选举与经济:如何应对经济衰退?

IF 0.4 Q4 ECONOMICS Economists Voice Pub Date : 2016-01-01 DOI:10.1515/ev-2016-0007
Rand Ghayad, M. Cragg, F. Pinter
{"title":"选举与经济:如何应对经济衰退?","authors":"Rand Ghayad, M. Cragg, F. Pinter","doi":"10.1515/ev-2016-0007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract There is no doubt that the US is embedded in a weak economy. Bond markets are now saying that neither inflation rates approaching 2 percent targets or real interest rates substantially above zero are on the horizon anytime in the foreseeable future. Growth forecasts are being revised downwards in most places, and there is growing evidence in the US that inflation expectations are becoming unanchored to the downside. That, along with widening credit spreads and a stronger dollar as Europe and Japan plunge more deeply into the world of negative rates is alarming and suggests that we are at risk of another recession. Presidential candidates on both sides of the aisle have laid out their positions on major issues ranging from taxes, minimum wage, the federal debt, to issues such as immigration, military strategy, and climate change. While candidates’ policy positions differ generally, it is not clear what their priorities are when it comes to most of these issues. In this paper, we apply text analytics to analyze hundreds of thousands of words that appeared in policy releases, interviews, or debate transcripts related to all of the 2016 presidential candidates. Among other things, we find that macroeconomic policy or “what to do about recessions” has been largely ignored by presidential candidates in this year’s election. Perhaps not surprisingly, Donald Trump’s positions are focused on Mexico and China while Hillary Clinton’s positions are heavily focused on gender and social factors. This appears to present a contrast from Bill Clinton’s campaign in the early 1990s, which was focused on America’s declining economy, emphasizing a basic but effective slogan, “It’s the Economy, Stupid!”","PeriodicalId":42390,"journal":{"name":"Economists Voice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2016-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/ev-2016-0007","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Elections and the Economy: What to do about Recessions?\",\"authors\":\"Rand Ghayad, M. Cragg, F. Pinter\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/ev-2016-0007\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract There is no doubt that the US is embedded in a weak economy. Bond markets are now saying that neither inflation rates approaching 2 percent targets or real interest rates substantially above zero are on the horizon anytime in the foreseeable future. Growth forecasts are being revised downwards in most places, and there is growing evidence in the US that inflation expectations are becoming unanchored to the downside. That, along with widening credit spreads and a stronger dollar as Europe and Japan plunge more deeply into the world of negative rates is alarming and suggests that we are at risk of another recession. Presidential candidates on both sides of the aisle have laid out their positions on major issues ranging from taxes, minimum wage, the federal debt, to issues such as immigration, military strategy, and climate change. While candidates’ policy positions differ generally, it is not clear what their priorities are when it comes to most of these issues. In this paper, we apply text analytics to analyze hundreds of thousands of words that appeared in policy releases, interviews, or debate transcripts related to all of the 2016 presidential candidates. Among other things, we find that macroeconomic policy or “what to do about recessions” has been largely ignored by presidential candidates in this year’s election. Perhaps not surprisingly, Donald Trump’s positions are focused on Mexico and China while Hillary Clinton’s positions are heavily focused on gender and social factors. This appears to present a contrast from Bill Clinton’s campaign in the early 1990s, which was focused on America’s declining economy, emphasizing a basic but effective slogan, “It’s the Economy, Stupid!”\",\"PeriodicalId\":42390,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Economists Voice\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/ev-2016-0007\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Economists Voice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/ev-2016-0007\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Economists Voice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/ev-2016-0007","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

毫无疑问,美国陷入了疲软的经济之中。债券市场现在表示,在可预见的未来,既不会出现通胀率接近2%的目标,也不会出现实际利率大幅高于零的情况。多数地区的增长预测都被向下修正,而美国也有越来越多的证据表明,通胀预期正变得不受下行影响。随着欧洲和日本更深地陷入负利率世界,信贷息差不断扩大,美元走强,这些都令人担忧,表明我们有再次陷入衰退的风险。从税收、最低工资、联邦债务到移民、军事战略和气候变化等重大问题,两党总统候选人都阐述了自己的立场。虽然候选人的政策立场普遍不同,但在大多数问题上,他们的优先事项是什么并不清楚。在本文中,我们应用文本分析来分析与2016年所有总统候选人相关的政策发布、访谈或辩论记录中出现的数十万个单词。除其他事项外,我们发现宏观经济政策或“如何应对经济衰退”在今年的选举中基本上被总统候选人所忽视。唐纳德·特朗普的立场主要关注墨西哥和中国,而希拉里·克林顿的立场主要关注性别和社会因素,这也许并不奇怪。这似乎与上世纪90年代初比尔•克林顿(Bill Clinton)的竞选活动形成了鲜明对比,当时克林顿的竞选重点是美国日益衰退的经济,强调一个基本但有效的口号:“问题在经济,笨蛋!”
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Elections and the Economy: What to do about Recessions?
Abstract There is no doubt that the US is embedded in a weak economy. Bond markets are now saying that neither inflation rates approaching 2 percent targets or real interest rates substantially above zero are on the horizon anytime in the foreseeable future. Growth forecasts are being revised downwards in most places, and there is growing evidence in the US that inflation expectations are becoming unanchored to the downside. That, along with widening credit spreads and a stronger dollar as Europe and Japan plunge more deeply into the world of negative rates is alarming and suggests that we are at risk of another recession. Presidential candidates on both sides of the aisle have laid out their positions on major issues ranging from taxes, minimum wage, the federal debt, to issues such as immigration, military strategy, and climate change. While candidates’ policy positions differ generally, it is not clear what their priorities are when it comes to most of these issues. In this paper, we apply text analytics to analyze hundreds of thousands of words that appeared in policy releases, interviews, or debate transcripts related to all of the 2016 presidential candidates. Among other things, we find that macroeconomic policy or “what to do about recessions” has been largely ignored by presidential candidates in this year’s election. Perhaps not surprisingly, Donald Trump’s positions are focused on Mexico and China while Hillary Clinton’s positions are heavily focused on gender and social factors. This appears to present a contrast from Bill Clinton’s campaign in the early 1990s, which was focused on America’s declining economy, emphasizing a basic but effective slogan, “It’s the Economy, Stupid!”
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Economists Voice
Economists Voice ECONOMICS-
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
25.00%
发文量
9
期刊介绍: This journal is a non-partisan forum for economists to present innovative policy ideas or engaging commentary on the issues of the day. Readers include professional economists, lawyers, policy analysts, policymakers, and students of economics. Articles are short, 600-2000 words, and are intended to contain deeper analysis than is found on the Op-Ed page of the Wall Street Journal or New York Times, but to be of comparable general interest. We welcome submitted Columns from any professional economist. Letters to the editor are encouraged and may comment on any Column or Letter. Letters must be less than 300 words.
期刊最新文献
Natural Interest Rate and Money Interest Rates An Evolutionary Path Towards a European Monetary Fund The Fairy Tale of Low Inflation in the Euro Area Food Insecurity and Health Outcomes The Economists’ Voice: Special Issue on Nutrition and Poverty Introduction
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1