DISTRIBUTION, WEALTH and DEMAND REGIMES in HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE USA, UK, France and Germany, 1855-2010
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
FMM WORKING PAPER No. 14 · January, 2018 · Hans-Böckler-Stiftung DISTRIBUTION, WEALTH AND DEMAND REGIMES IN HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE USA, UK, France and Germany, 1855-2010 Engelbert Stockhammer*, Joel Rabinovich**, Niall Reddy*** ABSTRACT Most empirical macroeconomic research limited to the period since World War II. This paper analyses the effects of changes in income distribution and in private wealth on consumption and investment covering a period from as early as 1855 until 2010 for the UK, France, Ger- many and USA, based on the dataset of Piketty and Zucman (2014). We contribute to the post-Keynesian debate on the nature of demand regimes, mainstream analyses of wealth effects and the financialisation debate. We find that overall domestic demand has been wage-led in the USA, UK and Germany. Total investment responds positively to higher wage shares, which is driven by residential investment. For corporate investment alone, we find a negative relation. Wealth effects are found to be positive and significant for consumption in the USA and UK, but weaker in France and Germany. Investment is negatively affected by private wealth in the USA and the UK, but positively in France and Germany. * Kingston University London & FMM Fellow. ** Université Paris 13. *** New York University. Distribution, wealth and demand regimes in historical perspective. USA, UK, France and Germany, 1855-2010 Engelbert Stockhammer*, Joel Rabinovich** and Niall Reddy*** * Kingston University London, ** Université Paris 13, *** New York University Version 1.04 Oct 2017 Abstract Most empirical macroeconomic research limited to the period since World War II. This paper analyses the effects of changes in income distribution and in private wealth on consumption and investment covering a period from as early as 1855 until 2010 for the UK, France, Germany and USA, based on the dataset of Piketty and Zucman (2014). We contribute to the post-Keynesian debate on the nature of demand regimes, mainstream analyses of wealth effects and the financialisation debate. We find that overall domestic demand has been wage-led in the USA, UK and Germany. Total investment responds positively to higher wage shares, which is driven by residential investment. For corporate investment alone, we find a negative relation. Wealth effects are found to be positive and significant for consumption in the USA and UK, but weaker in France and Germany. Investment is negatively affected by private wealth in the USA and the UK, but positively in France and Germany. Keywords: historical macroeconomics, demand regimes, Bhaduri-Marglin model, wealth effects, financialisation JEL codes: B50, E11, E12, E20, E21, N10 Acknowledgements: This paper is part of the research project ‘Income Distribution, Asset Prices and Aggregate Demand Formation, 1850-2010: A post-Keynesian Approach to Historical Macroeconomic Data’ (INO16-00008) with financial support by the Institute for New Economic Thinking. Earlier versions of this paper have been presented at …. The authors are grateful to Paul Auerbach, Erik Bengtsson, Giorgos Gouzoulis, Rob Jump, Karsten Kohler, Ozlem Onaran, and Rafael Wildauer for helpful comments. All remaining errors are ours. 1 1. INTRODUCTION Empirical research in macroeconomics overwhelmingly analyses recent experience and utilises data of the past three or four decades. However, economic historians have compiled macroeconomic data that go back into the 19th century for several countries. With the renewed interest in financial crises some studies have taken a longer view. Reinhart and Rogoff (2010) offer broad historical coverage of financial crises while Piketty (2014) provides an analysis of wealth inequality, but neither of them offers an econometric analysis. Jorda et al (2016) compile long historic series on private debt and present an econometric analysis of the severity of recessions. However, important contemporary debates in macroeconomics on the effects of changes in income distribution and changes in wealth are marred by historical shortsightedness. The contribution of this paper is to analyse the effects of changes in functional income distribution and of private wealth for long periods for the UK (1855-2010), USA (1929-2010), France (1896-2010) and Germany (1870-2010), using the dataset compiled by Piketty and Zucman (2014). This is the first study that presents results for macroeconomic behavioural equations that cover most of the history of capitalism for the European countries and more than 80 years in the case of the USA. The paper contributes to two debates. The first is on the nature of demand regimes and the effects of changes in functional