Daily Archives: July 25, 2010

The future of fiscal policy was intensely debated in the FT last week. In this Exchange, I want to examine what is going on in the US and, in particular, what is going on inside the Republican party. This matters for the US and, because the US remains the world’s most important economy, it also matters greatly for the world.

My reading of contemporary Republican thinking is that there is no chance of any attempt to arrest adverse long-term fiscal trends should they return to power. Moreover, since the Republicans have no interest in doing anything sensible, the Democrats will gain nothing from trying to do much either. That is the lesson Democrats have to draw from the Clinton era’s successful frugality, which merely gave George W. Bush the opportunity to make massive (irresponsible and unsustainable) tax cuts. In practice, then, nothing will be done.

Indeed, nothing may be done even if a genuine fiscal crisis were to emerge. According to my friend, Bruce Bartlett, a highly informed, if jaundiced, observer, some “conservatives” (in truth, extreme radicals) think a federal default would be an effective way to bring public spending they detest under control. It should be noted, in passing, that a federal default would surely create the biggest financial crisis in world economic history.

To understand modern Republican thinking on fiscal policy, we need to go back to perhaps the most politically brilliant (albeit economically unconvincing) idea in the history of fiscal policy: “supply-side economics”. Supply-side economics liberated conservatives from any need to insist on fiscal rectitude and balanced budgets. Supply-side economics said that one could cut taxes and balance budgets, because incentive effects would generate new activity and so higher revenue.

The political genius of this idea is evident. Supply-side economics transformed Republicans from a minority party into a majority party. It allowed them to promise lower taxes, lower deficits and, in effect, unchanged spending. Why should people not like this combination? Who does not like a free lunch?

Martin Wolf Exchange

Economic issues

About this blog About Martin Blog guide
On this blog, I will open the discussion of a topic that I am thinking about. My aim will be to elicit views of readers. I will give my own response to the question I have raised, before posting the next issue for discussion.

Martin aims to publish a post twice a week.
Martin Wolf is chief economics commentator at the Financial Times, London. He was awarded the CBE (Commander of the British Empire) in 2000 “for services to financial journalism”. Mr Wolf is an honorary fellow of Nuffield College and of Corpus Christi College, Oxford. He is also an honorary professor at the University of Nottingham. He has been a forum fellow at the annual meeting of the World Economic Forum in Davos since 1999 and a member of its International Media Council since 2006.

Martin was made a Doctor of Letters, honoris causa, by Nottingham University in July 2006 and a Doctor of Science (Economics) of London University, honoris causa, by the London School of Economics in December 2006. He was joint winner of the 2009 award for columns in “giant newspapers” at the 15th annual Best in Business Journalism competition of The Society of American Business Editors and Writers and won the 32nd Ischia International Journalism Prize in 2012. Martin's most recent publications are Why Globalization Works and Fixing Global Finance.
To comment, please register for free with FT.com and read our policy on submitting comments.

All posts are published in UK time.

Contact martin.wolf@ft.com.

See the full list of FT blogs.

Elsewhere on ft.com

Money Supply

News, data and opinions on central banks around the world

Gavyn Davies

Gavyn Davies blogs on macroeconomics and the financial markets

Archive

« Jun Aug »July 2010
M T W T F S S
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031