smart-phones, computers, and escalators. Developing the transistor has allowed workers to be anywhere with smaller devices. People can use these devices to communicate with other workers, measure product quality or do any other task in less time, improving worker productivity.
The third factor that determines labor productivity is economies of scale. Recall that economies of scale are the cost advantages that industries obtain due to size. (Read more about economies of scale in Production, Cost and Industry Structure.) Consider again the case of the fictional Canadian worker who could produce 10 loaves of bread in an hour. If this difference in productivity was due only to economies of scale, it could be that the Canadian worker had access to a large industrial-size oven while the U.S. worker was using a standard residential size oven.
Now that we have explored the determinants of worker productivity, let’s turn to how economists measure economic growth and productivity.
Sources of Economic Growth: The Aggregate Production Function
To analyze the sources of economic growth, it is useful to think about a production function, which is the technical relationship by which economic inputs like labor, machinery, and raw materials are turned into outputs like goods and services that consumers use. A microeconomic production function describes a firm's or perhaps an industry's inputs and outputs. In macroeconomics, we call the connection from inputs to outputs for the entire economy an aggregate production function.
Components of the Aggregate Production Function
Economists construct different production functions depending on the focus of their studies. Figure 7.2 presents two examples of aggregate production functions. In the first production function in Figure 7.2 (a), the output is GDP. The inputs in this example are workforce, human capital, physical capital, and technology. We discuss these inputs further in the module, Components of Economic Growth.
Figure 7.2 Aggregate Production Functions An aggregate production function shows what goes into producing the output for an overall economy. (a) This aggregate production function has GDP as its output. (b) This aggregate production function has GDP per capita as its output. Because we calculate it on a per-person basis, we already figure the labor input into the other factors and we do not need to list it separately.
Measuring Productivity
An economy’s rate of productivity growth is closely linked to the growth rate of its GDP per capita, although the two are not identical. For example, if the percentage of the population who holds jobs in an economy increases, GDP per capita will increase but the productivity of individual workers may not be affected. Over the long term, the only way that GDP per capita can grow continually is if the productivity of the average worker rises or if there are complementary increases in capital.
A common measure of U.S. productivity per worker is dollar value per hour the worker contributes to the employer’s output. This measure excludes government workers, because their output is not sold in the market and so their productivity is hard to measure. It also excludes farming, which accounts for only a relatively small share of the U.S. economy. Figure 7.3 shows an index of output per hour, with 2012 as the base year (when the index equals 100). The index equaled 110.5 in 2020. In 1977, the index equaled about 50, which shows that workers have more than doubled their productivity since then.
Figure 7.3 Output per Hour Worked in the U.S. Economy, 1947–2020 Output per hour worked is a measure of worker productivity. In the U.S. economy, worker productivity rose more quickly in the 1960s and the mid-1990s compared with the 1970s and 1980s. However, these growth-rate differences are only a few percentage points per year. Look carefully to see them in the changing slope of the line. The average U.S. worker produced over twice as much per hour in 2020 than they did in the 1970s. (Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics.)
A graph has an X-axis with years progressing from 1955 to 2020 and a Y axis labeled Percent Change at Annual Rate. The graphed data moves up and down across a zero line indicating change year over year. In 1970, 1974, 1981, 1983, 2008, and 2020, the rate was quite low, as the U.S. was undergoing recessions.
According to the Department of Labor, U.S. productivity growth was fairly strong in the 1950s but then declined in the 1970s and 1980s before rising again in the second half of the 1990s and the first half of the 2000s. In fact, the rate of productivity measured by the change in output per hour worked averaged 2.8% per year from 1947 to 1973; dropped to 1.2% per year from 1973 to 1979; increased to 1.5% per year from 1979 to 1990; increased again to 2.2% from 1990 to 2000; increased even more to 2.7% from 2000 to 2007; and then decreased to 1.4% from 2007 to 2020 Figure 7.4 shows average annual rates of productivity growth averaged over time since 1947.
Figure 7.4 Productivity Growth Since 1947 U.S. growth in worker productivity was very high between 1947 and 1973. It then declined to lower levels in the later 1970s and the 1980s. The late 1990s and early 2000s saw productivity rebound, but then productivity sagged a bit between 2001 and 2020. Some think the productivity rebound of the late 1990s and early 2000s marks the start of a “new economy” built on higher productivity growth, but we cannot determine this until more time has passed. (Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics.)
The “New Economy” Controversy
In recent years a controversy has been brewing among economists about the resurgence of U.S. productivity in the second half of the 1990s. One school of thought argues that the United States had developed a “new economy” based on the extraordinary advances in communications and information technology of the 1990s. The most optimistic proponents argue that it would generate higher average productivity growth for decades to come. The pessimists, alternatively, argue that even five or ten years of stronger productivity growth does not prove that higher productivity will last for the long term. It is hard to infer anything about long-term productivity trends during the later part of the 2000s, because the steep 2008-2009 recession, with its sharp but not completely synchronized declines in output and employment, complicates any interpretation. While productivity growth was high in 2009 and 2010 (around 3%), it has slowed down over the last decade.
