Skip to main content
Log in

Productivity in the United States and its relationship to government activity: An analysis of 57 years, 1929–1986

  • Published:
Public Choice Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Under the classical supply-side paradigm of productivity grouth, raising government economic above rudimentary levels integrates markets and provides useful public goods which enhance growth. Beyond some point however, increasing government activity discourages growth through tax disincentives and by rewarding dependence on government expenditures. Defining government economic activity to be government expenditures as a percentage of GNP, this study looks first at data for the period 1889–1986 and shows that the U.S. economy has experienced what is predicted by the supply-side paradigm. In addition, the study presents an econometric analysis of government's effects on productivity for the period 1929–1986 using a standard neoclassical growth model. This analysis validates the classical supply-side paradigm and shows that maximum productivity growth occurs when government expenditures represent about 20% of GNP, far less than the 35% which existed in 1986.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Barro, R.J. (1977). Unanticipated money growth and unemployment in the United States. American Economic Review 67(1): 101–115.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barro, R.J. (1981). Output effects of government purchases. Journal of Political Economy 89(6): 1086–1121.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barth, J.R., Keleher, R.E. and Russek, F.S. (1986). The scale of government and economic activity. Unpublished manuscript.

  • Branson, W.H. (1979). Macroeconomic theory and policy, 2nd edition. New York: Harper and Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, J.Y. and Mankiw, N.G. (1987). Permanent and transitory components in macroeconomic fluctuation. American Economic Review 77(2): 111–117.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cochran, T.C. (1977). 200 Years of American business. A New York: Delta Book.

    Google Scholar 

  • Council of Economic Advisors. (1987). Economc report of the president. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diamond, P.A. (1965). National debt in a neoclassical model. American Economic Review 55 (December): 1126–1150.

    Google Scholar 

  • Evans, M.K. (1969). Macroeconomic activity, theory, forecasting, and control. New York: Harper and Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, M. (1962). Capitalism and freedom. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Froyen, R.T. (1983). Macroeconomics, theories and policies. New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Granger, C.W.J. and Newbold, P. (1977). Forecasting economic time series. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grossman, P.J. (1987). The optimal size of government. Public Choice (53): 131–147.

  • Grossman, P.J. (1988). Government and economic growth: A non-linear relationship. Public Choice (56): 193–200.

  • Kendrick, J. (1961). Productivity trends in the United States. Princeton: The Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kormendi, R.C. (1983). Government debt, government spending, and private sector behavior. American Economic Review 73 (December): 994–1010.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kotlikoff, L.J. (1984). Taxation and savings: A neoclassical perspective. Journal of Economic Literature 22 (December): 1576–1629.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lucas, R.E. (1973). Some international evidence on output-inflation tradeoffs. American Economic Review 63 (June): 326–334.

    Google Scholar 

  • Musgrave, R.A. (1969). Fiscal systems. New Haven and London: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peden, E.A. (1987). The effects government expenditures on economic output and growth in the United States: The post World War II experience (1948–1984). Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, George Washington University, Washington DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peden, E.A. and Bradley, M.D. (1989). Government size, productivity, and economic growth: The post-war experience. Public Choice 61: 229–245.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pindyck, R.S. and Rubinfeld, D.L. (1981). Econometric models and economic forecasts. 2nd edition. New York: McGraw Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Romer, C.D. (1986). Is the stabilization of the postwar economy a figment of the data? American Economic Review 76 (3): 314–334.

    Google Scholar 

  • Solow, R.M. (1957). Technical change and the aggregate production function. Review of Economics and Statistics 39 (August): 312–320.

    Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Department of Commerce. (1986). Survey of current business. Washington, DC: Government U.S. Printing Office.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

I wish to thank Tom Hall and Michael D. Bradley for their comments on this paper. Their willingness to dig into the material and subsequent suggestions were very helpful in producing this document. Thanks also, to my wife, Carmen García, who helped me prepare the manuscript.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Peden, E.A. Productivity in the United States and its relationship to government activity: An analysis of 57 years, 1929–1986. Public Choice 69, 153–173 (1991). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00123845

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00123845

Keywords

Navigation