Public Choice

, Volume 59, Issue 3, pp 287–290

Expenditures and receipts in state and local government finances: Reply

  • Michael L. Marlow
  • Neela Manage
Article

Conclusion

It is worth repeating that causality testing is a very complex task. The diversity of views on interpreting the definition of causality and on the methods for testing causality highlight this issue. In our study, we cite an excellent article which provides a detailed critique of various problems associated with causality tests (see Conway, et al., 1984). It would appear that Chowdhury's comment draws very strong conclusions and fails to consider some of the complex theoretical issues regarding causality tests as well as important data problems pertaining to state and local governments. Moreover, we find it somewhat curious that, given the strong similarities in our two studies, Chowdhury prefers to dwell on the mechanics of an alternative technique rather than concentrate on the fact that his alternative technique yields supporting results to our 1987 paper on the tax-spend hypothesis.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Blackley, P.R. (1986). Causality between revenues and expenditures and the size of the federal budget. Public Finance Quarterly 14: 139–156.Google Scholar
  2. Chowdhury, A.R. (1988). Expenditures and receipts in state and local government finances: Comment. Public Choice 59: 277–285.Google Scholar
  3. Conway, R.K., Swamy, P.A.V.B., Yanagida, J.F., and Muehln, P. von zur. (1984). The impossibility of causality testing. Agricultural Economics Research 36 (Summer): 1–19.Google Scholar
  4. Guilkey, D.K., and Salemi, M.K. (1982). Small sample properties of three tests for Granger-causal ordering a bivariate stochastic process. Review of Economics and Statistics 64: 668–680.Google Scholar
  5. Manage, N., and Marlow, M.L. (1986). The causal relation between federal expenditures and receipts. Southern Economic Journal 52 (January): 617–629.Google Scholar
  6. Marlow, M.L., and Manage, N. (1987). Expenditures and receipts: Testing for causality in state and local government finances. Public Choice 53: 243–255.Google Scholar
  7. Mehra, Y. (1977). Money wages, prices, and causality. Journal of Political Economy 85: 1227–1244.Google Scholar
  8. Ram, R. (1988). Additional evidence on causality between government revenue and government expenditure. Southern Economic Journal 54: 763–769.Google Scholar
  9. Williams, D., Goodhart, C.A.E., and Gowland, D.H. (1976). Money, income and causality. American Economic Review 66: 417–423.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1988

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michael L. Marlow
    • 1
  • Neela Manage
    • 2
  1. 1.U.S. Department of TreasuryWashington
  2. 2.Department of EconomicsFlorida Atlantic UniversityBoca Raton

Personalised recommendations