Productivity growth is also closely linked to the average level of wages. Over time, the amount that firms are willing to pay workers will depend on the value of the output those workers produce. If a few employers tried to pay their workers less than what those workers produced, then those workers would receive offers of higher wages from other profit-seeking employers. If a few employers mistakenly paid their workers more than what those workers produced, those employers would soon end up with losses. In the long run, productivity per hour is the most important determinant of the average wage level in any economy. To learn how to compare economies in this regard, follow the steps in the following Work It Out feature.
Work It Out
Comparing the Economies of Two Countries
The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) tracks data on the annual growth rate of real GDP per hour worked. You can find these data on the OECD data webpage “Growth in GDP per capita, productivity and ULC” at this website.
Step 1. Visit the OECD website given above and select two countries to compare.
Step 2. On the drop-down menu “Subject,” select “ GDP per capita, constant prices,” and under “Measure,” select “Annual growth/change.” Then record the data for the countries you have chosen for the five most recent years.
Step 3. Go back to the drop-down “Subject” menu and select “GDP per hour worked, constant prices,” and under “Measure” again select “Annual growth/change.” Select data for the same years for which you selected GDP per capita data.
Step 4. Compare real GDP growth for both countries. Table 7.2 provides an example of a comparison between Australia and Belgium.
Australia 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Real GDP/Capita Growth (%) 2.3% 1.5% 1.3% 1.4 0.1%
Real GDP Growth/Hours Worked (%) 1.7% −0.1% 1.4% 2.2% −0.2%
Belgium 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Real GDP/Capita Growth (%) 0.9 −0.6 −0.5 1.2 1.0
Real GDP Growth/Hours Worked (%) −0.5 −0.3 0.4 1.4 0.9
Table 7.2
Step 5. For both measures, growth in Australia is greater than growth in Belgium for the first four years. In addition, there are year-to-year fluctuations. Many factors can affect growth. For example, one factor that may have contributed to Australia's stronger growth may be its larger inflows of immigrants, who generally contribute to economic growth.
The Power of Sustained Economic Growth
Nothing is more important for people’s standard of living than sustained economic growth. Even small changes in the rate of growth, when sustained and compounded over long periods of time, make an enormous difference in the standard of living. Consider Table 7.3, in which the rows of the table show several different rates of growth in GDP per capita and the columns show different periods of time. Assume for simplicity that an economy starts with a GDP per capita of 100. The table then applies the following formula to calculate what GDP will be at the given growth rate in the future:
$GDP at starting date × (1 + growth rate of GDP)years = GDP at end dateGDP at starting date × (1 + growth rate of GDP)years = GDP at end date$
For example, an economy that starts with a GDP of 100 and grows at 3% per year will reach a GDP of 209 after 25 years; that is, 100 (1.03)25 = 209.
The slowest rate of GDP per capita growth in the table, just 1% per year, is similar to what the United States experienced during its weakest years of productivity growth. The second highest rate, 3% per year, is close to what the U.S. economy experienced during the strong economy of the late 1990s and into the 2000s. Higher rates of per capita growth, such as 5% or 8% per year, represent the experience of rapid growth in economies like Japan, Korea, and China.
Table 7.3 shows that even a few percentage points of difference in economic growth rates will have a profound effect if sustained and compounded over time. For example, an economy growing at a 1% annual rate over 50 years will see its GDP per capita rise by a total of 64%, from 100 to 164 in this example. However, a country growing at a 5% annual rate will see (almost) the same amount of growth—from 100 to 163—over just 10 years. Rapid rates of economic growth can bring profound transformation. (See the following Clear It Up feature on the relationship between compound growth rates and compound interest rates.) If the rate of growth is 8%, young adults starting at age 20 will see the average standard of living in their country more than double by the time they reach age 30, and grow more than sixfold by the time they reach age 45.
Growth Rate Value of an original 100 in 10 Years Value of an original 100 in 25 Years Value of an original 100 in 50 Years
1% 110 128 164
3% 134 209 438
5% 163 339 1,147
8% 216 685 4,690
Table 7.3 Growth of GDP over Different Time Horizons
Clear It Up
How are compound growth rates and compound interest rates related?
The formula for GDP growth rates over different periods of time, as Figure 7.3 shows, is exactly the same as the formula for how a given amount of financial savings grows at a certain interest rate over time, as presented in Choice in a World of Scarcity. Both formulas have the same ingredients:
• an original starting amount, in one case GDP and in the other case an amount of financial saving;
• a percentage increase over time, in one case the GDP growth rate and in the other case an interest rate;
• and an amount of time over which this effect happens.
Recall that compound interest is interest that is earned on past interest. It causes the total amount of financial savings to grow dramatically over time. Similarly, compound rates of economic growth, or the compound growth rate, means that we multiply the rate of growth by a base that includes past GDP growth, with dramatic effects over time.
