Die Wirtschaft in der Krise – Wie weit sollte der Staat eingreifen?

Abstract

Abstract From Joachim Starbatty’s point of view the answer of many politicians to today’s economic crisis is deficit spending and protectionism. He declares that these are typical keynesian tools - which are - even in Keynes’ theory - only suitable in special circumstances and argues that the actual economic crisis is no Keynesian crisis. The actual lack of demand was predominantly caused by a problematic US monetary policy, not by a lack of marginal efficiency of capital. Keynesian tools cannot solve the crisis and risk to even worsen the situation in different ways. Karen Horn represents the opinion that the global financial and economic crisis has brought about a shift in the relative importance of government and market as well in terms of scope as in popularity. She says: The dichotomy may however seem overstated: both politics and the market are no more than evolved arenas for the social interaction of fallible humans. The crisis just demonstrates the natural failures and limitations of both more clearly than ever. But this is precisely the reason why social processes should become freer discovery procedures allowing for a dynamic generation of new knowledge. The precautionary principle recommends more active government focus on the rule level and clear limits of state action elsewhere in order to prevent a ratchet effect of intervention. In politics, a slippery slope leads directly from pragmatism to constructivism. Gustav Horn addresses the question if and under what conditions economic policy should intervene with markets during an economic crisis. He explains that two different forms of interventions are distinguished: A macroeconomic and microeconomic intervention. Their mutual impact is discussed and a theoretical macroeconomic approach of de Grauwe is used to derive a theoretical foundation. The conclusion is that at a time of crisis both macroeconomic interventions as well as microeconomic interventions that serve to stabilize production of a public good are appropriate. Not appropriate is a state intervention for purely microeconomic reasons.