Did the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) Fund an Optimal Mix of Tax Reductions and Direct Government Spending?

Abstract

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) was passed in response to widespread fears that that United States was in danger of slipping into a 1930s-style economic depression. Once the ARRA was introduced, the economic debate centered on tax reductions versus direct government spending. Old arguments resurfaced about the effectiveness of the Roosevelt New Deal, the 1936-1938 recession, and the theoretical views of both Keynesian and neoclassical economists. I briefly review the economic literature and discuss the economic arguments of both sides.My research accounts for economic adjustment, and seeks to calculate the optimal mix of tax reductions and direct government spending using three different standards: effect on Real Gross Domestic Product, effect on the stock market , and effect on the U.S. civilian unemployment rate.I found that ARRA did not fund an optimal mix of tax reductions and direct government spending because ARRA included subsidies to individual states, loan guarantees, and other subsidies.