For example, in 2020, the Central Intelligence Agency's World Fact Book reported that South Korea had a GDP of \$2.2 trillion. With a growth rate of 2.8% per year, South Korea's GDP will be \$2.5 trillion in five years. If we apply the growth rate to each year’s ending GDP for the next five years, we will calculate that at the end of year one, GDP is \$2.3 trillion. In year two, we start with the end-of-year one value of \$1.72 and increase it by 2.8%. Year three starts with the end-of-year two GDP, and we increase it by 2.8% and so on, as Table 7.4 depicts.
Year Starting GDP Growth Rate 2.8% Year-End Amount
1 \$2.2 Trillion × (1+0.028) \$2.3 Trillion
2 \$2.3 Trillion × (1+0.028) \$2.3 Trillion
3 \$2.3 Trillion × (1+0.028) \$2.4 Trillion
4 \$2.4 Trillion × (1+0.028) \$2.5 Trillion
5 \$2.5 Trillion × (1+0.028) \$2.5 Trillion
Table 7.4
Another way to calculate the growth rate is to apply the following formula:
$Future Value = Present Value × (1 + g)nFuture Value = Present Value × (1 + g)n$
Where “future value” is the value of GDP five years hence, “present value” is the starting GDP amount of \$1.67 trillion, “g” is the growth rate of 2.8%, and “n” is the number of periods for which we are calculating growth.
$Future Value = 1.67 × (1+0.028)5 = 1.92 trillion Future Value = 1.67 × (1+0.028)5 = 1.92 trillion$ | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_3e_(OpenStax)/07%3A_Economic_Growth/7.03%3A_Labor_Productivity_and_Economic_Growth.txt |
Learning Objectives
By the end of this section, you will be able to:
• Discuss the components of economic growth, including physical capital, human capital, and technology
• Explain capital deepening and its significance
• Analyze the methods employed in economic growth accounting studies
• Identify factors that contribute to a healthy climate for economic growth
Over decades and generations, seemingly small differences of a few percentage points in the annual rate of economic growth make an enormous difference in GDP per capita. In this module, we discuss some of the components of economic growth, including physical capital, human capital, and technology.
The category of physical capital includes the plant and equipment that firms use as well as things like roads (also called infrastructure). Again, greater physical capital implies more output. Physical capital can affect productivity in two ways: (1) an increase in the quantity of physical capital (for example, more computers of the same quality); and (2) an increase in the quality of physical capital (same number of computers but the computers are faster, and so on). Human capital refers to the skills and knowledge that make workers productive. Human capital and physical capital accumulation are similar: In both cases, investment now pays off in higher productivity in the future.
The category of technology is the “joker in the deck.” Earlier we described it as the combination of invention and innovation. When most people think of new technology, the invention of new products like the laser, the smartphone, or some new wonder drug come to mind. In food production, developing more drought-resistant seeds is another example of technology. Technology, as economists use the term, however, includes still more. It includes new ways of organizing work, like the invention of the assembly line, new methods for ensuring better quality of output in factories, and innovative institutions that facilitate the process of converting inputs into output. In short, technology comprises all the advances that make the existing machines and other inputs produce more, and at higher quality, as well as altogether new products.
It may not make sense to compare the GDPs of China and say, Benin, simply because of the great difference in population size. To understand economic growth, which is really concerned with the growth in living standards of an average person, it is often useful to focus on GDP per capita. Using GDP per capita also makes it easier to compare countries with smaller numbers of people, like Belgium, Uruguay, or Zimbabwe, with countries that have larger populations, like the United States, the Russian Federation, or Nigeria.
To obtain a per capita production function, divide each input in Figure 7.2(a) by the population. This creates a second aggregate production function where the output is GDP per capita (that is, GDP divided by population). The inputs are the average level of human capital per person, the average level of physical capital per person, and the level of technology per person—see Figure 7.2(b). The result of having population in the denominator is mathematically appealing. Increases in population lower per capita income. However, increasing population is important for the average person only if the rate of income growth exceeds population growth. A more important reason for constructing a per capita production function is to understand the contribution of human and physical capital.
Capital Deepening
When society increases the level of capital per person, we call the result capital deepening. The idea of capital deepening can apply both to additional human capital per worker and to additional physical capital per worker.
Recall that one way to measure human capital is to look at the average levels of education in an economy. Figure 7.5 illustrates the human capital deepening for U.S. workers by showing that the proportion of the U.S. population with a high school and a college degree is rising. As recently as 1970, for example, only about half of U.S. adults had at least a high school diploma. By the start of the twenty-first century, more than 80% of adults had graduated from high school. The idea of human capital deepening also applies to the years of experience that workers have, but the average experience level of U.S. workers has not changed much in recent decades. Thus, the key dimension for deepening human capital in the U.S. economy focuses more on additional education and training than on a higher average level of work experience.
