경제에 대한 대통령의 영향력: 신화와 현실

미국인들은 종종 대통령의 결정이 즉각적인 영향을 미친다고 믿으며 경제에 대한 대통령의 통제력을 과대평가합니다.

### 미국 대통령이 경제에 미치는 복잡한 영향
* 💰 "미국인의 **50%는 2024년 대통령 선거 결과가 개인 재정에 직접적인 영향을 미칠 것**이라고 생각합니다."
* 📊 거의 **99%의 유권자가 투표 결정에 경제를 중요한 요소**로 고려하는 것으로 나타나 대통령 성과와 경제 인식 사이에 밀접한 연관성이 있음을 알 수 있습니다.
* 🎩 유권자들은 종종 대통령을 **'경제 마법사'와 같은 경제 리더**로 생각하지만, 그 영향력은 종종 과장된 경우가 많습니다.
* 📉 통화 정책은 금리와 인플레이션을 관리하기 위해 독립적으로 운영되는 연방준비제도의 권한에 속하기 때문에 **대통령이 직접 통화 정책을 통제하는 것은 제한적**입니다.
* 🏛 대통령이 주요 경제 기관의 수장을 임명할 수는 있지만, **지출 계획에 대한 의회의 승인을 받아야** 하므로 재정 정책에 영향을 미칠 수 있는 능력은 제한됩니다.
* 🚢 미국 경제의 규모와 복잡성으로 인해 글로벌 이벤트 및 국가 정책과 같은 외부 요인이 경제 결과에 큰 영향을 미치며, 이는 종종 **대통령이 통제할 수 없는 수준**입니다.
* ⚠ 대침체와 같은 위기 상황에서는 대통령이 중요한 조치를 취할 수 있지만, 일반적인 상황에서는 **대통령의 전반적인 영향력이 더 미묘하고 즉각적이지 않다**.
* 🤔 대통령 권력에 대한 유권자의 기대는 오해로 이어질 수 있습니다. 대통령직이 중요한 것은 사실이지만 **대통령이 혼자서 경제 문제를 해결할 수 있다는 믿음**은 착각입니다.

50% of Americans believe that the result of the 2024 presidential election will directly impact their personal finances. While about 99% of voters say that the economy is at least somewhat important in influencing their vote for the next president. Voters absolutely are using the economy as a metric by which to evaluate presidents. It's something that they encounter in their day-to-day lives. You know, what their bank accounts look like, what their grocery bills look like. And so it's very natural to start to wonder, well, who's responsible for this? And so people can eventually get this sort of picture in their minds of a president as a kind of economic wizard behind a curtain that's pulling levers. And we're just all on the receiving end of this when the reality is something like presidents are basically a roulette ball spinning around a wheel, desperately hoping

that their presidency lands on black. So how much influence do U.S. presidents actually have on the economy? There has been a tendency on the part of our society, led by politicians, to exaggerate the amount of power that the president wields, and that's encouraged by participants in these campaigns. You've got a problem? I'm going to solve it. Policymakers have two main tools to influence the economy: monetary and fiscal policy. Monetary policy is one important tool that the government has to try to prevent the economy from overheating too much, or from cooling off too much, to find that nice, perfect sweet spot of low unemployment and low inflation. What it really has to do with kind of interest rates, right? The cost of borrowing money. If interest rates go up, for example, people will be more willing to save, less willing to make new purchases, less

willing to take out big loans. And this should help to kind of cool off the economy if inflation is running high. But by design, power over monetary policies falls under the authority of the Federal Reserve rather than the president of the United States. Monetary policy is the sole domain of our central bank, and we do have a politically independent Federal Reserve, which the data and history show is more effective when those who are in office have no real control over what the central bank does. It's almost inconceivable that the president would ever want higher interest rates, right? Those higher interest rates are going to influence credit card rates, the amount of money that the federal government spends on its debt. It will influence the rates and amount of money that students have to pay if they're taking out loans for their education. If people are purchasing homes, mortgage rates. People want those rates lower, not higher.

The Federal Reserve is empowered with this ability to make the decision that even though no one wants interest rates to be higher, sometimes that is the best policy to prevent these other problems. However, presidents can also get a chance to appoint the leaders of agencies like the Federal Reserve or the Federal Trade Commission, which still needs confirmation by the Senate. These leaders go on to make important decisions that greatly impact the economy. We can see a little bit of their influence happening for sure. Ideologically, we'd expect these people to be similar to the president, which is why the president picked them in the first place. And so we can expect the president's ideology to matter there. Presidents could have more influence over fiscal policies, which is all about how the U.S. Government makes and spends its money. But ultimately, the president can't achieve much alone without the approval of Congress. The president can talk until the proverbial cows come home.

about what they're going to do, but it requires Congress to open the gate for those cows to allow the federal spending to occur. So a president does not have the power to propose a program to attach federal spending to it and then enact that spending because constitutionally. The Congress must approve the spending, and the president then has to approve what Congress essentially checks off. The president's role is even more minimized when the president and Congress are at odds. The president comes in, or after two years, let's say Congress now switches political power. What happens, right? The president, it doesn't matter what they want anymore, right? It has to get through Congress. And so if Congress is shutting down the president's agenda, nothing gets passed. Beyond policies, many other variables make it challenging for the president to steer the economy however they see fit. The US economy is like a giant supertanker, and that

supertanker is going to have a great deal of momentum by virtue of its size and velocity that a president simply has no control over. What's going on in the global economy with supply chains, of minerals, or oil, or oil prices, or wars, or pandemics. All of these can really have a big influence on what's happening in the U.S. economy. And yet they're very much outside of the president's direct control. Even beyond that, individual states within the United States, they have influence over their state tax policies, unemployment insurance in different states. The president doesn't control a lot of what goes on in each state. And yet what goes on in each state can have a lot of influence on the overall national economy. The president's influence on the economy, it's not zero, but it is highly contingent and also not necessarily immediate in terms of what can be done.

