Confusion: to meet or not to meet the fiscal deficit target?

I came across 3 articles worth reading.  One clearly calls for the government to raise demand while the others caution us about the fiscal deficit.  This is the problem when we have no coherent economic theory guiding analysis.

http://www.livemint.com/Home-Page/gSPSvmblarO04TMXZ1yK2M/Recovery-in-capex-still-far-away.html

http://www.moneycontrol.com/news/economy/fiscal-discipline-notchoice-butnecessity_4661161.html

http://www.livemint.com/Opinion/6Hr0OQt5WwLpf4zsi9EWRL/Dont-give-up-on-fiscal-consolidation.html

Can we make sense of all this?

Can we make sense from these three articles using macroeconomic theory that appeared in the Livemint, all on the same day?

A useful exercise for students to look at issues from a macroeconomics perspective.

http://www.livemint.com/Politics/Puwo4XzazcHApN5n1JK0eI/India-to-remain-the-worlds-fastest-growing-economy-IMF.html

http://www.livemint.com/Money/XGY7AWl1fNfNEsMWe0PMFO/If-economy-is-really-growing-74-why-is-consumer-sentiment.html

http://www.livemint.com/Money/1dgjHuBdeq6Tct7GwRGJ8I/PMI-data-shows-spluttering-economy-plunging-business-expect.html

The pressing need for a new perspective

Today's piece by Prof. Deepak Nayyar in the Livemint (12.06.2015) clearly summarizes the problem with neoliberal economics - although the work neoliberal was never mentioned.  At the core of neoliberalism is inflation targeting and its consequent implications for control of the fiscal deficit. These policies are strangling not just India but even countries like Greece which are unable to come out of depression.  Prof. Nayyar has highlighted the need for "to question and get away from a blind belief in any idea, for ideologies that turn into faith are dangerous."  Who can disagree?  But critiquing economics has always been countered with the question; what is the alternative?  I think here we need to turn to post-Keynesian economics ... and Modern Money Theory in particular.

Here's the link to Prof. Nayyar's article:

http://www.livemint.com/Opinion/DubsmSzgYLBp3Swu8TqPII/The-interest-rate-conundrum.html

RICARDIAN EQUIVALENCE: IT SOUNDS SO PROFOUND IT MUST BE TRUE

In a recent piece, Tarun Ramadorai of the Said School of Business, Oxford University, has evoked upon Ricardian Equivalence (RE) to base his argument for optimal debt management.

Does economic theory offer any guidance about the optimal management of government debt?

One of the fundamental concepts in thinking about government debt is Ricardian Equivalence. David Ricardo posited in the 1800s that since debt must eventually be repaid by governments, it is essentially equivalent to future taxation (and will be perceived as such by taxpayers). Essentially all work in economics on public debt management relies on this concept in one way or another.

If debt and future tax policy are two sides of the same coin, the obvious step is to think through the role of debt in the context of sensible tax policy. 

His article can be found at:

http://www.livemint.com/Opinion/RJDJPFZ7X65Kqa4DlbSZPK/Public-debt-management-back-to-school.html


Without examining what he says about this, it is interesting to see how economists evoke RE to build upon their arguments.  RE simply does not hold true in a world of fiat currency.  Ricardo's principle perhaps held true in a world of commodity currency but economists seem indifferent to this changed reality.

The fundamental flaw with RE have been examined in this piece by Auerback and should be read.

https://www.creditwritedowns.com/2010/07/why-ricardian-equivalence-is-nonsense.html

But what interests me is how economic jargon and hi-sounding terms like RE find their way into popular discourse and are swallowed by general readers.

Decentring Fiscal Deficit Target Numbers

You can find my article in the Economic & Political Weekly of 09-05-2015.  Or follow this link:

independent.academia.edu/SashiSivramkrishna

The article questions the obsession with fiscal deficit traget numbers like 3.1% of GDP or 3.6% or 3.9%. Does it really matter?  Should it be the goal of macroeconomic policy??

This is what MMT is weary about ....

Union Budget 2015: FM Arun Jaitley hints at more cuts in spending

Ahead of the Budget 2015-16 to be unveiled later this month, Jaitley hinted at a stable tax regime, saying that 'no unfair effort' will be made by states and the Centre to mop up revenues.

Having already crossed the fiscal deficit target in November, Finance Minister Arun Jaitley today hinted at more cuts in spending so as to contain it within limits for the current fiscal, saying he does not believe in living on borrowed money.

"We're trying to rationalise expenditure as far as the government is concerned because we do not want the government to live on borrowed money indefinitely," he told a gathering of industrialists and planners here via video conferencing.

"The whole concept of spending beyond your means and leaving the next generation in debt to repay what we are overspending today is never prudent fiscal policy," he said. The additionally hinted spending cuts would be over and above 10 percent that the government has already announced to meet the budgeted 4.1 percent fiscal deficit target which was crossed in November itself -- four months ahead of the end of the financial year on March 31. 

