财政悬崖的教训

美国剑桥—我从米尔顿·弗里德曼那里学到了很多东西,其中之一是,政府的真正成本是其支出,而不是其税收。换句话说,支出要么用当前税收融资,要么借钱融资,而借来的钱无非是未来的税收,它对经济表现的影响和当前税收无甚区别。

我们可以把这一原理用于美国不可持续的财政赤字。众所周知,消除这一赤字要么通过减支,要么通过增税。

传统观点认为合理、平衡的方法将兼顾两者。但是,正如弗里德曼所指出的,这两个方法是南辕北辙的。减支意味着政府变小。增税意味着政府变大。因此,偏好小政府者(比如某些共和党)希望完全通过减支来消除赤字;而偏好大政府者(比如总统奥巴马和大部分民主党)希望完全通过增税来消除赤字。

To continue reading, please log in or enter your email address.

To access our archive, please log in or register now and read two articles from our archive every month for free. For unlimited access to our archive, as well as to the unrivaled analysis of PS On Point, subscribe now.

required

By proceeding, you agree to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, which describes the personal data we collect and how we use it.

Log in

http://prosyn.org/xsvoZoo/zh;

Cookies and Privacy

We use cookies to improve your experience on our website. To find out more, read our updated cookie policy and privacy policy.