"27510" . . "100194" . . "Machov\u00E1, Zuzana" . "RIV/61989100:27510/13:86086832" . . . "Ostrava" . "PRO-GROWTH EFFECTS OF (UN)PRODUCTIVE GOVERNMENT SPENDING IN THE OECD"@en . "Taxes in the World : 3rd International Scientific Conference : proceedings : [Ostravice, 12.-13.12.2013]" . . . "Ostravice" . "RIV/61989100:27510/13:86086832!RIV14-MSM-27510___" . . . "978-80-248-3133-6" . "Productive Government Spending, Unproductive Government Spending, Economic Growth, World Tax Index"@en . . "[232D361FECC7]" . "S" . "Vysok\u00E1 \u0161kola b\u00E1\u0148sk\u00E1 - Technick\u00E1 univerzita Ostrava" . . . . "PRO-GROWTH EFFECTS OF (UN)PRODUCTIVE GOVERNMENT SPENDING IN THE OECD" . "1"^^ . . . "PRO-GROWTH EFFECTS OF (UN)PRODUCTIVE GOVERNMENT SPENDING IN THE OECD" . "In connection with the recent financial and debt crisis, the debate about the influence of government spending on economic growth has deepened. The primary aim of this paper is thus to examine the influence of both, productive (investment) and unproductive (consumption) government expenditure on growth in the OECD in 2000-2010. The dynamic panel data analysis is performed using the GMM. The results show that, unlike the theoretical assumptions, the influence of both types of spending on economic growth is positive. If the unproductive part of the spending includes especially the social transfers, those raise the disposable income of households, the consumption and thus also the GDP per capita. In case of productive spending, the effect of its volatility on growth was proved to be negative. It can be concluded that instead of budget cuts, fiscal policy authorities should primarily try to avoid the changes and volatility of the investment spending." . "10"^^ . "2013-12-12+01:00"^^ . . "1"^^ . . "PRO-GROWTH EFFECTS OF (UN)PRODUCTIVE GOVERNMENT SPENDING IN THE OECD"@en . "In connection with the recent financial and debt crisis, the debate about the influence of government spending on economic growth has deepened. The primary aim of this paper is thus to examine the influence of both, productive (investment) and unproductive (consumption) government expenditure on growth in the OECD in 2000-2010. The dynamic panel data analysis is performed using the GMM. The results show that, unlike the theoretical assumptions, the influence of both types of spending on economic growth is positive. If the unproductive part of the spending includes especially the social transfers, those raise the disposable income of households, the consumption and thus also the GDP per capita. In case of productive spending, the effect of its volatility on growth was proved to be negative. It can be concluded that instead of budget cuts, fiscal policy authorities should primarily try to avoid the changes and volatility of the investment spending."@en . .