Figure 7.5 Human Capital Deepening in the U.S. Rising levels of education for persons 25 and older show the deepening of human capital in the U.S. economy. Even today, under one-third of U.S. adults have completed a four-year college degree. There is clearly room for additional deepening of human capital to occur. (Source: Penn World Tables, 10.0 https://www.rug.nl/ggdc/productivity/pwt/?lang=en)
Figure 7.6 shows physical capital deepening in the U.S. economy. The average U.S. worker in the late 2000s was working with physical capital worth almost three times as much as that of the average worker of the early 1950s.
Figure 7.6 Physical Capital per Worker in the United States The value of the physical capital, measured by plant and equipment, used by the average worker in the U.S. economy has risen over the decades. The increase may have leveled off a bit in the 1970s and 1980s, which were, not coincidentally, times of slower-than-usual growth in worker productivity. We see a renewed increase in physical capital per worker in the late 1990s, followed by a flattening in the early 2000s. (Source: Center for International Comparisons of Production, Income and Prices, University of Pennsylvania)
Not only does the current U.S. economy have better-educated workers with more and improved physical capital than it did several decades ago, but these workers have access to more advanced technologies. Growth in technology is impossible to measure with a simple line on a graph, but evidence that we live in an age of technological marvels is all around us—discoveries in genetics and in the structure of particles, the wireless internet, and other inventions almost too numerous to count. The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office typically has issued more than 150,000 patents annually in recent years.
This recipe for economic growth—investing in labor productivity, with investments in human capital and technology, as well as increasing physical capital—also applies to other economies. South Korea, for example, already achieved universal enrollment in primary school (the equivalent of kindergarten through sixth grade in the United States) by 1965, when Korea’s GDP per capita was still near its rock bottom low. By the late 1980s, Korea had achieved almost universal secondary school education (the equivalent of a high school education in the United States). With regard to physical capital, Korea’s rates of investment had been about 15% of GDP at the start of the 1960s, but doubled to 30–35% of GDP by the late 1960s and early 1970s. With regard to technology, South Korean students went to universities and colleges around the world to obtain scientific and technical training, and South Korean firms reached out to study and form partnerships with firms that could offer them technological insights. These factors combined to foster South Korea’s high rate of economic growth.
Growth Accounting Studies
Since the late 1950s, economists have conducted growth accounting studies to determine the extent to which physical and human capital deepening and technology have contributed to growth. The usual approach uses an aggregate production function to estimate how much of per capita economic growth can be attributed to growth in physical capital and human capital. We can measure these two inputs at least roughly. The part of growth that is unexplained by measured inputs, called the residual, is then attributed to growth in technology. The exact numerical estimates differ from study to study and from country to country, depending on how researchers measured these three main factors and over what time horizons. For studies of the U.S. economy, three lessons commonly emerge from growth accounting studies.
First, technology is typically the most important contributor to U.S. economic growth. Growth in human capital and physical capital often explains only half or less than half of the economic growth that occurs. New ways of doing things are tremendously important.
Second, while investment in physical capital is essential to growth in labor productivity and GDP per capita, building human capital is at least as important. Economic growth is not just a matter of more machines and buildings. One vivid example of the power of human capital and technological knowledge occurred in Europe in the years after World War II (1939–1945). During the war, a large share of Europe’s physical capital, such as factories, roads, and vehicles, was destroyed. Europe also lost an overwhelming amount of human capital in the form of millions of men, women, and children who died during the war. However, the powerful combination of skilled workers and technological knowledge, working within a market-oriented economic framework, rebuilt Europe’s productive capacity to an even higher level within less than two decades.
A third lesson is that these three factors of human capital, physical capital, and technology work together. Workers with a higher level of education and skills are often better at coming up with new technological innovations. These technological innovations are often ideas that cannot increase production until they become a part of new investment in physical capital. New machines that embody technological innovations often require additional training, which builds worker skills further. If the recipe for economic growth is to succeed, an economy needs all the ingredients of the aggregate production function. See the following Clear It Up feature for an example of how human capital, physical capital, and technology can combine to significantly impact lives.
Clear It Up
How do girls’ education and economic growth relate in low-income countries?
In the early 2000s, according to the World Bank, about 110 million children between the ages of 6 and 11 were not in school—and about two-thirds of them were girls. In Afghanistan, for example, the literacy rate for those aged 15-24 for the period 2005-2014 was 62% for males and only 32% for females. In Benin, in West Africa, it was 55% for males and 31% for females. In Nigeria, Africa’s most populous country, it was 76% for males and 58 percent for females.
Whenever any child does not receive a basic education, it is both a human and an economic loss. In low-income countries, wages typically increase by an average of 10 to 20% with each additional year of education. There is, however, some intriguing evidence that helping girls in low-income countries to close the education gap with boys may be especially important, because of the social role that many of the girls will play as mothers and homemakers.
