The Contagion of a Dollar: Why the Economic Multiplier is More Like a Virus Than a Formula

My Breakup with the Multiplier

It was in a sterile, fluorescent-lit lecture hall during my first year of graduate studies in economics that I first met—and promptly broke up with—the multiplier effect.

The professor presented it with a certain reverence, a cornerstone of macroeconomic thought encapsulated in a tidy, almost magical formula: $Multiplier = \frac{1}{1 – MPC}$.¹

Here, we were told, was the elegant mechanism by which an initial injection of spending—say, from a government stimulus program—could ripple through the economy to create a much larger impact on national income.

The formula told me that it happened.

It gave me a number to calculate.

Yet, it felt like a profound intellectual failure.

It was a black box.

It described a “chain reaction” but offered no visceral feel for the dynamics of that chain.³

It asserted that money is “used many times” but was silent on the human behaviors and structural forces that dictate the speed and spread of that usage.³

This created a chasm between the clean theory on the whiteboard and the messy, chaotic, and deeply human economy I saw in the world.

This sense of dissatisfaction, of having an answer without a story, would define my early years as a practitioner trying to reconcile elegant models with policy reality.

The textbook explanations felt static, disembodied, like a photograph of a dynamic process.

I was left with a nagging question that the simple formula could not answer: What if the multiplier isn’t a fixed coefficient to be calculated, but a dynamic process to be understood? What if a dollar of stimulus acts less like a number in an equation and more like…

something else entirely?

The Epiphany: An Economist Reads an Epidemiology Paper

Years later, while grappling with the very real-world problem of forecasting the impact of a proposed fiscal package, I stumbled upon a solution in the most unlikely of places: a research paper on epidemiology.

The paper detailed the standard SIR (Susceptible-Infected-Recovered) model of viral spread and its central organizing principle: the Basic Reproduction Number, or R0.⁵

R0, the paper explained, is defined as the expected number of secondary cases produced by a single infection in a completely susceptible population.⁶

As I read, the pieces clicked into place with an almost audible snap.

This wasn’t just a loose metaphor; it was a structurally identical system.

The economy wasn’t a machine to be calibrated; it was a population to be studied.

An injection of government spending wasn’t just a variable; it was an “index case.” The act of spending wasn’t a mere transaction; it was a “transmission event.”

The true “aha!” moment came from the formula for R0 itself: $R_0 = \tau \cdot \bar{c} \cdot d$, where $\tau$ is the transmissibility of the virus, $\bar{c}$ is the contact rate between individuals, and $d$ is the duration of infectiousness.⁶

Unlike the static economic formula, this one was dynamic and behavioral.

It broke the process of contagion down into its intuitive, constituent parts.

This new lens provided the story I had been missing.

It offered a framework not just for explaining the multiplier, but for truly understanding its mechanics.

The following table lays out this new paradigm, mapping the abstract concepts of economics onto the intuitive framework of epidemiology.

It serves as the cornerstone for re-examining this fundamental economic principle.

Table 1: The Multiplier and R0 – A Comparative Framework

Economic Concept (The Multiplier)	Epidemiological Analogue (R0)	Description of the Parallel
Initial Spending (e.g., Fiscal Stimulus)	Index Case / Initial Infection	The exogenous event that introduces the “virus” (new money) into a “susceptible population” (the economy). 4
Marginal Propensity to Consume (MPC)	Transmission Rate (τ)	The probability that contact (a transaction) results in a new “infection” (the recipient spending the money). A higher MPC means the economic virus is more contagious. 6
Velocity of Money	Contact Rate (cˉ)	The number of times money changes hands in a period. A higher velocity is like a higher rate of social mixing, increasing opportunities for transmission. 4
Economic Activity / Spending Rounds	Generations of Infection	The initial spending is the first round. The re-spending of that income is the second round, and so on, just like successive generations of viral spread. 4
Leakages (Savings, Taxes, Imports)	“Immunity” & Containment Measures	Factors that remove money from the active spending stream, akin to individuals becoming immune (saving), being isolated (taxes), or leaving the population (imports). These actions reduce the effective reproduction number. 5
The Multiplier Value (e.g., 2.5)	The Basic Reproduction Number (R0)	A single number representing the total expected number of subsequent “infections” (total economic activity) generated by the initial case. If R0 > 1, an epidemic occurs; if the Multiplier > 1, the economy grows by more than the initial spending. 1

The Initial Injection: Patient Zero of Economic Growth

Using this new paradigm, we can explore the “index case” of the multiplier effect—the initial, autonomous injection of spending that kicks off the entire process.¹²

The very idea of such an injection was born from crisis.