The president's role can become more important during times of crises. I think the president's powers are most important when the country has an identifiable crisis. In 2008, we had the Troubled Assets Relief Program signed into law by President Bush. One year later, we're still in the midst, in the throes of the Great Recession. President Obama comes in and signs Congress's Reinvestment and Recovery Act, the stimulus package of 2009. These were major spending bills to try to stop the economy from going into just freefall. And so, in those particular moments, the president can have an influence. In theory, had President Bush or President Obama decided not to sign those bills, I think most economists would tell you that it would be pretty scary. The president can figure out where the guardrails allow them to insert some special policy or initiative without the involvement of Congress.

If a president is well served by essentially their advisers, they will know where executive action can apply or where they think that they can essentially make a move without the approval of Congress. But those are really special situations. Presidents also play a large role in negotiating trade deals and imposing sanctions or tariffs that can influence the economy more directly. In theory, presidents could have a pretty big effect were they to do something pretty extreme. And so using tariffs, for example, if enormous 100% tariffs were imposed on any imports coming from particular countries, that could matter a lot. I mean, consumers purchase these products. Businesses in the US rely on these products as inputs for their own businesses. It's just that in normal practice, presidents don't do this. Experts also suggest that the outcome of an election could also have an impact on consumer sentiment. In our polarized era, a question that sometimes comes

up is, might consumers actually change their spending habits or their habits for the future based on who is running, right? So if someone believes that a Republican president would be better for a business, will they hold off on investment or something until that president comes into office? Because they'd feel more secure about the economy. And so in this way, some have been interested in researching this idea that consumers change their behavior in ways that can affect the economy based on who is in office. It's important for voters to have accurate expectations of what the president is actually able to do. If you have this idea in your head that presidents wave a wand and they'll make the economy wonderful, and that everything will turn around in a few months and just be great. Well, it's kind of a delusion of sorts. There is no overstating the importance of the presidency, but we can overstate the powers that we think the

President can wield. And that's a problem.

Does The President Actually Control The U.S. Economy?

Welcome to the official YouTube channel for CNBC. From 'Wall Street' to 'Main Street' to award winning original documentaries and Reality TV series, CNBC has you covered. Experience special sneak peeks of your favorite shows, exclusive video and more.

For real-time news updates from around the world, visit: http://www.cnbc.com

For CNBC's primetime TV lineup, visit http://tv.cnbc.com

For CNBC's International YouTube channel, visit: http://www.youtube.com/cnbcinternational

CNBC

2024년 대통령 선거가 개인 재정에 미치는 영향

미국인의 절반은 2024년 대선이 개인 재정에 영향을 미칠 것이라고 생각하며, 유권자의 99%는 투표 시 경제를 우선순위에 두고 있습니다.

경제에 대한 대통령의 영향력에 대한 인식은 종종 과장되어 있으며, 정책 입안자들은 통화 및 재정 정책을 주요 도구로 사용합니다.

금리는 낮은 실업률과 낮은 인플레이션의 균형을 목표로 사람들의 저축과 소비 습관에 영향을 미치는 데 중요한 역할을 합니다.

통화 정책에서 연방준비제도의 역할

미국의 통화 정책에 대한 권한은 대통령이 아닌 연방준비제도이사회에 있습니다.

연방준비제도가 사용하는 도구인 금리 인상은 신용카드 금리, 정부 지출, 대출금 상환에 상당한 영향을 미칠 수 있습니다.

대통령은 연방준비제도이사회와 같은 기관의 수장을 임명할 수 있지만, 재정 정책에 영향을 미치려면 궁극적으로 의회의 승인이 필요합니다.

경제를 형성하는 데 있어 대통령의 제한된 권한

대통령은 의회의 연방 지출 승인을 요구하며, 특히 두 기관이 상충할 때 의회의 권한을 최소화합니다.

미국 경제의 규모와 공급망 및 팬데믹과 같은 글로벌 요인으로 인해 대통령이 통제력을 행사하기 어렵습니다.

개별 주 역시 국가 경제를 형성하는 데 중요한 역할을 하므로 대통령의 영향력은 더욱 제한됩니다.

대침체기에 부시 대통령과 오바마 대통령이 서명한 주요 지출 법안에서 볼 수 있듯이 위기 상황에서는 대통령의 역할이 중요해집니다.

특히 조언을 잘 받으면 의회의 승인 없이도 특별 정책과 이니셔티브를 시행할 수 있는 권한이 있습니다.

또한 대통령은 무역 거래, 제재 및 관세를 통해 경제에 직접적인 영향을 미칠 수 있지만 실제로 극단적인 조치를 취하는 경우는 거의 없습니다.

대통령 리더십이 소비자 행동에 미치는 영향

소비자는 재임 중인 대통령의 소속 정당에 따라 지출 및 투자 습관을 바꿀 수 있습니다.

이러한 행동은 개인이 재정적 결정을 내릴 때 안정성을 추구하기 때문에 잠재적으로 경제에 영향을 미칠 수 있습니다.

유권자들이 경제 변화에 영향을 미칠 수 있는 대통령의 권한에 대한 현실적인 기대치를 갖는 것이 중요합니다.