…..

Read more at: http://www.moneycontrol.com/news/economy/fm-arun-jaitley-hints-at-more-cutsspending_1294457.html?utm_source=ref_article

Here is some conventional macroeconomic rhetoric, extracted from an article in the Livemint of Friday, Nov.7, 2014.  MMTers can obviously see through the anxiety that is being raised here.


... “Given the sluggish growth of tax revenues in (the) first half of 2014/15, meeting the disinvestment target would be crucial to ensure that the fiscal deficit remains in line with the budgeted level,” said Aditi Nayar, an economist at ICRA, the Indian arm of rating agency Moody’s.

... Officials worry that a shortfall in proceeds from share sales and lower tax collections due to the weak economic recovery could force them to cut budgeted spending again.

... “The situation is not as bad as last year, but we may need expenditure cuts, maybe of Rs20,000-25,000 crore,” said the first source, adding there could be savings in capital spending as some ministries were unable to spend allocated funds.

Read more at: http://www.livemint.com/Politics/fUvEGpLThR9rVAtYvpDinN/Govt-may-fall-short-of-its-95-billion-privatisation-target.html?utm_source=copy

How mainstream macroeconomics thinking finds its way into popular discourse.

Two excerpts from articles that appeared in the Livemint of 20 October 2014 show how the need to achieve a fiscal deficit target is becoming an end in itself.  More than the fiscal deficit number per se the debate needs to focus on the real effects of subsidies in distorting resource allocation (if that is so) and the unproductive expenditure of the government that fails to ease supply side constraints and raise productivity.  There is surely space for an MMT perspective on these issues.

Is the centre finally cracking down on subsidies?

Decisions on diesel prices and cooking gas subsidy will help meet centre’s fiscal deficit target of 4.1% of GDP

Remya Nair

…

The move will also enable the government to meet its fiscal deficit target of 4.1% of gross domestic product (GDP), even after taking into account the expected shortfall in revenue collections.
…

A Union cabinet minister, who did not wish to be identified, pointed out that the government cannot afford to continue with the current subsidy regime. “There are no freebies. We cannot afford to bankrupt the state exchequer,” the minister said, signalling the central government’s intent to overhaul the subsidy regime.
…

Read more at: http://www.livemint.com/Politics/h9P8fnfqgoehC9iRbAHzuL/Is-the-centre-finally-cracking-down-on-subsidies.html?utm_source=copy

What it takes to make in India

The first and most important condition for manufacturing success in India is to have a low inflation regime

Narayan Ramachandran 
…

The first task in ensuring a low inflation environment is to eliminate the primary deficit. This deficit is the difference between the total revenue and total expenditure of the government with debt payments netted out of the calculation. India must begin to deliver upon both a primary and fiscal deficit target as measures of fiscal consolidation in its annual budget. The elimination of the primary deficit and a reduction in the fiscal deficit (to say 2.5% of GDP) will ensure that we live within our means each year, do not increase the stock of debt and crowd out less capital from the productive economy.

…

Read more at: http://www.livemint.com/Opinion/ZNh0XaD02lIvreFus5PHlL/What-it-takes-to-make-in-India.html?utm_source=copy

IMF, India's fiscal deficits and the need to question the obvious

I just read a news report from Business Today (19-Sept-2014) that speaks of the IMF asking the RBI to raise interest rates.  The infatuation over fiscal deficits as being the most serious problem that Indian macroeconomic policy needs to address runs throughout the article.  But there were also some contradictions that I came across, reading between the lines.  Here are some statements from the article that I want to highlight:

"...IMF said the government needed to take more steps to reduce stubbornly high inflation and the large fiscal deficit."

"The IMF said removing supply bottlenecks would lead to more sustainable growth. It also called for increasing public spending on infrastructure to ease supply bottlenecks and support economic development."

"While lauding the new government's emphasis on fiscal consolidation, it said "the quality and durability of the consolidation remain a cause of concern.""

"The government proposes to bring down the fiscal deficit to 4.1 per cent of gross domestic product (GDP) in current year from 4.5 per cent last fiscal ... fiscal deficit has to be brought down to three per cent of the GDP by 2016-17."

On the one hand the IMF wants to cut the fiscal deficit while at the same time they want an increase in public spending on infrastructure.  When they say the quality of the deficit is important, what do they mean?  What are the items that the government should cut spending on?

Also, like MMT warns us, why this concern about fiscal deficit numbers like 4.1% and 3% of GDP?  Will achieving these numbers solve India's macroeconomic problems?

It's time for MMTers to question what is now being seen as obvious in India.



Follow this link to read the article in Business Today:

http://businesstoday.intoday.in/story/rbi-should-raise-policy-rates-to-cut-inflation-imf-g20-cairn/1/210504.html