During the Great Depression of the 1930s, the global economy collapsed into a state of prolonged, high unemployment and inadequate demand.¹³

Classical economic theory, which held that free markets would automatically return to full employment, was powerless to explain or solve the crisis.¹⁵

It was in this intellectual vacuum that British economist John Maynard Keynes proposed a revolutionary idea: the economy could get stuck in a terrible equilibrium, and a deliberate, external “infection” of government spending was needed to jolt it back to health.¹³

This concept, first articulated by his student Richard Kahn, was the genesis of the multiplier.¹⁴

It posited that an economy, like a population with no immunity, was susceptible to a beneficial contagion of spending.

There are several types of “Patient Zero” that can initiate this economic spread:

• Fiscal Stimulus (Government Spending): This is the most direct form of injection, where the government deliberately introduces the spending “pathogen.” The New Deal’s infrastructure projects in the 1930s and the over $800 billion American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) of 2009 are prime examples.¹⁸ During the 2008 financial crisis, the ARRA was deployed to “jump-start” the stalled economy, with economists later estimating its multiplier was around 1.5 to 2.0, meaning every dollar of spending generated up to two dollars in GDP.¹⁹
• Private Investment: Businesses can also serve as “Patient Zero.” When a company decides to build a new factory or expand its operations, that initial investment spending—on construction, equipment, and wages—acts as an autonomous injection, paying workers and suppliers who then spend that new income elsewhere.¹
• Tax Cuts: This is a more indirect form of injection. Rather than directly spending, the government increases the disposable income of households and firms. In our analogy, this is like giving the population a “vulnerability boost,” making them more susceptible to “catching” the spending virus and passing it on.²¹

The nature of this initial infection matters profoundly.

An infrastructure project, for instance, is like a slow-release virus with a long incubation period.

It suffers from implementation delays, but its long-term effects on productivity can be powerful.²³

In contrast, a direct stimulus check to households is like a highly contagious but short-lived virus; it spreads rapidly through the economy but may burn out faster.¹⁹

This reveals a critical trade-off for policymakers: the choice is not just

how much to spend, but how to spend it, depending on whether the goal is immediate relief or long-term recovery.

The Transmission Rate: The Marginal Propensity to Consume (MPC)

The engine of the multiplier—and the core of its contagion—is the Marginal Propensity to Consume (MPC).

In our epidemiological framework, the MPC is the “transmission rate” ($\tau$) of the economic virus.

It is the single most important factor determining how contagious a dollar of new income Is.⁸

Simply put, the MPC is the fraction of each additional dollar of income that a person or household spends rather than saves.⁸

If a household receives a $100 bonus and spends $80 of it, its MPC is 0.8.⁸

The remaining $20 that is saved represents the Marginal Propensity to Save (MPS), and by definition,

MPC + MPS = 1.²⁴

A higher MPC means a greater proportion of new income is immediately re-injected into the economy, fueling the next round of the chain reaction.

Crucially, this transmission rate is not uniform across the population.

Some groups are far more effective at spreading economic activity than others.

• The “Super-Spreaders” of the Economy: Lower-income households have a very high MPC, often close to 1. This is because they must devote most or all of any additional income to basic necessities like food, housing, and transportation.²⁶ When stimulus is directed toward these households, it has an extremely high transmission rate; the money is almost guaranteed to be spent immediately, creating income for someone else.
• The “Low-Contact” Individuals: Conversely, higher-income households have a much lower MPC. As income rises and essential needs are met, a larger fraction of any additional dollar is saved.⁸ Stimulus directed toward these groups has a lower transmission rate, as a significant portion of the money “leaks” out of the active spending stream into savings.

This heterogeneity has profound policy implications.

