Comments on: Public Sector Jobs Beget Private Sector Ones (i.e., There’s a Multiplier!)

By: t ball

t ball — Wed, 18 Jul 2012 00:25:54 +0000

Sure the govts. are bankrupt. They are starving themselves of the revenues they’d have if lots more people were working and paying income and sales taxes.

By: Michael

Michael — Sat, 14 Jul 2012 15:45:17 +0000

That’s a ridiculous argument; the Senate can’t pass a budget, since any proposal can be filibustered indefinitely by the GOP minority.

In addition, whatever else you think the Dems did wrong during their time of control of government, what they DID do was regularly pass budgets and manage the machinery of governance.

By: Michael

Michael — Sat, 14 Jul 2012 15:44:04 +0000

Crabs in a bucket.

By: Tommy D

Tommy D — Sat, 14 Jul 2012 02:56:33 +0000

The average taxpayer should join a labor union. I’m a retired private sector worker. My labor union got me good pay and working conditions and has provided me witThank you very much. Put two boys thru college and paid off my mortgage. h a solid pension and health benefits.

Seriously, there are reasons the 1% has all the money and the middle class is struggling and one of the reasons is the destruction of labor unions.

By: pjr

pjr — Sat, 14 Jul 2012 01:51:31 +0000

Correct, at least until states/localities see an economic rebound–which requires more jobs. The federal government could fund a lot of state/local employees by eliminating the Bush tax cuts on those earning more than a quarter million per year, and the federal government also can borrow at negative real interest rates right now. Additionally, some states have cut taxes while shedding jobs. Politics is keeping the unemployment rate high. And this is not a new phenomenon.

By: William occam

William occam — Fri, 13 Jul 2012 20:59:02 +0000

Slight problem PJR. Government at every level inthis country is bankrupt (and I am not just talking morally).

http://bluecravat.blogspot.com/2012/07/problem-local-governement-are-bankrupt.html

By: William occam

William occam — Fri, 13 Jul 2012 20:52:28 +0000

Yes how do you create an emotional charged slogan supporting people who get pay and benefits the average taxpayer can only dream of?

http://bluecravat.blogspot.com/2012/07/stocktonwtf.html

By: William occam

William occam — Fri, 13 Jul 2012 20:45:56 +0000

Sure the government creates jobs…the only problem is that government is bankrupt and rapidly becoming more so.

http://bluecravat.blogspot.com/2012/06/pk-thinks-san-jose-should-hire-more.html

By: Frank Lysy

Frank Lysy — Fri, 13 Jul 2012 19:40:24 +0000

Yes, the point that cut-backs in government employment and expenditures have held back the economy is certainly correct. As you note here, what distinguishes this downturn from any other in recent decades has been these public sector cut-backs. A similar analysis is provided at http://aneconomicsense.com/2012/06/23/government-jobs-have-been-cut-in-this-recession-this-has-hurt-not-helped-the-recovery/ (showing the paths centered at the cyclical peaks equal to 100), and at http://aneconomicsense.com/2012/07/09/restoring-government-employment-as-a-way-to-restore-full-employment/ (showing the paths from Inauguration day set at 100).

But I believe there is an important technical error in the calculations of Shierholz and Bivens, which results in a lower multiplier for state and local government expenditures than would be the case. They use multipliers from Mark Zandi, and assume implicitly that all federal aid to the state and local level is spent either on purchases or on transfers. But it isn’t: a significant part has been saved (paying down the debt, or reducing increases in debt). Correcting for this, the multiplier on state and local government expenditures would be much higher than the 1.24 they calculate.

By: Hmmm...

Hmmm... — Fri, 13 Jul 2012 18:48:54 +0000

It seems to me you have a serious problem with sample size. You are drawing a conclusion from 3 samples? Really?

Furthermore, your statement, “conservatives continue block policies…” is laughable, considering it has been over 3 years since the Democrat controlled Senate has passed a budget. Democrats had complete control of Congress and the Executive branch for two years. What did they do with that power? Republicans have only had control of the house for 1.5 years, and not the Senate. So you have Democrats controlling both the Senate and the White House and it is the fault of conservatives? Laughable. And, 3 samples. Fail.