The U.S. government is in the midst of spending more than \(1 billion on seven buildings containing more than 100,000 square feet of space to be used for the study of infectious diseases. Prior to the government's decision to construct these buildings, a few universities had been planning to build essentially the same facilities using privately obtained funds. After construction on the government buildings began, however, the universities dropped their plans. Evaluate whether the government's \)1 billion expenditure is actually likely to push U.S. real GDP above the level it would have reached in the absence of the government's construction spree.

Short Answer

Expert verified

To conclude, the government's $1 billion building spending does not necessarily raise real GDP over the level it would have achieved if the government had not gone on a construction binge.

Step by step solution

01

Introduction 

The given is the government's decision to develop these structures, a few colleges had planned to construct roughly the same facilities with privately obtained cash.

The objective is to determine whether the government is likely to increase the real GDP

02

Explanation

No, the government's one-billion-dollar expenditure has no effect on real GDP. An increase in government spending will be offset by a drop in private spending. This is due to the fact that universities abandoned their construction plans when government construction began.

As a result, aggregate demand and actual GDP stay the same.

03

Explanation 

As a result of the government's involvement in the activity in order to compete with the private sector, fiscal policy is impacted by direct expenditure.

It's worth noting that the government spending multiplier will be 0 if all direct expenditures are offset.

04

Explanation 

To sum up, the government's $1 billion building spending does not necessarily raise real GDP over the level it would have achieved if the government had not gone on a construction binge.

Unlock Step-by-Step Solutions & Ace Your Exams!

  • Full Textbook Solutions

    Get detailed explanations and key concepts

  • Unlimited Al creation

    Al flashcards, explanations, exams and more...

  • Ads-free access

    To over 500 millions flashcards

  • Money-back guarantee

    We refund you if you fail your exam.

Over 30 million students worldwide already upgrade their learning with Vaia!

One App. One Place for Learning.

All the tools & learning materials you need for study success - in one app.

Get started for free

Most popular questions from this chapter

1. Other things being equal, what features of a nation's economy do you think would tend to contribute to a higher value for its stabilization coefficient? [Hint: Consider the chapter's discussion of the reasons fiscal policy actions tend to have larger effects on real GDP.)

It is late 2019 , and the U.S. economy is showing signs of slipping into a potentially deep recession. Government policymakers are searching for income-tax-policy changes that will bring about a significant and lasting boost to real consumption spending. According to the logic of the permanent income hypothesis, should the proposed income-tax-policy changes involve tax increases or tax reductions, and should the policy changes be short-lived or long-lasting?

Determine whether each of the following is an example of a situation in which a direct expenditure offset to fiscal policy occurs.

a. In an effort to help rejuvenate the nation's railroad system, a new government agency buys unused track, locomotives, and passenger and freight cars, many of which private companies would otherwise have purchased and put into regular use.

b. The government increases its expenditures without raising taxes. To cover the resulting budget deficit, it borrows more funds from the private sector, thereby pushing up the market interest rate and discouraging private planned investment spending.

c. The government finances the construction of a classical music museum that otherwise would never have received private funding.

Suppose that Congress and the president decide that the nation's economic performance is weakening and that the government should "do something" about the situation. They make no tax changes but do enact new laws increasing government spending on a variety of programs.

a. Prior to the congressional and presidential action, careful studies by government economists indicated that the Keynesian multiplier effect of a rise in government expenditures on equilibrium real GDP per year is equal to 3. In the 12 months since the increase in government spending, however, it has become clear that the actual ultimate effect on real GDP will be less than half of that amount. What factors might account for this?

b. Another year and a half elapses following passage of the government spending boost. The government has undertaken no additional policy actions, nor have there been any other events of significance. Nevertheless, by the end of the second year, real GDP has returned to its original level, and the price level has increased sharply, Provide a possible explanation for this outcome.

Recall that the Keynesian spending multiplier equals 1 /(1-MPC). Suppose that in panel (b) of Figure 13-1, the government knows that the MPC is equal to 0.75 and that the amount of the horizontal distance that the AD curve had to be shifted directly leftward from point E1 was equal to $1.0 trillion. What is the reduction in real government spending required to have generated this shift?

See all solutions

What do you think about this solution?

We value your feedback to improve our textbook solutions.

Study anywhere. Anytime. Across all devices.

Sign-up for free