Alleged expansionary austerity episodes actually occurred during economic growth, not slumps.

Evidence

Arjun Jayadev and Mike Konczal undertook the first major critical examination of the 2009 paper’s data and key claims. They note several oddities in the paper. First, that of the twenty-six expansionary episodes identified in the data “in virtually none did the country … reduce the deficit when the economy was in a slump and … increase growth rates while reducing the debt-to-GDP ratio.” This is especially odd when compared to another finding, namely, that across these episodes “examples of successful consolidation were, on average, growing steadily the year before the year of adjustment.” In other words, and per contra one of the main claims made in the literature, it turns out that no state that tried this actually tried it during a slump. — Mark Blyth, Austerity, 576

Categorization

• SEED: A direct, citable empirical falsification of expansionary austerity — the ‘they only succeeded because they were already growing’ exposure is a clean article premise.
• XREF: connects to: Denmark’s austerity cuts occurred during a boom, not a slump — Mark Blyth, Austerity: The History of a Dangerous…, 564; Successful austerity required devaluation and boom timing, not fiscal contraction alone. — Mark Blyth, Austerity: The History of a Dangerous…, 503

Broader Connections

• Successful austerity required devaluation and boom timing, not fiscal contraction alone. #expands (0.80) — Mark Blyth, Austerity, 503