XREAP2007-14
Table 3. Fiscal rule, (1) and (6): US, 1962-2000.
|
federal government |
panel of state governments___________ | |||
|
(1)_______ |
(6) |
(1)___________ |
(6)___________ | |
|
P |
0.08 |
0.08 |
0.10 |
0.08 |
|
(0.01) |
(0.01) |
(0.00) |
(0.00) | |
|
α |
0.08 |
-0.06 | ||
|
(0.35) |
(0.00) | |||
|
obs |
^38 |
38 |
1887 |
1887 |
|
R2 |
0.19 |
0.20 |
0.08 |
0.10 |
|
R2 within |
0.05 |
0.07 | ||
|
R2 between |
0.21 |
0.19 | ||
|
R2 overall |
0.08 |
0.10 | ||
|
Hausmann |
1059.31 |
1144.58 | ||
|
(0.00) |
(0.00) | |||
|
1967 |
1992 |
- |
- | |
|
AQ |
(0.08) |
(0.36) | ||
|
AP |
(0.03) |
(0.18) | ||
|
Bai |
1966 |
1994 | ||
|
(0.00) |
(0.00) | |||
|
[-;-] |
[-;-] | |||
Notes: heteroscedasticity and autocorrelation robust OLS
estimates; AQ and AP indicate the corrected Andrews Quandt
and Andrews Ploberger break date for the fiscal rule; the
breaktest of Bai is Bai (1997), with the 33% confidence
interval.
Table 4. Fiscal rules for government tiers, system estimates (3), German Lander, 1970-2005.
|
all 1970-2 |
Lander |
old 1970-2 |
Lander |
old |
Lander 990 |
old 1991-2 |
Lander >005 |
new 1991-2 |
Lander | |
|
P__ |
p-value |
P__ |
p-value |
P__ |
p-value |
P__ |
p-value |
P__ |
p-value | |
|
federal |
-0.01 |
(0.36) |
-0.01 |
(0.38) |
-0.06 |
(0.06) |
0.00 |
(0.88) |
0.00 |
(0.89) |
|
BE |
0.00 |
(0.00) |
0.00 |
(0.00) |
0.00 |
(0.01) |
0.00 |
(0.04) |
0.00 |
(0.04) |
|
BW |
0.00 |
(0.35) |
0.00 |
(0.34) |
0.00 |
(0.67) |
0.00 |
(0.24) | ||
|
BY |
0.00 |
(0.03) |
0.00 |
(0.03) |
0.00 |
(0.86) |
0.00 |
(0.49) | ||
|
HB |
0.00 |
(0.01) |
0.00 |
(0.01) |
0.00 |
(0.10) |
0.00 |
(0.87) | ||
|
HE |
0.00 |
(0.06) |
0.00 |
(0.06) |
0.00 |
(0.24) |
0.00 |
(0.14) | ||
|
HH |
0.00 |
(0.71) |
0.00 |
(0.71) |
0.00 |
(0.91) |
0.00 |
(0.23) | ||
|
NI |
0.00 |
(0.75) |
0.00 |
(0.76) |
0.00 |
(0.18) |
0.00 |
(0.01) | ||
|
NW |
0.00 |
(0.26) |
0.00 |
(0.26) |
0.00 |
(0.00) |
0.00 |
(0.00) | ||
|
RP |
0.00 |
(0.70) |
0.00 |
(0.71) |
0.00 |
(0.76) |
0.00 |
(0.00) | ||
|
SH |
0.00 |
(0.08) |
0.00 |
(0.08) |
0.00 |
(0.46) |
0.00 |
(0.10) | ||
|
SL |
0.00 |
(0.19) |
0.00 |
(0.19) |
0.00 |
(0.00) |
0.00 |
(0.04) | ||
|
BB |
0.00 |
(0.00) |
0.00 |
(0.00) | ||||||
|
MV |
0.00 |
(0.20) |
0.00 |
(0.12) | ||||||
|
SN |
0.00 |
(0.00) |
0.00 |
(0.00) | ||||||
|
ST |
0.00 |
(0.00) |
0.00 |
(0.00) | ||||||
|
TH |
0.00 |
(0.00) |
0.00 |
(0.00) | ||||||
|
sum |
0.01 |
(0.21) |
0.00 |
(0.29) |
0.00 |
(0.38) |
0.00 |
(0.20) |
0.01 |
(0.03) |
22
More intriguing information
1. Food Prices and Overweight Patterns in Italy2. The name is absent
3. Experience, Innovation and Productivity - Empirical Evidence from Italy's Slowdown
4. Sectoral Energy- and Labour-Productivity Convergence
5. The name is absent
6. An Intertemporal Benchmark Model for Turkey’s Current Account
7. The name is absent
8. Stable Distributions
9. The economic value of food labels: A lab experiment on safer infant milk formula
10. A Dynamic Model of Conflict and Cooperation