Girls in low-income countries who receive more education tend to grow up to have fewer, healthier, better-educated children. Their children are more likely to be better nourished and to receive basic health care like immunizations. Economic research on women in low-income economies backs up these findings. When 20 women obtain one additional year of schooling, as a group they will, on average, have one less child. When 1,000 women obtain one additional year of schooling, on average one to two fewer women from that group will die in childbirth. When a woman stays in school an additional year, that factor alone means that, on average, each of her children will spend an additional half-year in school. Education for girls is a good investment because it is an investment in economic growth with benefits beyond the current generation.
A Healthy Climate for Economic Growth
While physical and human capital deepening and better technology are important, equally important to a nation’s well-being is the climate or system within which these inputs are cultivated. Both the type of market economy and a legal system that governs and sustains property rights and contractual rights are important contributors to a healthy economic climate.
A healthy economic climate usually involves some sort of market orientation at the microeconomic, individual, or firm decision-making level. Markets that allow personal and business rewards and incentives for increasing human and physical capital encourage overall macroeconomic growth. For example, when workers participate in a competitive and well-functioning labor market, they have an incentive to acquire additional human capital, because additional education and skills will pay off in higher wages. Firms have an incentive to invest in physical capital and in training workers, because they expect to earn higher profits for their shareholders. Both individuals and firms look for new technologies, because even small inventions can make work easier or lead to product improvement. Collectively, such individual and business decisions made within a market structure add up to macroeconomic growth. Much of the rapid growth since the late nineteenth century has come from harnessing the power of competitive markets to allocate resources. This market orientation typically reaches beyond national borders and includes openness to international trade.
A general orientation toward markets does not rule out important roles for government. There are times when markets fail to allocate capital or technology in a manner that provides the greatest benefit for society as a whole. The government's role is to correct these failures. In addition, government can guide or influence markets toward certain outcomes. The following examples highlight some important areas that governments around the world have chosen to invest in to facilitate capital deepening and technology:
• Education. The Danish government requires all children under 16 to attend school. They can choose to attend a public school (Folkeskole) or a private school. Students do not pay tuition to attend Folkeskole. Thirteen percent of primary/secondary (elementary/high) school is private, and the government supplies vouchers to citizens who choose private school.
• Savings and Investment. In the United States, as in other countries, the government taxes gains from private investment. Low capital gains taxes encourage investment and so also economic growth.
• Infrastructure. The Japanese government in the mid-1990s undertook significant infrastructure projects to improve roads and public works. This in turn increased the stock of physical capital and ultimately economic growth.
• Special Economic Zones. The island of Mauritius is one of the few African nations to encourage international trade in government-supported special economic zones (SEZ). These are areas of the country, usually with access to a port where, among other benefits, the government does not tax trade. As a result of its SEZ, Mauritius has enjoyed above-average economic growth since the 1980s. Free trade does not have to occur in an SEZ however. Governments can encourage international trade across the board, or surrender to protectionism.
• Scientific Research. The European Union has strong programs to invest in scientific research. The researchers Abraham García and Pierre Mohnen demonstrate that firms which received support from the Austrian government actually increased their research intensity and had more sales. Governments can support scientific research and technical training that helps to create and spread new technologies. Governments can also provide a legal environment that protects the ability of inventors to profit from their inventions.
There are many more ways in which the government can play an active role in promoting economic growth. We explore them in other chapters and in particular in Macroeconomic Policy Around the World. A healthy climate for growth in GDP per capita and labor productivity includes human capital deepening, physical capital deepening, and technological gains, operating in a market-oriented economy with supportive government policies. | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_3e_(OpenStax)/07%3A_Economic_Growth/7.04%3A_Components_of_Economic_Growth.txt |
Learning Objectives
By the end of this section, you will be able to:
• Explain economic convergence
• Analyze various arguments for and against economic convergence
• Evaluate the speed of economic convergence between high-income countries and the rest of the world
Some low-income and middle-income economies around the world have shown a pattern of convergence, in which their economies grow faster than those of high-income countries. GDP increased by an average rate of 2.7% per year in the 1990s and 1.7% per year from 2010 to 2019 in the high-income countries of the world, which include the United States, Canada, the European Union countries, Japan, Australia, and New Zealand.
Table 7.5 lists eight countries that belong to an informal “fast growth club.” These countries averaged GDP growth (after adjusting for inflation) of at least 5% per year in both the time periods from 1990 to 2000 and from 2010 to 2019. Since economic growth in these countries has exceeded the average of the world’s high-income economies, these countries may converge with the high-income countries. The second part of Table 7.5 lists the “slow growth club,” which consists of countries that averaged GDP growth of 2% per year or less (after adjusting for inflation) during the same time periods. The final portion of Table 7.5 shows GDP growth rates for the countries of the world divided by income.
