Warning: foreach() argument must be of type array|object, bool given in /var/www/html/web/app/themes/studypress-core-theme/template-parts/header/mobile-offcanvas.php on line 20

Describe how certain aspects of fiscal policy function as automatic stabilizers for the economy

Short Answer

Expert verified

Automatic stabilizers aim to be at the forefront of protection as they react almost immediately to changes in income and unemployment, reversing mild negative economic trends. However, governments often use these others to deal with a more serious or long-term recession, or for further financial relief, targeting specific regions, sectors, or politically-supported groups of society. Look at the broader fiscal policy initiatives of the type.

Step by step solution

01

Step 1- Introduction

Automatic stabilizers take into account changes in economic activity without direct dialogue with policy makers. If you have a high income, your taxes and other laws will not improve, your tax obligations will increase, and your right to state benefits will decrease. Conversely, lower incomes reduce tax obligations and increase the number of households eligible for government benefits such as food stamps and unemployment insurance to support their income.

02

Step 2- Explanation

Automatic stabilizers also work in state and local tax and transfer processes. Nevertheless, state constitutions usually require a balanced budget, which can lead to opposition adjustments to spending and tax law. These provisions do not enforce a complete rebalancing each year. Budget forecasts tend to be more focused than executions, so deficits can continue even when economic conditions are unexpectedly weak.

03

- Conclusion

When the economy is in recession, automatic stabilizers inherently lead to high budget deficits. This is an aspect of fiscal policy, a Keynesian economic mechanism that uses government spending and taxes to boost aggregate demand in the economy during a recession. Fiscal policy is to avoid worsening recession by allowing private companies and households to reduce taxpayers' money and give more in the form of subsidies and tax refunds. Should be increased, or at least not decreased.

Unlock Step-by-Step Solutions & Ace Your Exams!

  • Full Textbook Solutions

    Get detailed explanations and key concepts

  • Unlimited Al creation

    Al flashcards, explanations, exams and more...

  • Ads-free access

    To over 500 millions flashcards

  • Money-back guarantee

    We refund you if you fail your exam.

Over 30 million students worldwide already upgrade their learning with Vaia!

One App. One Place for Learning.

All the tools & learning materials you need for study success - in one app.

Get started for free

Most popular questions from this chapter

2. Why do you suppose that many economists perceive a trade-off between short-term stabilization benefits of unemployment compensation and a contribution to a higher unemployment rate in the long run?

Recall that the Keynesian spending multiplier equals 1 /(1-M P C). Suppose that in Figure 13-4, the MPC is equal to 0.9. In addition, the amount of the horizontal leftward shift from AD2 to AD3 caused by a crowding-out effect on planned investment spending was 0.5\( trillion, or \) 500 billion. How much investment spending was crowded out?

Currently, a government's budget is balanced. The marginal propensity to consume is \(0.80. The government has determined that each additional \)10 billion it borrows to finance a budget deficit pushes up the market interest rate by role="math" localid="1651613391961" 0.1 percentage point. It has also determined that every role="math" localid="1651613378175" 0.1-percentage point change in the market interest rate generates a change in planned investment expenditures equal to \(2 billion. Finally, the government knows that to close a recessionary gap and take into account the resulting change in the price level, it must generate a net rightward shift in the aggregate demand curve equal to \)200 billion. Assuming that there are no direct expenditure offsets to fiscal policy, how much should the government increase its expenditures? (Hint: How much private investment spending will each $10 billion increase in government spending crowd out?)

In May and June of 2008, the federal government issued one-time tax rebates - checks returning a small portion of taxes previously paid to millions of U.S residents, and U.S. real disposable income temporarily jumped by nearly $500 billion. Household real consumption spending did not increase in response to the short-lived increase in real disposable income. Explain how the logic of the permanent income hypothesis might help to account for this apparent non relationship between real consumption and real disposable income in the late spring of 2008.

List and define fiscal policy time lags and explain why they complicate efforts to engage in fiscal "fine tuning".

See all solutions

Recommended explanations on Economics Textbooks

View all explanations

What do you think about this solution?

We value your feedback to improve our textbook solutions.

Study anywhere. Anytime. Across all devices.

Sign-up for free