And when spending increases, as it did in Q3, it boosts the GDP nominally speaking. Yet close to 23 million Americans cannot find full-time work in this economy, and another 5 million have given up looking. The implication of this finding is that one will often not get a good GDP number without dramatically increasing government spending.
Only 22 million Americans work for government at the federal, state, and local level, just 15 percent of the million people who have jobs.
Especially when one considers the composition of our workforce. In fact, the numbers look even worse upon examining the fine print, because 20 percent of the nominal increase in GDP was attributable to increased government spending. This type of reporting system makes it difficult to chart the effects of governmental policies, particularly expenditures, on the private sector by a mere casual reading of the GDP.
If government spending had held steady, as it had the prior two quarters, growth would have only come in at a reported 1. The study shows annualized growth of the GDP versus that of the private sector with government spending removed as a component. What would actually happen is probably somewhere in between a reported 4.
There will be no recovery from this depression without a robustly growing private sector, because we cannot all work for the government. We need to grow the real economy, and going forward, the public will need useful metrics that do not double-count the impact of government spending on economic output.
So for example in Q1the GDP grew by 2 percent, but the private sector grew by 2. This is a rough estimate because oftentimes appropriations stretch out over several years. Then the reported rate of contraction would rise to 12 percent in terms of real GDP.
That result prompted a study at Americans for Limited Government into what would happen if one takes government spending out of the equation entirely and then calculates the growth rate of the private sector alone.
Just to get to the 3 percent annual growth rate the Obama Administration had originally forecast at the beginning of the year, the economy would have to grow at an annualized pace of 6. Because when government spending is included as a component of GDP, and then is held steady or cut, as in Q1, it weighs down the GDP on a nominal basis.
Say we had balanced the budget in Q1 with spending cuts. Moreover, if one physically cuts spending substantially, the Bureau will measure a marked decrease in the GDP.
Or was spending simply decreasing? Converted into real GDP, the economy would have contracted by a reported annualized rate of 4.
That is, unless the decrease in government spending is offset by an even larger increase of the private sector. But even more so, it emphasizes why we need a real private sector recovery in this economy.
It is therefore misleading.
This is an inherent bias of the first order in favor of government expenditures when measuring the health of the economy. But was the economy really contracting?
All of this underscores why government spending should probably not be included as a component of the GDP — it is a misleading indicator of true economic health.
More importantly, it creates a disincentive against legislators ever cutting spending, even if our fiscal house is crumbling, as it is today, because it will cause a technical recession.
But in Q3, the GDP grew by 2 percent but the private sector only by 1.analyzing the impact of changes in government spending on private consumption and investment. By doing this, we provide an additional test on whether government.
Assuming no immediate impact on private consumption, the GDP in Q1 would have come in at $15, billion, a nominal decrease of $ billion. Converted into real GDP, the economy would have contracted. The impact of government spending on private sector consumption and demand of economy has always been one of the main issues discussed among policymakers and economists.
Consumption as comprehensive discussions of macroeconomic. IMPACT OF GOVERNMENT EXPENDITURE ON ECONOMIC GROWTH IN NIGERIA. Chude, Nkiru Patricia Lecturer, Department Of Banking and Finance, Anambra State University, Igbariam Campus- Nigeria.
Chude, Daniel Izuchukwu Lecturer, Department Of Accountancy, Anambra State University, Igbariam Campus-Nigeria. Government spending is disaggregated into investment and consumption components to investigate both theoretically and empirically whether public sector consumption and investment spending crowd out private sector expenditures in the same categories.
Isolating the precise effects of one type of government policy-such as government spending-on aggregate economic performance is probably impossible. Moreover, the relationship between government spending and economic growth may depend on factors that can change over time.Download