Country Average Growth Rate of Real GDP 1990–2000 Growth Rate of Real GDP 2010–2019
Fast Growth Club (5% or more per year in both time periods)
Cambodia 7.1% 7.0%
China 10.6% 7.3%
India 6.0% 6.7%
Ireland 7.5% 6.3%
Laos 6.5% 7.3%
Mozambique 6.4% 5.6%
Uganda 7.1% 5.4%
Vietnam 7.9% 6.3%
Slow Growth Club (2% or less per year in both time periods)
Central African Republic 2.0% –0.2%
France 2.0% 1.4%
Germany 1.8% 2.0%
Haiti –1.5% 1.5%
Italy 1.6% 0.3%
Jamaica 0.9% 0.7%
Japan 1.3% 1.3%
Switzerland 1.0% 2.0%
United States (for reference) 3.2% 2.3%
World Overview
High income 2.7% 1.7%
Low income 3.8% 4.5%
Middle income 4.7% 4.0%
Table 7.5 Economic Growth around the World
Each of the countries in Table 7.5 has its own unique story of investments in human and physical capital, technological gains, market forces, government policies, and even lucky events, but an overall pattern of convergence is clear. The low-income countries have GDP growth that is faster than that of the middle-income countries, which in turn have GDP growth that is faster than that of the high-income countries. Two prominent members of the fast-growth club are China and India, which between them have nearly 40% of the world’s population. Some prominent members of the slow-growth club are high-income countries like France, Germany, Italy, and Japan.
Will this pattern of economic convergence persist into the future? This is a controversial question among economists that we will consider by looking at some of the main arguments on both sides.
Arguments Favoring Convergence
Several arguments suggest that low-income countries might have an advantage in achieving greater worker productivity and economic growth in the future.
A first argument is based on diminishing marginal returns. Even though deepening human and physical capital will tend to increase GDP per capita, the law of diminishing returns suggests that as an economy continues to increase its human and physical capital, the marginal gains to economic growth will diminish. For example, raising the average education level of the population by two years from a tenth-grade level to a high school diploma (while holding all other inputs constant) would produce a certain increase in output. An additional two-year increase, so that the average person had a two-year college degree, would increase output further, but the marginal gain would be smaller. Yet another additional two-year increase in the level of education, so that the average person would have a four-year-college bachelor’s degree, would increase output still further, but the marginal increase would again be smaller. A similar lesson holds for physical capital. If the quantity of physical capital available to the average worker increases, by, say, \$5,000 to \$10,000 (again, while holding all other inputs constant), it will increase the level of output. An additional increase from \$10,000 to \$15,000 will increase output further, but the marginal increase will be smaller.
Low-income countries like China and India tend to have lower levels of human capital and physical capital, so an investment in capital deepening should have a larger marginal effect in these countries than in high-income countries, where levels of human and physical capital are already relatively high. Diminishing returns implies that low-income economies could converge to the levels that the high-income countries achieve.
A second argument is that low-income countries may find it easier to improve their technologies than high-income countries. High-income countries must continually invent new technologies, whereas low-income countries can often find ways of applying technology that has already been invented and is well understood. The economist Alexander Gerschenkron (1904–1978) gave this phenomenon a memorable name: “the advantages of backwardness.” Of course, he did not literally mean that it is an advantage to have a lower standard of living. He was pointing out that a country that is behind has some extra potential for catching up.
Finally, optimists argue that many countries have observed the experience of those that have grown more quickly and have learned from it. Moreover, once the people of a country begin to enjoy the benefits of a higher standard of living, they may be more likely to build and support the market-friendly institutions that will help provide this standard of living.
Link It Up
View this video to learn about economic growth across the world.
Arguments That Convergence Is neither Inevitable nor Likely
If the economy's growth depended only on the deepening of human capital and physical capital, then we would expect that economy's growth rate to slow down over the long run because of diminishing marginal returns. However, there is another crucial factor in the aggregate production function: technology.
Developing new technology can provide a way for an economy to sidestep the diminishing marginal returns of capital deepening. Figure 7.7 shows how. The figure's horizontal axis measures the amount of capital deepening, which on this figure is an overall measure that includes deepening of both physical and human capital. The amount of human and physical capital per worker increases as you move from left to right, from C1 to C2 to C3. The diagram's vertical axis measures per capita output. Start by considering the lowest line in this diagram, labeled Technology 1. Along this aggregate production function, the level of technology is held constant, so the line shows only the relationship between capital deepening and output. As capital deepens from C1 to C2 to C3 and the economy moves from R to U to W, per capita output does increase—but the way in which the line starts out steeper on the left but then flattens as it moves to the right shows the diminishing marginal returns, as additional marginal amounts of capital deepening increase output by ever-smaller amounts. The shape of the aggregate production line (Technology 1) shows that the ability of capital deepening, by itself, to generate sustained economic growth is limited, since diminishing returns will eventually set in.
Figure 7.7 Capital Deepening and New Technology Imagine that the economy starts at point R, with the level of physical and human capital C1 and the output per capita at G1. If the economy relies only on capital deepening, while remaining at the technology level shown by the Technology 1 line, then it would face diminishing marginal returns as it moved from point R to point U to point W. However, now imagine that capital deepening is combined with improvements in technology. Then, as capital deepens from C1 to C2, technology improves from Technology 1 to Technology 2, and the economy moves from R to S. Similarly, as capital deepens from C2 to C3, technology increases from Technology 2 to Technology 3, and the economy moves from S to T. With improvements in technology, there is no longer any reason that economic growth must necessarily slow down.
