From such an action (increase in government spending by 5 billion and a Marginal Propensity to Consume of 90%), the GDP would increase (in the scope of simplicity) by 4.5 billion. This is because government expenditures is counted in GDP, and in this case 90% of it is consumed by the populace, so 5B * .9 = 45B.
But, being that the GDP is Consumption + Gross Investment + Govt. Spending +(-) Imports/exports, one could suggest that the GDP would increase by just 5B because that which is not consumed is saved (and thus invested).
spending too much money
BP Shipping Master Salary £62,000 - 67,000, tax free is spending more than 183 days out of UK per annum. There are also options for company shares etc which can increase the total package to £75,000+.
actuly i think i do no i think its just going into the the wallets of the people who think there iportant No I don't think its going to these people. All this money is going to the government. The government is spending it on useless things. The government needs to stop taxing us so much so we can get back on our feet!!
there are many ways the financial crisis spread.: 1) the $700 billion dollar bail out. 2) too many mega million lottos. 3) lastly, government keeps spending too much on wars, and public works.
The congress backs credit card relief by changing it so that a person can limit the cap on their credit card. This allows for more or less spending and less fees for over spending.
The government spending multiplier is different form the tax multiplier from the top of my head is because the government spending total effect ripples off. That is if government spending increase then the total income increases. When total income increase, consumption increases, when consumption increases total income increases further (as consumption is a factor of total income), and this pattern is carried forward. This is the the multiplier effect, such that an increase in government spending's final impact on income is much bigger than its initial increase. The tax multiplier on the other hand, has a much smaller effect than government spending. This is because tax is only a portion of the consumer income. That is, if there is a tax cut, consumers only save a fractional amount (specifically 1-MPC) of a tax cut. As a result of the smaller boost in spending form ma tax cut, the ripples/multiplier effect of a tax cut is much less than an increase in government spending.
Celsius increases by 15 for a 27 degree increase in Fahrenheit.
The increase in US defense spending in 1952 was to fund the American-Korean War or what Americans call the Korean War.
A gas typically increases the entropy much more than the increase in moles.
In 2006, US health care spending was $7,026. This expenditure was an increase of 6.7 percent from the prior year for a price tag of $2.1 trillion dollars.
The amount of money the government is spending on welfare for people like you.
There are two basic ways: 1. Increase the government's spending. It is a good way to grow the economy . The money the government spends goes into the economy as wages, profit, and revenue. most government spending adds some money to the economy. The drawbacks to this is that it is very hard to control. Politicians have a knack for spending gobs of money carelessly. If it is not reigned in quickly, it can cause massive inflation, large government debt, and ultimately lead to a need to increase taxes, which brings us to the second way... 2. Cut taxes. It gives money back to consumers and businesses,Also it has one major drawback: unlike outright governemnt spending, it is NOT a quick fix. This is because some of the money will be saved or invested, so it is not spent (and thus given to workers as wages and businesses as revenue) as quickly as government spending. But this reason is also why it is so much more effective than government spending. The market decides where to spend the money from cut taxes.
There are many different types of scenarios regarding this. Allot depends on how much of an increase in spending, along with how much of a decrease in tax rates. Generally speaking, lowing taxes helps individuals and companies to retain more of their income. Clearly this income saved is not placed under a mattress. Extra income is often spent by increasing production and thus even at lower tax rates the increase in taxable income rises. This benefits all including government revenues. The problem comes if spending outstrips the extra tax income from the private sector. Then interest rates on government borrowing becomes higher. Adding to a high deficit makes for a certain degree of lost confidence in the way a government handles its finances. On the individual side, a decrease in taxes gives the consumer more income to spend or save. If spending is increased then sales taxes gain income. The spending also keeps companies in business and they are able to hire more people. If the consumer decides to save their extra income, it gives banks more funds to lend to other consumers and to businesses.
To many government-run programs; to much spending!
10 times
Some say that the people will have more money. The government will have no money to build more roads, more buildings, and more schools. The problem is finding a good middle between too much tax and not enough tax.
Producers only increase quantity supplied in response to DEMAND increases. They only want to make as much as someone will buy.