Menu Expand

Cite JOURNAL ARTICLE

Style

Michaelis, J. Staatsverschuldung als Quelle der Nicht-Neutralität. . Ein Beitrag zum Ricardianischen Äquivalenztheorem. Credit and Capital Markets – Kredit und Kapital, 22(4), 453-469. https://doi.org/10.3790/ccm.22.4.453
Michaelis, Jochen "Staatsverschuldung als Quelle der Nicht-Neutralität. Ein Beitrag zum Ricardianischen Äquivalenztheorem. " Credit and Capital Markets – Kredit und Kapital 22.4, 1989, 453-469. https://doi.org/10.3790/ccm.22.4.453
Michaelis, Jochen (1989): Staatsverschuldung als Quelle der Nicht-Neutralität, in: Credit and Capital Markets – Kredit und Kapital, vol. 22, iss. 4, 453-469, [online] https://doi.org/10.3790/ccm.22.4.453

Format

Staatsverschuldung als Quelle der Nicht-Neutralität

Ein Beitrag zum Ricardianischen Äquivalenztheorem

Michaelis, Jochen

Credit and Capital Markets – Kredit und Kapital, Vol. 22 (1989), Iss. 4 : pp. 453–469

Additional Information

Article Details

Author Details

Jochen Michaelis, Hamburg

References

  1. Abel, Andrew B. (1987): Operative Gift and Bequest Motives, in: American Economic Review, Vol. 77, S.1037 – 1047.  Google Scholar
  2. Barro, Robert J. (1974): Are Government Bonds Net Wealth?, in: Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 82, S.1095 – 1117.  Google Scholar
  3. Barro, Robert J. (1976): Reply to Feldstein and Buchanan, in: Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 84, S. 343 – 349.  Google Scholar
  4. Buchanan, James M. (1958): Public Principles of Public Debt, _Homewood.  Google Scholar
  5. Buchanan, James M. (1976): Barro on the Ricardian Equivalence Theorem, in: Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 84, S. 337 – 341.  Google Scholar
  6. Buiter, Willem H. (1979): Government Finance in an Overlapping Generations Model with Gifts and Bequests, in: von Furstenberg, G. M. (Hrsg.), Social Security versus Private Saving, Cambridge (Mass.), S. 395 – 429.  Google Scholar
  7. Buiter, Willem H. (1980): “Crowding Out” of Private Capital Formation by Government Borrowing in the Presence of Intergenerational Gifts and Bequests, in: Greek Economic Review, Vol. 2, S.111 – 142.  Google Scholar
  8. Buiter, Willem H.; Carmichael, Jeffrey (1984): Government Debt: Comment, in: American . Economic Review, Vol. 74, S. 762 – 765.  Google Scholar
  9. Buiter, Willem H.; Tobin, James (1979): Debt Neutrality: A Brief Review of Doctrine and Evidence, in: von Furstenberg, G.M. (Hrsg.), Social Security versus Private Saving, Cambridge (Mass.), S. 39 – 63.  Google Scholar
  10. Burbidge, John B. (1983): Government Debt in an Overlapping-Generations Model with Bequests and Gifts, in: American Economic Review, Vol. 73, S. 222 – 227.  Google Scholar
  11. Burbidge, John B. (1984): Government Debt: Reply, in: American Economic Review, Vol. 74, S. 766 – 767. – Carlberg, Michael (1988): Public Debt, Taxation and Government Expenditures in a Growing Economy, Berlin.  Google Scholar
  12. Carmichael, Jeffrey (1979): The Role of Government Financial Policy in Economic Growth, unpublished dissertation, Princeton University.  Google Scholar
  13. Carmichael, Jeffrey (1982): On Barro’s Theorem of Debt Neutrality: The Irrelevance of Net Wealth, in: American Economic Review, Vol. 72, S. 202-213.  Google Scholar
  14. Diamond, Peter A. (1965): National Debt in a Neoclassical Growth Model, in: American Economic Review, Vol. 55, S. 1126 – 1150.  Google Scholar
  15. Drazen, Allan (1978): Government Debt, Human Capital, and Bequests in a Life-Cycle Model, in: Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 86, S. 505 – 516.  Google Scholar
