Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorMasur, Jonathan S.
dc.contributor.authorPosner, Eric A.
dc.date2021-11-25T13:35:21.000
dc.date.accessioned2021-11-26T11:58:41Z
dc.date.available2021-11-26T11:58:41Z
dc.date.issued2017-01-01T00:00:00-08:00
dc.identifieryjreg/vol34/iss3/4
dc.identifier.contextkey12811315
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.13051/8258
dc.description.abstractPoliticians and commentators have from time to time proposed that regulations be suspended or delayed during recessions because of their adverse impact on employment. We evaluate this argument from within a macroeconomic framework. When the business cycle is taken into account, it is possible that regulations should be weakened during downturns and strengthened during upturns, along the lines of stimulus policy, which normally takes the form of countercyclical adjustments to taxes or the money supply. However, countercyclical regulation will normally be a less efficient means of stimulus. For that reason, it should be used in relative narrow conditions, and when the other stimulus instruments are either ineffective on their own terms or politically infeasible.
dc.titleShould Regulation Be Countercyclical?
dc.source.journaltitleYale Journal on Regulation
refterms.dateFOA2021-11-26T11:58:41Z
dc.identifier.legacycoverpagehttps://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/yjreg/vol34/iss3/4
dc.identifier.legacyfulltexthttps://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1509&context=yjreg&unstamped=1


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
JonathanSMasurEricAPosner.pdf
Size:
2.183Mb
Format:
PDF

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record