income distribution. The Bhaduri Marglin model has become a widely used workhorse model for post-Keynesian economists. Its hallmark is that it can depict wage-led as well as profit-led demand regimes depending on the relative size of the saving differential between capital and labour and the profit sensitivity of investment. The model provides a framework for the controversy between the Kaleckian and Marxist-inspired Goodwinians and has sparked a substantial empirical literature with impressive geographical scope (Bowles & Boyer, 1995; Stockhammer and Onaran 2005; Naastepad & Storm, 2006; Hein & Vogel, 2008; Stockhammer, Onaran, & Ederer, 2009; Onaran & Galanis, 2014; Hartwig 2015; Kiefer & Rada, 2015; Stockhammer & Wildauer, 2016; Onaran & Obst 2016). The demand regime approach has recently also been taken up by comparative political economists (Baccaro and Pontusson 2016). However, all existing studies have so far been limited to the postwar era. The second debate that we contribute concerns the effect of wealth on consumption 2 and investment. Consumption studies commonly use mainstream frameworks based on life time utility maximizing individuals who may be credit-constrained and consume part of their wealth (Slacalek 2009, Ludwig and Slok 2004). There are disagreements on the size of wealth effects and whether they differ for financial and housing wealth (Case et al 2005) but these studies rarely cover the period before 1970. The discussion on the impact of wealth on (business) investment has largely taken place outside the mainstream under the heading of financialisation, where several authors have highlighted the negative impact of financial activity on real investment (Stockhammer 2004, Krippner 2005, Onaran and Tori 2017). Again, these contributions cover only the past few decades. This paper builds on Stockhammer & Wildauer (2016), who synthesise these effects in a post-Keynesian macro model, and apply this framework to historic macroeconomic data. We estimate error correction models (ECM) for each country. For consumption we find positive long-run effect of wages for the USA, the UK, and Germany. Our investment results are potentially surprising – they indicate positive or no effects of the wage share on total investment, which comprises business and residential accumulation. For France and the USA we also perform estimations for corporate investment and find that the wage share has a negative effect. This suggests that the residential component is driving the outcome in total investment estimations. Since total investment responds positively to an increase in the wage share, overall domestic private demand is wage-led in the USA, UK and Germany. Regarding wealth effects, we find that effects on consumption are large in the USA and UK and smaller and less significant in France and Germany, which is consistent with the distinction between market-based and bank-based financial systems (Jackson and Deeg 2006). For the investment equation we find a negative effect in the USA and UK, but positive effects in Germany and France. While these effects are not always statistically significant, they suggest that financialisation effects on investment have been operating for longer than previously recognized. The paper is structured as follows. Section 2 motivates our consumption and invstement functions and analyses demand regimes with respect to changes in distribution and wealth. Section 3 reviews the existing empirical literature. Section 4 presents data sources and the econometric methodology. Section 5 presents the 3 econometric results and section 6 analyses demand regimes and results for subperiods. Finally, section 7 concludes. 2. DISTRIBUTION, WEALTH AND DEMAND REGIMES We will use general consumption (C) and investment (I) functions that depend on income (Y), the functional distribution of income measured by the wage share (WS) and private wealth (PW): = ( , , ), with ∂C/∂Y, ∂C/∂WS, ∂C/∂PW > 0 Consumption depends positively on income (∂C/∂Y>0). Following a long tradition in classical, Marxist and post-Keynesian theory we assume that the marginal propensity to consume is higher for workers (or recipients of wage incomes) than for capitalists (or recipients of capital incomes), therefore a higher wage share will positively affect consumption (∂C/∂WS > 0). Neoclassical economics usually does not attribute any effect on consumption arising from the distribution of income. Wealth is generally expected to have a positive effect on consumption (∂C/∂PW>0), although there are varying theoretical explanations for this. 1 In mainstream economics this result is generally derived from the utility maximization of rational households (e.g. Aron et al 2012), whereas the financialisation literature emphasises the active role of lenders and non-rational consumption norms (Cynamon & Fazzari, 2008). For New Keynesians, households