  16. Feldstein, Martin (1976): Perceived Wealth in Bonds and Social Security: A Comment, in: Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 84, S. 331 – 336. – von Furstenberg, George M. (Hrsg.), (1979): Social Security versus Private Saving, Cambridge (Mass.). – von Furstenberg, George M. (Hrsg.), (1980): The  Google Scholar
  17. Government and Capital Formation, Cambridge (Mass.).  Google Scholar
  18. Grassl, Werner (1984): Die These der Staatsschuldneutralität, Berlin.  Google Scholar
  19. Ihori, Toshihiro (1978): The Golden Rule and the Role of Government in a Life Cycle Growth Model, in: American Economic Review, Vol. 68, S. 389 – 396.  Google Scholar
  20. Kimball, Miles S. (1987): Making Sence of Two-Sided Altruism, in: Journal of Monetary Economics, Vol. 20, S. 301 – 326.  Google Scholar
  21. Kitterer, Wolfgang (1986): Sind Steuern und Staatsverschuldung äquivalente Instrumente zur Finanzierung der Staatsausgaben?, in: Kredit und Kapital, Vol.19, S. 271 – 291.  Google Scholar
  22. Kitterer, Wolfgang (1988): Staatsverschuldung und intertemporale Allokation, in: Jahrbücher für Nationalökonomie und Statistik, Vol. 204, S. 346 – 363. – Michaelis, Jochen (1989): Optimale Finanzpolitik im Modell überlappender Generationen, Frankfurt a. M.  Google Scholar
  23. Ricardo, David (1821): Funding Systems, in: Sraffa, P. (Hrsg.), The Works and Correspondence of David Ricardo, Bd. IV, Cambridge 1951.  Google Scholar
  24. Samuelson, Paul A. (1958): An Exact Consumption-Loan Model of Interest with or without the Social Contrivance of Money, in: The Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 66, S. 467 -482.  Google Scholar
  25. Stein, Jerome L. (1969): A Minimal Role of Government in Achieving Optimal Growth, in: Economica, Vol. 34, S.139 – 150.  Google Scholar
  26. Tobin, James (1980): Asset Accumulation and Economic Activity, Oxford.  Google Scholar
  27. Weil, Philippe (1987): Love Thy Children -Reflections on the Barro Debt Neutrality Theorem, in: Journal of Monetary Economics, Vol.19, S. 377 – 391.  Google Scholar

Abstract

Government Debt as a Reason for Lacking Neutrality

A Contribution to the Ricardian Equivalence Theorem

While Barro did in fact prove the validity of the Ricardian equivalence theorem for making positive bequests, he was, however, in no position to define under what circumstances a motive for bequests actually exists. Since private individuals “respond” to increased government debt by increasing the legacies they hand down, it is evident that the very level and, consequently, actual bequests depend on the level of government borrowing. If the level of government debt falls short of a certain limit, it turns out that – although there is a motive for handing down legacies – actual bequests are not made. This means that government is in a position to determine through the level of its borrowings whether a motive for bequests actually materializes. In other words, the Ricardian equivalence theorem is a function of the level of government borrowing. If government adopts a rate of borrowing that reduces the handing down of legacies to about nil, the result is an undercapitalized steady state. In order to arrive at the golden rule of capital accumulation, there is a need for forced capital formation. It is impossible to counteract the lowering of the level of government borrowing by adequately reducing bequests because of the fact that bequests are actually not made in spite of an existing motive therefore, which means that this policy generates the desired results. Since bequests are consequently not made in the pareto-optimal steady state, optimum fiscal policies are independent of an existing motive for making bequests. It is identical with the one contained in the model precluding the motive for making bequests