The originally linked article is quite misleading regarding the multiplier:
> But this study found a much bigger impact: Every $100 given directly to the poorest households was generating between $250 and $270 in GDP. That’s a fiscal multiplier in the range of 2.5 to 2.7 [...]
The paper itself states 2.6 +/- 1.5 which is a huge range of possible values. It sounds like the article is instead quoting the central estimates for income and expenditure.
The paper says that they're sure the multipliers are greater than 0 only at the 10% significance level.
Maybe instead of doing share buybacks to transfer .9% of the value to shareholders, major conglomerates could just give money to poor people to spend on their products.
Thanks for the study, getting pay walled. Will have to read this later.
Side note: on mobile, the papers in line citations are anchored to the individual reference (tapping the citation redirects user to reference). This is a pretty neat feature. Hope more people start to use it.
bovine3dom|6 years ago
> But this study found a much bigger impact: Every $100 given directly to the poorest households was generating between $250 and $270 in GDP. That’s a fiscal multiplier in the range of 2.5 to 2.7 [...]
The paper itself states 2.6 +/- 1.5 which is a huge range of possible values. It sounds like the article is instead quoting the central estimates for income and expenditure.
The paper says that they're sure the multipliers are greater than 0 only at the 10% significance level.
So thanks for linking to the paper!
taurath|6 years ago
xyst|6 years ago
Side note: on mobile, the papers in line citations are anchored to the individual reference (tapping the citation redirects user to reference). This is a pretty neat feature. Hope more people start to use it.
uoaei|6 years ago
vinni2|6 years ago