THE following remarks about Report National and International Measures for Full Employment 1 are concerned with recommendations which deal with international policies. They try to emphasize importance of Report as of most constructive suggestions in field of international financial relations; but they are also meant as a criticism of some of weaker features of Report. In domestic field recommendations of Report are not very original. The experts feel adoption by each country of a system of automatic compensatory measures which would come into operation in clearly defined circumstances announced beforehand is a most important element in a successful fullemployment policy (I65). The suggestions concerning prevention of inflationary tendencies are rather vague. In discussing dollar shortage, experts should have considered more fully than they did fact that dollar gap is to a large degree caused by repressed or open inflation. Professor J. M. Clark in his Separate Concurring Statement, which is appended to Report, obviously feels that treatment of inflation in main part of Report is inadequate, but he does not offer any special recommendations. It should, however, be possible to point out how domestic consumption and investment compete with exports and how, therefore, balance of payments difficulties cannot be overcome if, at full employment, consumption, investment, and public expenditures are permitted to expand to a point where it becomes difficult to command enough resources, to say nothing about inflated wage and price structure which makes it difficult to sell on foreign markets and requires repeated exchange rate adjustments. To be sure, these conclusions are implied in Report; but they are not explicitly stated, and it has not been pointed out which specific steps could be taken. The suggestions of paragraph 87 are too general. The experts could have emphasized general as against direct controls, and they might have indicated need for investment programs which are designed not only to keep total investment on a noninflationary level but also to allocate available loanable funds to industries which should expand. The experts could have considered allocation of loanable funds on basis of a rate of interest which would be high enough to remove need for innumerable direct investment controls which are difficult to co-ordinate and to administer. It can, of course, be argued that should not prescribe to deficit countries domestic measures by which they may try to overcome their dollar shortage. It seems, however, that Report is not quite impartial in this respect. We shall see that experts are quite willing to make precise suggestions concerning contributions which surplus countries should make to solution of problem of international payments disequilibrium. Since no similar clear-cut suggestions are made concerning contributions of deficit countries, Report lacks balance. The Report does point out that the main obligation of deficit countries in this connexion is to pursue policies aimed at reducing internal inflationary pressures which may compromise their ability to export and aggravate their need to import . (I07), but this general statement is not followed up by specific recommendations. It is to be admitted that it will be difficult to formulate hard and fast rules for anti-inflationist policies which are not potentially dangerous. Particularly, wage policies will constitute a formidable obstacle. The experts themselves admit that there exists one important area where it is not possible to make a finding at once positive and simple, where competent study is in its in'National and International Measures for Full Employmnent. Report by a Group of Experts appointed by Secretary-General. United Nations, Department of Economic Affairs, Lake Success, New York, December I949.
Read full abstract