Suchergebnisse

In a global economy, a country's international economic ties affect both how desirable pre-electoral fiscal manipulation is to the government, and how costly it is to the government to engage in such manipulation. Governments are more likely to engage in pre-electoral fiscal manipulation when the country's exchange rate is flexible and the domestic economy is highly open to international trade, and when the exchange rate is fixed and the domestic economy is relatively closed to international trade. This argument is tested empirically through a quantitative analysis of changes in government debt in twenty OECD countries from 1974 to 2008. Adapted from the source document.

In a global economy, a country's international economic ties affect both how desirable pre-electoral fiscal manipulation is to the government, and how costly it is to the government to engage in such manipulation. Governments are more likely to engage in pre-electoral fiscal manipulation when the country's exchange rate is flexible and the domestic economy is highly open to international trade, and when the exchange rate is fixed and the domestic economy is relatively closed to international trade. This argument is tested empirically through a quantitative analysis of changes in government debt in twenty OECD countries from 1974 to 2008.

Central bank independence has been seen as an effective way to achieve low inflation. However, by increasing the likelihood that the government will adopt a fixed exchange rate rather than maintain domestic control over monetary policy, an independent central bank may be a victim of its own success. Because monetary policy set by an independent central bank may result in what the government considers to be adverse distributive consequences, governments may look for ways to mitigate the central bank's control over monetary policy, turning to a fixed exchange rate as one possible solution. The author examines the implications of this argument through an analysis of the British, German, and French governments' preferences on joining the European Monetary System in 1978.

The effects of economies of scale in government, trade openness, preference heterogeneity, and regime type are used to explain why the average size of states within the international system nearly doubled between 1816 and 1876 and then contracted over the 20th century. No one variable appears to explain the trend fully. Results suggest that the rise in territorial size during the 19th century is the product of a growing number of federal democracies, which tend to be large, and that the decline in average size during the 20th century is the result of a growing number of unitary democracies, which tend to be small. Increasing economies of scale in the 19th century may have led to the rise of large federal democracies, whereas economic liberalism may have allowed unitary democracies to prosper in the 20th century.