Public expenditure: Difference between revisions

From Citizendium
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>Nick Gardner
imported>Nick Gardner
Line 21: Line 21:


===Social effects===
===Social effects===
====Criteria====
====Ethical criteria====
The largest component of public expenditure is nearly always the collection of transfer payments that is adopted in the pursuit of social justice. Its principle objective is generally to influence the distribution of income and wealth but there is no consensus concerning the ethically desireable criterion that should be adopted. It is generally accepted that the utilitarian criterion of welfare maximisation proposed by Jeremy Bentham <ref> Jeremy Bentham: ''An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation'', Oxford University Press, 1970</ref> that is used elsewhere in economics<ref> See the article on [[welfare economics]]</ref> yields unacceptable results when applied to questions of distribution because of its effects upon motivation. In its place the philosopher John Rawls proposed the "difference principle", requiring that there should be no more inequality than would be required for the benefit of the least well off <ref> John Rawls: ''A Theory of Justice'', Harvard University Press, 1971</ref>, but the political philosopher Will Kymlicka argued that that, too, could have averse motivational consequences<ref> Will Kymlicka: ''Contemporary Political Philosophy'', Clarendon Press, 1989</ref>. The legal philosopher Ronald Dworkin proposed the adoption of an "equality of resources" criterion<ref> Ronald Dworkin: ''Sovereign Virtue'', Hasvard University Press, 2002</ref>, and the eminent economist Amartya Sen proposed instead the criterion  of "equality of capability"<ref> Amartya Sen: ''The Idea of Justice'', Alan Lane, 2009</ref>, but the political philosopher Robert Nozick rejected  the entire concept of redistribution on the grounds that it would infringe every  person's inalienable right to benefit from the employment of the talents with which he is endowed<ref> Robert Nozick: ''Anarchy, State and Utopia'', Basic Books, 1974</ref>.
The largest component of public expenditure is nearly always the collection of transfer payments that is adopted in the pursuit of social justice. Its principle objective is generally to influence the distribution of income and wealth but there is no consensus concerning the ethically desireable criterion that should be adopted. It is generally accepted that the utilitarian criterion of welfare maximisation proposed by Jeremy Bentham <ref> Jeremy Bentham: ''An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation'', Oxford University Press, 1970</ref> that is used elsewhere in economics<ref> See the article on [[welfare economics]]</ref> yields unacceptable results when applied to questions of distribution because of its effects upon motivation. In its place the philosopher John Rawls proposed the "difference principle", requiring that there should be no more inequality than would be required for the benefit of the least well off <ref> John Rawls: ''A Theory of Justice'', Harvard University Press, 1971</ref>, but the political philosopher Will Kymlicka argued that that, too, could have averse motivational consequences<ref> Will Kymlicka: ''Contemporary Political Philosophy'', Clarendon Press, 1989</ref>. The legal philosopher Ronald Dworkin proposed the adoption of an "equality of resources" criterion<ref> Ronald Dworkin: ''Sovereign Virtue'', Hasvard University Press, 2002</ref>, and the eminent economist Amartya Sen proposed instead the criterion  of "equality of capability"<ref> Amartya Sen: ''The Idea of Justice'', Alan Lane, 2009</ref>, but the political philosopher Robert Nozick rejected  the entire concept of redistribution on the grounds that it would infringe every  person's inalienable right to benefit from the employment of the talents with which he is endowed<ref> Robert Nozick: ''Anarchy, State and Utopia'', Basic Books, 1974</ref>.


Revision as of 05:43, 30 October 2009

This article is developing and not approved.
 Main Article
 Discussion
Related Articles  [?]
Bibliography  [?]
External Links  [?]
Citable Version  [?]
Addendum [?]
 
https://en.citizendium.org/wiki/index.php?title=Public_expenditure&printable=yes
This editable Main Article is under development and subject to a disclaimer.

Overview

Definitions

Public expenditure may be understood as spending by central (federal), state and local governments and by the public corporations, or simply as spending by the public sector.

(For statistical purposes, however, those terms are open to differing interpretations, and to promote comparability in the construction of national accounts, the OECD has published the following definitions[1]

  • The public sector comprises the general government sector plus all public corporations including the central bank.
  • The government sector consists of the following resident institutional units: all units of central, state or local government; all social security funds at each level of government; all non-market non-profit institutions that are controlled and financed by government units.
  • The general government sector consists of the totality of institutional units which, in addition to fulfilling their political responsibilities and their role of economic regulation, produce principally non-market services (possibly goods) for individual or collective consumption and redistribute income and wealth.)

Categorisation

The principal categories of public expenditure are:

  • government investment,
  • government consumption,
  • transfer payments

The effects of public spending

Social effects

Ethical criteria

The largest component of public expenditure is nearly always the collection of transfer payments that is adopted in the pursuit of social justice. Its principle objective is generally to influence the distribution of income and wealth but there is no consensus concerning the ethically desireable criterion that should be adopted. It is generally accepted that the utilitarian criterion of welfare maximisation proposed by Jeremy Bentham [2] that is used elsewhere in economics[3] yields unacceptable results when applied to questions of distribution because of its effects upon motivation. In its place the philosopher John Rawls proposed the "difference principle", requiring that there should be no more inequality than would be required for the benefit of the least well off [4], but the political philosopher Will Kymlicka argued that that, too, could have averse motivational consequences[5]. The legal philosopher Ronald Dworkin proposed the adoption of an "equality of resources" criterion[6], and the eminent economist Amartya Sen proposed instead the criterion of "equality of capability"[7], but the political philosopher Robert Nozick rejected the entire concept of redistribution on the grounds that it would infringe every person's inalienable right to benefit from the employment of the talents with which he is endowed[8].

Economic effects

Crowding-out and crowding-in

Under normal circumstances, private sector spending on government bonds is to some extent at the expense of spending on private sector bonds, with the consequence that some private-sector investment is "crowded out". To the extent that government bonds are used to finance consumption rather than investment, the total of the country's investment is diminished, leading in time to a loss of potential output. Crowding-out is seldom complete, however, but depends upon a range of factors including elasticities of demand for investment and for money [9]. During a recession, crowding-out may to some extent be offset by "crowding-in" as government spending makes up for the deficiency in private sector spending, leading to a recovery of demand and an increase in private-sector investment. The balance between crowding out under particular circumstances is a matter of controversy [10] .

Growth effects

[11]

Notes and references

  1. ↑ Glossary of Statistical Terms, OECD, 2009
  2. ↑ Jeremy Bentham: An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation, Oxford University Press, 1970
  3. ↑ See the article on welfare economics
  4. ↑ John Rawls: A Theory of Justice, Harvard University Press, 1971
  5. ↑ Will Kymlicka: Contemporary Political Philosophy, Clarendon Press, 1989
  6. ↑ Ronald Dworkin: Sovereign Virtue, Hasvard University Press, 2002
  7. ↑ Amartya Sen: The Idea of Justice, Alan Lane, 2009
  8. ↑ Robert Nozick: Anarchy, State and Utopia, Basic Books, 1974
  9. ↑ See Frederick Fourie: How to Think and Reason in Economics, Juta 2001
  10. ↑ See "The Crowding-out Controversy" on page 248 of William Baumol and Alan Blinder: Economics, Principles and Policy, Harcourt Bruce Jovanovich, 1979
  11. ↑ Oscar Alfeanca and Miguel-Angel Galindo:Public Expenditure, Income Distribution, and Growth in OECD Countries, Int’ernational Advances in Economics, May 2003
Retrieved from "https://citizendium.org/wiki/index.php?title=Public_expenditure&oldid=699291"