Main menu:

History of RPE Thought

Posts by Tag

RSS New from the CCPA

  • Kate McInturff Fellowship in Gender Justice September 19, 2018
    The CCPA is pleased to announce the creation of the Kate McInturff Fellowship in Gender Justice.This Fellowship is created to honour the legacy of senior researcher Kate McInturff who passed away in July 2018. Kate was a feminist trailblazer in public policy and gender-based research and achieved national acclaim for researching, writing, and producing CCPA’s […]
    Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives
  • The buck-a-beer challenge Ontario deserves September 6, 2018
    Ricardo Tranjan proposes an alternate plan to Doug Ford's buck-a-beer challenge in the Toronto Star.
    Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives
  • Growing number of professionals face job insecurity, study finds September 6, 2018
    The Toronto Star's Sara Mojtehedzadeh discusses the findings of the CCPA Ontario's report, No Safe Harbour and gathers firsthand accounts from precariously employed professionals who live and work in Ontario.
    Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives
  • Our Schools/Our Selves: The view from West Virginia September 4, 2018
    Our latests publication, Lesson Here, digs in to the West Viriginia teachers' strike.  Read the firsthand accounts of the work stoppage here.
    Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives
  • What do the two largest mining disasters in Canada's and Brazil's history have in common? August 20, 2018
    Tailings dam spills at Mount Polley and Mariana: Chronicles of disasters foretold  explores the many parallels between the tailings dam spills at the Mount Polley mine in British Columbia, Canada, and the Samarco mine in Mariana, Minas Gerais, Brazil. The Mount Polley disaster took place in August 2014, when the dam holding toxic waste from […]
    Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives
Progressive Bloggers

Meta

Recent Blog Posts

Posts by Author

Recent Blog Comments

The Progressive Economics Forum

Whither the automatic stabilizers?

Given the storm clouds on the horizon, and the prospect of a slowdown/recession, one of the more interesting aspects of fiscal policy has to do with automatic stabilizers. As the economy turns, revenues will fall and expenditures on income support will naturally increase, driving the budget towards deficit and thereby propping up demand just as it is needed. The question is not whether the government should run a deficit per se, but given that the budget will naturally turn to deficit, would the government cut spending (thereby making the problem worse) for the sake of maintaining a balanced budget.

But it is also worth noting that the overall strength of these automatic stabilizers has been greatly weakened since the last time we had a recession in 1990-91. In the mid-1990s, the renamed Employment Insurance program introduced measures that severely reduced the eligibility for benefits. In part this was changes for seasonal workers, in part changes in hours required to qualify. Added to the growth of self-employment, where there is no eligibility for EI, we have a situation where only about 35% of the unemployed are able to access EI, down from about 80% before the changes.

Provincially, similar dynamics have taken place with regard to social assistance programs. Here in BC, for example, the decline the welfare rolls is roughly split between people leaving for employment, and policy changes that prevent people in need from accessing benefits (see this CCPA report for details). These include deliberate diversion tactics on the front lines, as well as three-week waits for benefits, a “two-year independence test” and time limits. I’m not expert on what has happened in other provinces, but I suspect that these types of changes are pretty common now in provincial welfare systems.

The upshot of this is that we are less prepared for a recession that we were the last time around. There are some important exceptions, to be sure, in seniors’ benefits (which are generally good and tied to inflation) and children’s benefits (which could be better but are also superior to what existed at the time of the last recession). But if things start to turn down in a big way, we should quickly revisit the rules on federal EI and provincial social assistance as part of our “stimulus package”.

Enjoy and share:

Comments

Comment from Dmitriy Kinaev
Time: May 8, 2008, 5:14 am

Automatic stabelizers are part of indescretionary fiscal policy. Indeed they are just that – automatic. Any government intervention will render them absolutely useless. In a recessionary situation (consecutive fall in GDP), as GDP consists of C+I+G+(X-M) C+I may fall, but G will rise, as the government increases transfer payments.

As the budget deficit grows, people are receiving more money, which helps to ameliorate the decline in real GDP. If carefully ochestrated, the budget deficit will be only temporary, as the GDP increases and the employment surges back to NAIRU.

Cutting spending in a recessionary situation, would greatly exacerbate the economic problem. It is a general rule that in a downturn, expansionary fiscal policy would “prime the economic pump”, and is of vital importance to revive the economy.

Kinaev, D.

Write a comment





Related articles