Philosophy Dictionary of ArgumentsHome
| |||
|
| |||
| Political parties: Political parties are groups of people who share similar political views and goals. They help to organize voters, inform the public about the issues, and hold governments accountable. Political parties also provide a platform for candidates to run for office. Democracy, Political elections, Electoral systems._____________Annotation: The above characterizations of concepts are neither definitions nor exhausting presentations of problems related to them. Instead, they are intended to give a short introduction to the contributions below. – Lexicon of Arguments. | |||
| Author | Concept | Summary/Quotes | Sources |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Economic Theories on Political Parties - Dictionary of Arguments
Mause I 284f Political Parties/Economic Theories: most models have in common that they expect left-wing governments to pursue a much more expansionary fiscal policy.(For references see Political Parties/Hibbs.) There are arguments to the contrary. It could be a strategy of right-wing parties to show paradoxical behaviour and to get into debt in order to take away the financial leeway for future left-wing governments for higher social spending (see, for example, Persson and Svensson 1989 (1); Milesi-Feretti and Spoalore 1994) (2) It could also be that left-wing governments with low unemployment have no incentive for expansionary deficit spending and reduce deficits to create a future fiscal leeway (see Carlsen 1997 (3); Cusack 1999 (4)). Numerous empirical studies in the period that followed show that left-wing governments spend more than right-wing governments. The thesis that left and right-wing parties are converging in spending policy in the face of pressure for reform and increasing interdependence was not confirmed. (5), (6). 1. Torsten Persson & Lars E. O. Svensson. 1989. Why a stubborn conservative would run a deficit: Policy with time-inconsistent preferences. Quarterly Journal of Economics 104 (2): 325– 345. 2. Gian M. Milesi-Feretti & Enrico Spoalore. 1994. How cynical can an incumbent be? Strategic policy in a model of government spending. Journal of Public Economics 55: 121– 140. 3. Fredrik Carlsen, Fredrik. 1997. Counterfiscal policies and partisan politics: Evidence from industrialized countries. Applied Economics 29: 145– 151. 4. Thomas R. Cusack, 1999. Partisan politics and fiscal policy. Comparative Political Studies 32( 4): 464– 486. 5, James P. Allan & Lyle Scruggs. 2004. Political partisanship and welfare state reform in advanced industrial societies. American Journal of Political Science 48 (3): 496– 512. 6. Niklas Potrafke. 2009. Did globalization restrict partisan politics? An empirical evaluation of social expenditures in a panel of OECD countries. Public Choice 140 (1): 105– 124._____________Explanation of symbols: Roman numerals indicate the source, arabic numerals indicate the page number. The corresponding books are indicated on the right hand side. ((s)…): Comment by the sender of the contribution. Translations: Dictionary of Arguments The note [Concept/Author], [Author1]Vs[Author2] or [Author]Vs[term] resp. "problem:"/"solution:", "old:"/"new:" and "thesis:" is an addition from the Dictionary of Arguments. If a German edition is specified, the page numbers refer to this edition. |
Economic Theories Mause I Karsten Mause Christian Müller Klaus Schubert, Politik und Wirtschaft: Ein integratives Kompendium Wiesbaden 2018 |
||
> Counter arguments against Economic Theories
> Counter arguments in relation to Political Parties
Ed. Martin Schulz, access date 2024-04-28