Financial Fragility and Public Social Spending: Unraveling the Endogenous Nexus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article provides both stylized facts and estimations of the endogenous nexus of the financial fragility hypothesis (FFH) with public social spending (PSS) for a paradigmatic Eurozone member country. The sample period 1995–2022 includes three major economic crises, the global financial crisis 2007–2009, the European debt crisis 2010–2015 and the COVID-19 pandemic one in 2020–2022. Within the context of the financialization literature, this paper is founded, for the first time, as far as we know, on the “financial fragility hypothesis”, combining the effects of both Minsky’s “financial instability”, as it has been extended for open economies, and the “Eurozone fragility one”. Similar to the relevant literature, the findings show that the PSS is associated, in a long-term steady state (cointegration), with the financial fragility process, starting, firstly, from the hedge-financing structure with high profitability of firms, when PSS decreases; secondly, to hyper-speculative financing with risky options, supported by bank credit and openness, indebtedness or discretionary fiscal policy, when PSS rises; thirdly, to the hyper-speculative or even Ponzi financing structures with over-indebtedness (leverage) from the global capital market, inflated asset prices and internationalized fragility, when PSS also rises, and so on. Our conclusion validates Minsky’s famous saying, “stability breeds instability”, also in the architecturally incomplete Eurozone. Policy implications are straightforward and discussed.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".