Lower reserve requirements will result in more funds being available to loan out. This should, in turn, increase the rate of economic growth. Conversely, a higher reserve requirement will reduce the availability of funds and should slow economic growth. In this case, we need to increase our rate of economic growth in response to the recession, so I choose to lower the reserve requirement. The reason I would make this choice is to stimulate lending to businesses, reduce unemployment and increase household income so that the economy could then recover naturally.
However, pensioners will be hit hard because the extra income they earn from saving will have dramatically reduced, making them worse off. On the other hand, savers may leave the pound for better interest rates in other countries (hot money), causing a fall in the demand for the pound. As a result the value of the pound will fall, making exports cheaper and there will be an injection of net exports. In conclusion, the impact of loose monetary policy will be beneficial to the economy because extra consumption and investment will cause AD to increase which will increase economic growth. However, it takes a long time for changes in interest rates to feed through to consumption and investment and by then the economy may have gotten worse.
Decreasing the interest rate effectively increases consumer and businesses consumption. Lower interest rates also increase investments and net exports (Hubbard, 868). These increases push true GDP back in line with potential GDP and, as a result, production increases. This increase in production also increases the need for workers, ultimately increasing employment. Conclusion The Federal Reserve is a very powerful entity and has a large amount of influence on how our nation’s economy performs.
Monetary policies influence and are influenced by international developments, including exchange rates, and based on these market conditions the U.S. government can make strategic changes to these policies to maintain the country’s economic stability (full employment, stable growth and price stability). For example if Federal Reserve actions raised U.S. interest rates, the foreign exchange value of the dollar generally would rise. An increase in the foreign exchange value of the dollar, in turn, would raise the price in foreign currency of U.S. goods traded on world markets and lower the dollar price of goods imported into the United States (Federal Reserve, 2005). By restraining exports and boosting imports, these developments could lower output and price levels in the U.S. economy and control or lower
If the interest rate is low, it will cause more funds to be available, greater expansion and increased employment. If the interest rate is high, it will cause fewer funds to be available, less expansion, and decreased employment. Fiscal policy is an important tool for managing the economy because of its ability to affect the total amount of output produced or the gross domestic product. The first impact of a fiscal expansion is to raise the demand for goods and services. This greater demand leads to increases in both output and prices.
When there is a greater disposable personal income this will allow consumption to increase due to the money saved from the lower tax rate. Through consumption increasing this will favour economic because the gross domestic product has increased. When government expenditures are increased it will have a multiplier effect on aggregate demand. Because of the multiplier effect, the government can increase spending by only a small amount to achieve a larger, necessary increase in aggregate demand. By doing so, the economy will be able to attain an equilibrium level of real
When government spending is increased, the amount of the increase in aggregate demand primarily depends on: A. The average propensity to consume B. The size of the multiplier C. Income taxes D. Exchange rates 5. Which fiscal policy would be the most expansionary? A.
The increase in real GDP would put downward pressure on the price level and reduce inflation. Supply-siders also believed that the budget deficit would not increase substantially as a result of the tax cut. Even if it did increase, it would be offset by increased saving due to the lower taxes. Many economic critics today and in the 1980’s questioned the effectiveness of Reagan s policies, also known as Reaganomics. Economists still argue whether Reagan’s actions were helpful or harmful to the United States economy.
I do not agree with her as well on raising the bank reserve requirements as it can restrain lending from banks and as a result it will shrink the economy growth. After analyzing my colleagues’ recommendations, and as the president’s senior economic advisor, I recommend the following: * We should lower income taxes. This shall increase the aggregate demand as the consumer disposable income will increase, which leads to an increase in the consumer spending. If the consumer spending increases, it will bring back up the flow of business and operations which means more jobs opening in the market and low unemployment rates. * Lowering banks’ interest rates.
With privatization of social security, workers would be able to 'own' all or a portion of their Social Security contributions in an individual account. These funds would be invested in the financial markets, where individuals would have the chance to earn higher returns. The Economic Benefits The biggest beneficiary of any Social Security privatization would be the U.S. economy. Increased investment in private enterprise-whether through stocks or bonds-should create more economic opportunities and boost domestic growth. It may also contribute to greater productivity, resulting in a lower inflation rate that would help retirement savings go further.