Now, bring improvements in technology into the picture. Improved technology means that with a given set of inputs, more output is possible. The production function labeled Technology 1 in the figure is based on one level of technology, but Technology 2 is based on an improved level of technology, so for every level of capital deepening on the horizontal axis, it produces a higher level of output on the vertical axis. In turn, production function Technology 3 represents a still higher level of technology, so that for every level of inputs on the horizontal axis, it produces a higher level of output on the vertical axis than either of the other two aggregate production functions.
Most healthy, growing economies are deepening their human and physical capital and increasing technology at the same time. As a result, the economy can move from a choice like point R on the Technology 1 aggregate production line to a point like S on Technology 2 and a point like T on the still higher aggregate production line (Technology 3). With the combination of technology and capital deepening, the rise in GDP per capita in high-income countries does not need to fade away because of diminishing returns. The gains from technology can offset the diminishing returns involved with capital deepening.
Will technological improvements themselves run into diminishing returns over time? That is, will it become continually harder and more costly to discover new technological improvements? Perhaps someday, but, at least over the last two centuries since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, improvements in technology have not run into diminishing marginal returns. Modern inventions, like the internet or discoveries in genetics or materials science, do not seem to provide smaller gains to output than earlier inventions like the steam engine or the railroad. One reason that technological ideas do not seem to run into diminishing returns is that we often can apply widely the ideas of new technology at a marginal cost that is very low or even zero. A specific worker or group of workers must use a specific additional machine, or an additional year of education. Many workers across the economy can use a new technology or invention at very low marginal cost.
The argument that it is easier for a low-income country to copy and adapt existing technology than it is for a high-income country to invent new technology is not necessarily true, either. When it comes to adapting and using new technology, a society’s performance is not necessarily guaranteed, but is the result of whether the country's economic, educational, and public policy institutions are supportive. In theory, perhaps, low-income countries have many opportunities to copy and adapt technology, but if they lack the appropriate supportive economic infrastructure and institutions, the theoretical possibility that backwardness might have certain advantages is of little practical relevance.
Link It Up
Visit this website to read more about economic growth in India.
The Slowness of Convergence
Although economic convergence between the high-income countries and the rest of the world seems possible and even likely, it will proceed slowly. Consider, for example, a country that starts off with a GDP per capita of \$40,000, which would roughly represent a typical high-income country today, and another country that starts out at \$4,000, which is roughly the level in low-income but not impoverished countries like Indonesia, Guatemala, or Egypt. Say that the rich country chugs along at a 2% annual growth rate of GDP per capita, while the poorer country grows at the aggressive rate of 7% per year. After 30 years, GDP per capita in the rich country will be \$72,450 (that is, \$40,000 (1 + 0.02)30) while in the poor country it will be \$30,450 (that is, \$4,000 (1 + 0.07)30). Convergence has occurred. The rich country used to be 10 times as wealthy as the poor one, and now it is only about 2.4 times as wealthy. Even after 30 consecutive years of very rapid growth, however, people in the low-income country are still likely to feel quite poor compared to people in the rich country. Moreover, as the poor country catches up, its opportunities for catch-up growth are reduced, and its growth rate may slow down somewhat.
The slowness of convergence illustrates again that small differences in annual rates of economic growth become huge differences over time. The high-income countries have been building up their advantage in standard of living over decades—more than a century in some cases. Even in an optimistic scenario, it will take decades for the low-income countries of the world to catch up significantly.
Bring It Home
Calories and Economic Growth
We can tell the story of modern economic growth by looking at calorie consumption over time. The dramatic rise in incomes allowed the average person to eat better and consume more calories. How did these incomes increase? The neoclassical growth consensus uses the aggregate production function to suggest that the period of modern economic growth came about because of increases in inputs such as technology and physical and human capital. Also important was the way in which technological progress combined with physical and human capital deepening to create growth and convergence. The issue of distribution of income notwithstanding, it is clear that the average worker can afford more calories in 2020 than in 1875.
Aside from increases in income, there is another reason why the average person can afford more food. Modern agriculture has allowed many countries to produce more food than they need. Despite having more than enough food, however, many governments and multilateral agencies have not solved the food distribution problem. In fact, food shortages, famine, or general food insecurity are caused more often by the failure of government macroeconomic policy, according to the Nobel Prize-winning economist Amartya Sen. Sen has conducted extensive research into issues of inequality, poverty, and the role of government in improving standards of living. Macroeconomic policies that strive toward stable inflation, full employment, education of women, and preservation of property rights are more likely to eliminate starvation and provide for a more even distribution of food.
