Conclusion
In this comment we have demonstrated that Cebula’s estimation results depend upon the choice of the sample period and the chosen interest rate. It is also argued that estimation results with non-stationary variables are unreliable. We have chosen an alternative model specification and have shown that the results change remarkably.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Cebula, Richard J., “Federal Government Budget Deficits and Interest Rates: An Empirical Analysis for the United States, 1955–1984”.Public Finance, Vol. 43, 1988, pp. 337–348.
—,Kimberly Bates, Louise Marks, Allison Roth, “Financial-Market Effects of Federal Government Budget Deficits”.Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv, Vol. 124, 1988, pp. 729–734.
Dewald, William G., Jerry G. Thursby, Richard G. Anderson, “Replication in Empirical Economics: The Journal of Money, Credit and Banking Project”.The American Economic Review, Vol. 76, 1986, pp. 587–603.
Evans, Paul, “Do Large Deficits Produce High Interest Rates?”.The American Economic Review, Vol. 75, 1985, pp. 68–87.
—, “Interest Rates and Expected Deficits in the United States”.Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 95, 1987, pp. 34–55.
Granger, Clive W.J., Paul Newbold,Forecasting Economic Time Series. New York 1977.
Hoelscher, Gregory, “Federal Borrowing and Short Term Interest Rates”.Southern Economic Journal, Vol. 50, 1983, pp. 319–333.
Holloway, Thomas M., “The Cyclically Adjusted Federal Budget and Federal Debt: Revised and Updated Estimates”.Survey of Current Business, Vol. 66,1986, pp. 11–17.
Mascara, Angelo, Allan H. Meltzer, “Long and Short Term Interest Rates in a Risky World”.Journal of Monetary Economics, Vol. 12, 1983, pp. 485–518.
About this article
Cite this article
de Haan, J., Zelhorst, D. Financial- market effects of Federal Government budget deficits: Comment. Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv 126, 388–392 (1990). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02706366
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02706366