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

Which of the following would help a government reduce an inflationary output gap?

  1. Raising taxes

  2. Lowering taxes

  3. Increasing government spending

  4. Decreasing government spending

Short Answer

Expert verified

Option (a): raising taxes; option (d): decreasing government spending

Step by step solution

01

Explanation for correct options

During an inflationary expenditure gap, the total spending hikes due to a pull in prices by heavy consumer demand. The demand has to be cut down to reduce the inflationary gap.The economy's aggregate demand can be reduced either by increasing the taxes or decreasing government spending or both simultaneously.

Higher taxes will minimize the disposable income of consumers, and the consumption expenditure will decline, which will ultimately reduce the aggregate demand or expenditure in the economy. The inflationary output gap will be minimized.

Decreased government spending will directly shrink the economy's aggregate expenditure. As aggregate expenditure declines, the price level will also decline, which reduces the inflationary gap.

02

Explanation for incorrect options

A lowering of taxes will enhance the consumption capacity of households.As a result, private consumption will be pushed forward, increasing the aggregate expenditure further, widening the inflationary gap.On the other hand, increasing government spending will lift the aggregate expenditure resulting in a multiplied inflationary output gap.

Therefore options (b) and (c) are incorrect.

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

In January, the interest rate is 5 percent and firms borrow \(50 billion per month for investment projects. In February, the federal government doubles its monthly borrowing from \)25 billion to \(50 billion, driving the interest rate up to 7 percent. As a result, firms cut back their borrowing to only \)30 billion per month. Which of the following is true?

  1. There is no crowding-out effect because the governmentโ€™s increase in borrowing exceeds firmsโ€™ decrease in borrowing.

  2. There is a crowding-out effect of \(20 billion.

  3. There is no crowding-out effect because both the government and firms are still borrowing a lot.

  4. There is a crowding-out effect of \)25 billion.

Trace the cause-and-effect chain through which financing and refinancing of the public debt might affect real interest rates, private investment, the capital stock, and economic growth. How might investment in public capital and public-private complementarities alter the outcome of the cause-effect chain?

What is the role of the Council of Economic Advisers (CEA) as it relates to fiscal policy? Use an Internet search to find the names and university affiliations of the present members of the CEA.

What happens between the public and private sectors during a "crowding out" effect?

(For students who were assigned Chapter 11) Assume that, without taxes, the consumption schedule for an economy is as shown below:

GDP, Billions

Consumption, Billions
\(100120
200200
300280
400360
500440
600520
700600
  1. Graph this consumption schedule. What is the size of the MPC?

  2. Assume that a lump-sum (regressive) tax of \)10 billion is imposed at all levels of GDP. Calculate the tax rate at each level of GDP. Graph the resulting consumption schedule and compare the MPC and the multiplier with those of the pretax consumption schedule.

  3. Now suppose a proportional tax with a 10 percent tax rate is imposed instead of the regressive tax. Calculate and graph the new consumption schedule, and calculate the MPC and the multiplier.

  4. Finally, impose a progressive tax such that the tax rate is 0 percent when GDP is \(100, 5 percent at \)200, 10 percent at \(300, 15 percent at \)400, and so forth. Determine and graph the new consumption schedule, noting the effect of this tax system on the MPC and the multiplier.

  5. Use a graph similar to Figure 13.3 to show why proportional and progressive taxes contribute to greater economic stability, while a regressive tax does not.

See all solutions

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