Global distributions of net factor income from abroad (NFI) during 1990-2019 have witnessed that (1) the United States is the top one country accounting for 40% of surpluses of the global total, while a surge in China’s deficit with its GDP increase; (2) GDP growth in emerging economies has a price scissors with NFI deficits; (3) asymmetric NFI has covered up the severity of rich countries’ global arbitrages especially from emerging economies; (4) China’s economic power is exaggerated by the PPP-based GDP implemented by the World Bank. It concludes that (1) developing countries have paid for huge hidden cost for their emergence; (2) the statement of the United States suffering losses absolutely does not hold; (3) GDP is not a universal tool for measuring what matters. It suggests that (1) emerging economies countries should beware of the potential misleading of GDP on economic measurement and economic power comparison ; (2) GDP should be critiqued from the applicability perspective of economies’ types; (3) it is urgent to clarify some misjudgment and misleading concepts in the economic affairs surrounding the global value chain patterns; (4) the construction of national governance capacity in emerging economies should focus on “social infrastructure”, of which one of the important parts is an effective economic statistics system; (5) emerging economies should carry out the strategic layout of international economic statistics talents to enhance their soft powers.

In reality firms most often face negatively sloped demand curves. Then, for a given level of consumers’ surplus, levies on prices yield higher fiscal revenues than specific duties. Therefore, according to the prevailing view, the switch from unit to ad valorem taxation is supposed to generate more welfare; some even speak of an associated Pareto-improvement. However, this is not true because taxing prices merely transfers profits to the Treasury, while total rent remains unaffected. Since excise duties diminish the welfare gain in comparison with untaxed trade, an appropriately designed income tax allows all parties to benefit. Sales should be taxed only exceptionally.

In this paper I will show that budget deficit (or fiscal deficit) is necessary to achieve full employment under constant prices or inflation, using a model of endogenous growth in which consumers hold money for the reason of liquidity and live forever. Budget deficit need not be offset by future budget surpluses. I consider the continuous time case by taking the limit of the discrete time case when the time interval approaches zero. A continuous time dynamic model seems to be more general than a discrete time model. When the actual budget deficit is greater (smaller) than the value which is necessary and sufficient for full employment under constant prices, an inflation (a recession) occurs. The main argument of this paper is that a growing economy requires the continuation of budget deficit, and that we should not think of paying off the resulting government debt with taxes.

I examine the problem of budget deficit in a growing economy in which consumers hold money as a part of their savings in the case where consumers live forever. For simplicity and tractability I use a discrete time dynamic model and Lagrange multiplier method. In the appendix I briefly explain the solution using a discrete time version of the Hamiltonian method. I will show the following results. 1) Budget deficit is necessary for full employment under constant prices. 2) Inflation is induced if the actual budget deficit is greater than the value at which full employment is achieved under constant prices. 3) If the actual budget deficit is smaller than the value which is necessary and sufficient for full employment under constant prices, a recession occurs. Therefore, balanced budget cannot achieve full employment under constant prices. I do not assume that budget deficit must later be made up by budget surplus.

Traditionally, conditions of sustainability of the public debt have long been related quite exclusively to fiscal policy and to budgetary parameters. However, the interaction between fiscal and monetary policies regarding the fixation of the interest rate is fundamental. Indeed, a simple analytical modelling shows that if the nominal interest rate increases exponentially with the public debt, because of a default (credit) risk premium, if the confidence of investors is fundamental, conditions of sustainability of the public debt could be much more difficult to comply with. Indeed, if the interest rate is risk-free, values for which the public debt can be sustainable are less constraining if the long-term GDP growth rate is high, or if the long-term risk-free nominal interest rate is small. They are also less constraining if the country decides to turn to a non-negligible primary budget surplus in case of a high public debt. However, if the interest rate exponentially increases with the public debt level, in case of a significant importance of the default (credit) risk premium, these parameters have very limited consequences on sustainable and equilibrium public debt levels. The sustainable public debt that a government should target is then much smaller than in absence of this risk premium.

By an endogenous growth model with a two-period overlapping generations structure, I examine the existence of a budget deficit in an economy that endogenously grows by investments of firms. The consumers leave bequests to their descendants and hold money as a part of their savings. I use a Barro-type utility function, where people include the utility of their children in their own utility. The main results are as follows. 1) A budget deficit is necessary for full employment under constant prices. 2) Inflation is induced if the actual budget deficit is greater than the value at which full employment is achieved under constant prices. 3) If the actual budget deficit is smaller than the value which is necessary and sufficient for full employment under constant prices, a recession occurs. Therefore, a balanced budget cannot achieve full employment under constant prices. I do not assume that the budget deficit must later be made up by a budget surplus. I use a Barro-type utility function to prove the necessity (or inevitability) of a budget deficit instead of the neutrality of government debt. In the appendix of this paper, I show that if money, as well as goods, are produced by capital and labor, a budget deficit is not necessary for full employment under constant prices.