By identity, current account = financial account. But this doesn't mean that causality runs from budget deficit or current account.
|Alberto Alesina||Harvard||Uncertain||2||Bio/Vote History|
|Joseph Altonji||Yale||Uncertain||3||Bio/Vote History|
|Alan Auerbach||Berkeley||Agree||5||Bio/Vote History|
|David Autor||MIT||Uncertain||5||Bio/Vote History|
|Katherine Baicker||Harvard||Did Not Answer||Bio/Vote History|
|Abhijit Banerjee||MIT||Agree||5||Bio/Vote History|
|Marianne Bertrand||Chicago||Uncertain||1||Bio/Vote History|
|Markus Brunnermeier||Princeton||Agree||8||Bio/Vote History|
|Raj Chetty||Stanford||Did Not Answer||Bio/Vote History|
|Judith Chevalier||Yale||Did Not Answer||Bio/Vote History|
|David Cutler||Harvard||Agree||7||Bio/Vote History|
|Angus Deaton||Princeton||Agree||7||Bio/Vote History|
|Darrell Duffie||Stanford||No Opinion||Bio/Vote History|
|Aaron Edlin||Berkeley||No Opinion||Bio/Vote History|
This is the "twin deficits hypothesis," which may or may not hold, depending on what happens to other categories of spending in response.
|Liran Einav||Stanford||No Opinion||Bio/Vote History|
|Ray Fair||Yale||Agree||5||Bio/Vote History|
|Amy Finkelstein||MIT||Uncertain||3||Bio/Vote History|
|Pinelopi Goldberg||Yale||Did Not Answer||Bio/Vote History|
|Austan Goolsbee||Chicago||Uncertain||1||Bio/Vote History|
it depends on how private saving/investment responds. i'm unaware of decisive empirical evidence on this (but perhaps it exists)
Depends on the fiscal action--more likely with a cut in government purchases
It depends on how it is done. Taxes up? Government expenditure down? It is also possible to have a large trade deficit with fiscal balance.
|Bengt Holmström||MIT||Did Not Answer||Bio/Vote History|
|Caroline Hoxby||Stanford||Did Not Answer||Bio/Vote History|
|Hilary Hoynes||Berkeley||Uncertain||9||Bio/Vote History|
If a dynamically balanced budget is expected, then timing of fiscal deficits will not affect anything.
|Steven Kaplan||Chicago||No Opinion||Bio/Vote History|
|Anil Kashyap||Chicago||Agree||7||Bio/Vote History|
It depends on how the budget deficit is reduced, of course.
-see background information here
|Jonathan Levin||Stanford||Did Not Answer||Bio/Vote History|
Depends on how the fiscal deficit reduction is achieved. If through higher consumer/income taxes, then trade deficit would probably decline.
Standard open economy macro for long run/full employment. Subject to reservations on timing, size, and equilibrium nominal interest rate.
|Emmanuel Saez||Berkeley||Agree||4||Bio/Vote History|
There are so many variables at work here, including how the deficit is reduced, to be sure of the effect.
|José Scheinkman||Princeton||Did Not Answer||Bio/Vote History|
All else equal...
|Carl Shapiro||Berkeley||Did Not Answer||Bio/Vote History|
|Robert Shimer||Chicago||Agree||7||Bio/Vote History|
|Richard Thaler||Chicago||Did Not Answer||Bio/Vote History|
|Christopher Udry||Yale||Did Not Answer||Bio/Vote History|
This panel explores the extent to which economists agree or disagree on major public policy issues. To assess such beliefs we assembled this panel of expert economists. Statistics teaches that a sample of (say) 40 opinions will be adequate to reflect a broader population if the sample is representative of that population.
To that end, our panel was chosen to include distinguished experts with a keen interest in public policy from the major areas of economics, to be geographically diverse, and to include Democrats, Republicans and Independents as well as older and younger scholars. The panel members are all senior faculty at the most elite research universities in the United States. The panel includes Nobel Laureates, John Bates Clark Medalists, fellows of the Econometric society, past Presidents of both the American Economics Association and American Finance Association, past Democratic and Republican members of the President's Council of Economics, and past and current editors of the leading journals in the profession. This selection process has the advantage of not only providing a set of panelists whose names will be familiar to other economists and the media, but also delivers a group with impeccable qualifications to speak on public policy matters.
Finally, it is important to explain one aspect of our voting process. In some instances a panelist may neither agree nor disagree with a statement, and there can be two very different reasons for this. One case occurs when an economist is an expert on a topic and yet sees the evidence on the exact claim at hand as ambiguous. In such cases our panelists vote "uncertain". A second case relates to statements on topics so far removed from the economist's expertise that he or she feels unqualified to vote. In this case, our panelists vote "no opinion".
The Economic Experts Panel questions are emailed individually to the members of the panel, and each responds electronically at his or her convenience. Panelists may consult whatever resources they like before answering.
Members of the public are free to suggest questions (see link below), and the panelists suggest many themselves. Members of the IGM faculty are responsible for deciding the final version of each week’s question. We usually send a draft of the question to the panel in advance, and invite them to point out problems with the wording if they see any. In response, we typically receive a handful of suggested clarifications from individual experts. This process helps us to spot inconsistencies, and to reduce vagueness or problems of interpretation.
The panel data are copyrighted by the Initiative on Global Markets and are being analyzed for an article to appear in a leading peer-reviewed journal.