Because we have more food per capita, global food prices have decreased since 1875. The prices of some foods, however, have decreased more than the prices of others. For example, researchers from the University of Washington have shown that in the United States, calories from zucchini and lettuce are 100 times more expensive than calories from oil, butter, and sugar. Research from countries like India, China, and the United States suggests that as incomes rise, individuals want more calories from fats and protein and fewer from carbohydrates. This has very interesting implications for global food production, obesity, and environmental consequences. Affluent urban India has an obesity problem much like many parts of the United States. The forces of convergence are at work. | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_3e_(OpenStax)/07%3A_Economic_Growth/7.05%3A_Economic_Convergence.txt |
aggregate production function
the process whereby an economy as a whole turns economic inputs such as human capital, physical capital, and technology into output measured as GDP per capita
capital deepening
an increase by society in the average level of physical and/or human capital per person
compound growth rate
the rate of growth when multiplied by a base that includes past GDP growth
contractual rights
the rights of individuals to enter into agreements with others regarding the use of their property providing recourse through the legal system in the event of noncompliance
convergence
pattern in which economies with low per capita incomes grow faster than economies with high per capita incomes
human capital
the accumulated skills and education of workers
Industrial Revolution
the widespread use of power-driven machinery and the economic and social changes that occurred in the first half of the 1800s
infrastructure
a component of physical capital such as roads and rail systems
innovation
putting advances in knowledge to use in a new product or service
invention
advances in knowledge
labor productivity
the value of what is produced per worker, or per hour worked (sometimes called worker productivity)
modern economic growth
the period of rapid economic growth from 1870 onward
physical capital
the plant and equipment that firms use in production; this includes infrastructure
production function
the process whereby a firm turns economic inputs like labor, machinery, and raw materials into outputs like goods and services that consumers use
rule of law
the process of enacting laws that protect individual and entity rights to use their property as they see fit. Laws must be clear, public, fair, and enforced, and applicable to all members of society
special economic zone (SEZ)
area of a country, usually with access to a port where, among other benefits, the government does not tax trade
technological change
a combination of invention—advances in knowledge—and innovation
technology
all the ways in which existing inputs produce more or higher quality, as well as different and altogether new products
7.07: Key Concepts and Summary
7.1 The Relatively Recent Arrival of Economic Growth
Since the early nineteenth century, there has been a spectacular process of long-run economic growth during which the world’s leading economies—mostly those in Western Europe and North America—expanded GDP per capita at an average rate of about 2% per year. In the last half-century, countries like Japan, South Korea, and China have shown the potential to catch up. The Industrial Revolution facilitated the extensive process of economic growth, that economists often refer to as modern economic growth. This increased worker productivity and trade, as well as the development of governance and market institutions.
7.2 Labor Productivity and Economic Growth
We can measure productivity, the value of what is produced per worker, or per hour worked, as the level of GDP per worker or GDP per hour. The United States experienced a productivity slowdown between 1973 and 1989. Since then, U.S. productivity has rebounded for the most part, but annual growth in productivity in the nonfarm business sector has been less than one percent each year between 2011 and 2016. It is not clear what productivity growth will be in the coming years. The rate of productivity growth is the primary determinant of an economy’s rate of long-term economic growth and higher wages. Over decades and generations, seemingly small differences of a few percentage points in the annual rate of economic growth make an enormous difference in GDP per capita. An aggregate production function specifies how certain inputs in the economy, like human capital, physical capital, and technology, lead to the output measured as GDP per capita.
Compound interest and compound growth rates behave in the same way as productivity rates. Seemingly small changes in percentage points can have big impacts on income over time.
7.3 Components of Economic Growth
Over decades and generations, seemingly small differences of a few percentage points in the annual rate of economic growth make an enormous difference in GDP per capita. Capital deepening refers to an increase in the amount of capital per worker, either human capital per worker, in the form of higher education or skills, or physical capital per worker. Technology, in its economic meaning, refers broadly to all new methods of production, which includes major scientific inventions but also small inventions and even better forms of management or other types of institutions. A healthy climate for growth in GDP per capita consists of improvements in human capital, physical capital, and technology, in a market-oriented environment with supportive public policies and institutions.
7.4 Economic Convergence
When countries with lower GDP levels per capita catch up to countries with higher GDP levels per capita, we call the process convergence. Convergence can occur even when both high- and low-income countries increase investment in physical and human capital with the objective of growing GDP. This is because the impact of new investment in physical and human capital on a low-income country may result in huge gains as new skills or equipment combine with the labor force. In higher-income countries, however, a level of investment equal to that of the low income country is not likely to have as big an impact, because the more developed country most likely already has high levels of capital investment. Therefore, the marginal gain from this additional investment tends to be successively less and less. Higher income countries are more likely to have diminishing returns to their investments and must continually invent new technologies. This allows lower-income economies to have a chance for convergent growth. However, many high-income economies have developed economic and political institutions that provide a healthy economic climate for an ongoing stream of technological innovations. Continuous technological innovation can counterbalance diminishing returns to investments in human and physical capital. | textbooks/socialsci/Economics/Principles_of_Macroeconomics_3e_(OpenStax)/07%3A_Economic_Growth/7.06%3A_Key_Terms.txt |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.