Center for Business and Economic Research - Ball State University


CBER Data Center
Projects and
Publications
Economic
Indicators
Weekly
Commentary
County
Profiles
Community
Asset Inventory
Brownfield Grant
Writers' Toolbox
Manufacturing
Scorecard

About

Commentaries are published weekly and distributed through the Indianapolis Business Journal and many other print and online publications. Disclaimer

RSS Feed

Disclaimer

The views expressed in these commentaries do not reflect those of Ball State University or the Center for Business and Economic Research.

Recent

Inflation Is Not Our Top ProblemRecession effects are influenced by the tradeoff between unemployment and inflation.

What Will This Economic Recovery Yield for Indiana?The quest to better fund schools and improve our workforce cannot become a partisan issue.

Let’s Be Honest About the COVID Relief BillToo little stimulus is far worse than too much.

Two Sides of the Minimum WageWhat role should the government play?

View archives

Top Tags

jobs and employment 199
economics 162
economic development 121
education 118
taxes 117
finance 102
recession 93
budget and spending 75
state and local government 74
unemployment and the labor market 72
Browse all tags
Reporter / Admin Login

May 23, 2011

A Dose of Economic Theory

I am a bit hesitant to fill this column with the technical aspects of economy theory.  These lessons are rarely successful in my pragmatic household, but there is a time and place for everything; and this time of high budgets, incipient inflation and modest national recovery is a time for thinking folks to better understand the economic debate of our times. 

Despite many jokes to the contrary, economists largely share a common set of beliefs forged by empirical observation of the world.  Among these is that people respond to incentives with their best interests at heart and that left to its own devices, an economy will recover from even the worst recession of its own accord.  The questions that remain in dispute are: How fast will the recovery be? and How much can government policy improve the speed of recovery?

Many demagogues would have us believe that there are two schools of thought in economics: old line Keynesians and pure free-market types.  The caricature of both groups of economists is that they are, respectively, free-wheeling spendthrifts or cold-hearted social Darwinists.  These descriptions are simple to understand, convenient and wrong.

Virtually all practicing economists fall into a broad middle.  At the risk of sounding elitist, I need to define practicing economists as those who conduct their own technical research, not those who solely interpret the work of others or who spout ideological dogma.  Most active researchers conclude that markets adjust slowly from recession to recovery.  The technical research on the matter is painfully obtuse and often densely mathematical.  Yet there is an easy reality to the findings of this work.  It describe workers reluctant to concede to pay cuts, families unwilling to uproot at the first sign of economic hardship and businesses afraid to slash prices when demand drops.  So most economists who study recessions and publish their own research argue that something can potentially be done to ease the transition from recession to recovery, if well timed and executed.  Of course, these are big ifs.  This something comes in the form of monetary policy (lowering interest rates to spur more investment in new capital) or fiscal policy (a combination of lower tax rates and increased government spending to stimulate demand for goods and services).  

Despite high rhetoric to the contrary, we live in a world that has enshrined these ideas.  Unemployment insurance, a progressive tax and most social programs automatically reduce taxes and increase spending as we move into a recession.  These automatic stabilizers implicitly accept the reality that some government action can ease the effects of a looming recession.

So I argue to the angst of some of my colleagues, most disagreement over economic policy is not based on theory; rather it is based on the discordant views about the ability of government to quickly and efficiently spend a stimulus or target a tax cut.  In that regard, the past two years have provided a great boost to those who argue for less, not more government intervention.

Link to this commentary: https://commentaries.cberdata.org/569/a-dose-of-economic-theory

Tags: prices and inflation, economic recovery


About the Author

Michael Hicks cberdirector@bsu.edu

Michael J. Hicks, PhD, is the director of the Center for Business and Economic Research and the George and Frances Ball distinguished professor of economics in the Miller College of Business at Ball State University. Hicks earned doctoral and master’s degrees in economics from the University of Tennessee and a bachelor’s degree in economics from Virginia Military Institute. He has authored two books and more than 60 scholarly works focusing on state and local public policy, including tax and expenditure policy and the impact of Wal-Mart on local economies.

© Center for Business and Economic Research, Ball State University

About Ball State CBER Data Center

Ball State CBER Data Center is one-stop shop for economic data including demographics, education, health, and social capital. Our easy-to-use, visual web tools offer data collection and analysis for grant writers, economic developers, policy makers, and the general public.

Ball State CBER Data Center (cberdata.org) is a product of the Center for Business and Economic Research at Ball State University. CBER's mission is to conduct relevant and timely public policy research on a wide range of economic issues affecting the state and nation. Learn more.

Terms of Service

Center for Business and Economic Research

Ball State University • Whitinger Business Building, room 149
2000 W. University Ave.
Muncie, IN 47306-0360
Phone:
765-285-5926
Email:
cber@bsu.edu
Website:
www.bsu.edu/cber
Facebook:
www.facebook.com/BallStateCBER
Twitter:
www.twitter.com/BallStateCBER
Close