Talk:Deficit spending

Economics Mid‑importance

	Business and economics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Economics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Economics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EconomicsWikipedia:WikiProject EconomicsTemplate:WikiProject EconomicsEconomics articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Finance & Investment Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Finance & Investment, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Finance and Investment on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Finance & InvestmentWikipedia:WikiProject Finance & InvestmentTemplate:WikiProject Finance & InvestmentFinance & Investment articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Politics Mid‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

[[Post-Keynesian economics#Kansas City School|Kansas City School]] The anchor (#Kansas City School) is no longer available because it was deleted by a user before.

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

Severe lack of references

I fall toward neither direction in this argument - whether deficit spending is good or bad - but this article, in so many places, lacks the most basic of wikipedia precepts - that information be sourced. There are at least thirty places in this article that assert knowledge without a source. 75.134.26.34 (talk) 04:52, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ERROR

I didn't want to edit the article itself, but in the "Sound Finance" section, it's stated that Vermont is the only state with balanced budget amendment. That is incorrect. I don't know about all the states, but Texas Constitution also requires a balanced budget HITMANactual666 (talk) 11:40, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Shouldn’t merge

Section added. —Nils von Barth (nbarth) (talk) 01:31, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

deftdrummer: 1252 7/14/06 I don't think that this article should be merged with deficit spending. This is mainly due to the fact that this article pretains more to the amendment about deficit spending rather than about deficit spending itself. Or at least it should be...

Citation

Section added. —Nils von Barth (nbarth) (talk) 01:31, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know how to cite sources, but the explanation dealing with Hoover worsening the Great Depression can be found in this book: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0673993167/103-6585805-1667011?v=glance&n=283155

Debatable...?

Thank you for the link to the Hoover point, but it still seems to me - after studying several other economics-related pages on Wikipedia - that what he should or shouldn't have done is still under debate. Economics is theory, after all. I'm also slightly confused at the references to "monetary policy" in the article - are we referring to the concept itself, or of specific applications of that concept, or of policy decisions that affect money in a general way (e.g., calling a method of dealing with insurance companies as a general matter an 'insurance policy', so to speak... if that makes sense...).

Thx, t

Keyner or Lerner?

As far as I know, Keynes was neither in favour of deficit spending nor did he coin the word. His pupil Abba P. Lerner was, and he did. --Peter Hammer 14:19, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the note – I’ve added discussion of Lerner and his views!

—Nils von Barth (nbarth) (talk) 01:31, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Problem syntax

Something seems wrong with this sentence:

This raises the real gross domestic product (GDP) and the employment of labor, all else constant lowering the unemployment rate.

Could it maybe be written as follows? "This raises the real gross domestic product (GDP) and the employment of labor, and if all else is constant, lowers the unemployment rate."

Thanks. TimidGuy (talk) 20:52, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Went ahead and made this change. TimidGuy (talk) 18:36, 26 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Citations

This article badly needs more citations. Comments such as "nearly all economists" need to be clarified. There are very large numbers of economists that disagree with much of Keyensian philosophy. This article needs more balance and citations. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.255.22.38

Agreed on more citations; I’ve summarized my understanding of the economic positions (mainstream: cyclical deficit; sound money: balanced budget/surplus; Post-Keynesian/Chartalist: deficit spending) on this highly controversial topic, with some references; more would be especially appreciated!

—Nils von Barth (nbarth) (talk) 01:31, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Crowding out

When a government borrows, it must borrow. To the corporate borrower who must see the possibility of profit from borrowing, the interest rate becomes a limbo stick, and a time comes when they can no longer afford to borrow. They are then said to be "crowded out".

This aspect of deficit spending puts the death knell on economic recovery and sends an economy into a deep downward spiral.

-- This should be edited. First of all: When a government borrows, it must borrow. Doesn't seem real bright. Also:

This aspect of deficit spending puts the death knell on economic recovery and sends an economy into a deep downward spiral. --> not very balance, an increase in borrowing rate automatically sends an economy into a deep downward spiral???  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 135.12.16.7 (talk) 16:50, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

yuyu —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.64.223.6 (talk) 15:29, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I personally disagree with you - a government does not need to make a profit on a loan, it only needs to break even. Having said that, yes, a private person or a publically traded entity needs to make a profit on a loan. Perhaps you can expand the sections on the detriments and benefits of deficit spending? 75.134.26.34 (talk) 05:05, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

National Deficit Public Policy Organizations?

I'm sure there must be both pro and anti US deficit spending public policy organizations. Listing those in a section, along w/links, would be most helpful.

Phantom in ca (talk) 23:46, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Deficit financing

Deficit financing is an arrangement in which television and cable networks obtain most programs through paying the studio that creates a show a license fee in exchange for the right to air the show...

I wonder if this entry has anything to do with Public Finance? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Deisik (talk • contribs) 14:42, 25 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I came here to make exactly the same point. In a day or two I'm going to be be bold and spin it off almost-instinct 17:40, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is so out of place it feels like being slapped across the face with a large dead fish. For goodness sake almost-instinct, DO spin it off. If you haven't got expertise in the area you could just call it "Television Deficit Financing"Golux (talk) 11:33, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done - all info pasted into Deficit financing almost-instinct 13:02, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Basic Definition

I think the exact definition of Deficit Spending in the first sentence should be expanded. (Sorry but I'm not qualified to do it.) Relating it to the budget by saying it's also called Budget Deficit confuses me: If the total budget was $1T and included in that was $1B of borrowing, but instead we had to borrow $6B (due to rising interest rates or whatever) and spent $1.005T, what would the budget deficit be, spending above the budget ($5B) or how much the debt actually increased ($6B)? ```` — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.51.243.162 (talk) 23:11, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sad to say but it depends on the economist who figures the numbers. For example, Scott Walker ran for governor of WI on exactly that point - that WI was desperately running out of money - he repeated numbers enough to win the election when the actual figures were MUCH lower over the course of his first term... by a factor of almost one thousand times lower. As far as I am concerned a budget deficit includes all prior debts, but does not include future debts outside of what is payable THIS YEAR. That is not a popular view. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.134.26.34 (talk) 05:15, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]