It explains why the design of fiscal policy is paramount.

Stimulus targeted at low-income groups, such as the temporary increases in food stamps or extended unemployment benefits seen in the U.S., has been estimated to have a much higher multiplier (around 1.6 to 1.7) than broad-based tax cuts that also benefit the wealthy (with multipliers estimated as low as 0.32).²¹

This is not a political judgment but a functional one, dictated by the varying “transmission rates” within the economic population.

Epidemiological models offer a powerful lens here through the concept of “heterogeneous contact”.⁶

While a simple model might use an average R0 for a population, more sophisticated models recognize that some individuals (super-spreaders) have far more contacts than others, dramatically affecting the course of an epidemic.

Likewise, the standard multiplier formula uses an

average MPC.

But in an economy with high inequality, the distribution of MPC is highly varied.

A stimulus that “infects” the low-MPC group will fizzle out, while one that infects the high-MPC group can trigger a much larger economic “outbreak” than the average MPC would predict.

This reframes the debate over targeted stimulus from one of social fairness to one of epidemiological efficiency.

The Economy’s Immune System: Leakages, Lags, and Limiting Factors

If the multiplier process were to continue unchecked, any initial injection of spending would cascade into infinite economic growth.

This doesn’t happen because the economy has a robust “immune system” that constantly removes money from the active spending stream.

In economics, these removal mechanisms are known as leakages.¹⁰

There are three primary “immune responses” that dampen the multiplier effect:

1. Saving (Marginal Propensity to Save, MPS): When a household or firm receives new income and chooses to save a portion of it, that money is withdrawn from the immediate cycle of spending and re-spending. This is the economic equivalent of an individual developing immunity to a virus; they are no longer an active participant in its transmission.¹¹
2. Taxes (Marginal Propensity to Tax, MPT): When the government taxes income, that money is removed from private hands and is no longer available for immediate consumption. This is analogous to a public health “containment” or “isolation” measure, taking an “infected” agent out of general circulation.¹⁰
3. Imports (Marginal Propensity to Import, MPM): When consumers or businesses spend their income on foreign-made goods or services, that money “leaks” out of the domestic economy entirely. This is like an infected person leaving the population, ending their chain of transmission within that specific community.¹⁰

These leakages are not just conceptual; they are mathematically integrated into more realistic multiplier formulas.

While the simple formula is $1/(1-MPC)$, a more comprehensive version for an open economy with taxes is $Multiplier = \frac{1}{MPS + MPT + MPM}$ (where MPS, MPT, and MPM are the marginal propensities to save, tax, and import, respectively).¹⁰

This formula simply states that the multiplier is the inverse of the sum of all leakages.

The larger the share of each dollar that leaks out in each round, the smaller the final multiplier will be.

This is how we calculate the “effective reproduction number” of our economic virus in a population with a functioning immune system.

Furthermore, the multiplier effect is not instantaneous.

Just as a virus has an incubation period, the economic impact has time lags.

It takes time for government funds to be disbursed, for businesses to make investment decisions, and for households to spend their new income.

The full impact of a stimulus can take up to 18 months or even longer to materialize, a critical real-world factor that simple models often ignore.¹⁰

A Contested Diagnosis: The Great Debate Over the Multiplier’s True Size

Just as epidemiologists can fiercely debate the true R0 of a new virus based on limited and noisy data, economists are locked in a decades-long debate about the true size—and even the existence—of the fiscal multiplier.

The diagnosis is highly contested, and for good reason.²⁹

The primary challenge is the “identification problem”: it is incredibly difficult to isolate the effect of a specific fiscal policy from the thousands of other variables churning in a complex economy.³¹

Did government spending cause GDP to grow, or was an already-improving economy causing both tax revenues and confidence to rise, leading to more spending (a problem of reverse causality)?.³³

This uncertainty has allowed various schools of economic thought to develop competing diagnoses of how the economic “body” functions.

Our epidemiological analogy helps clarify their positions.

Table 2: A Summary of Critiques of the Multiplier Effect

School of Thought	Core Argument	Analogy (The “Patient’s” Condition)
Keynesian	The economy can suffer from a lack of demand. Government spending can create a virtuous cycle of spending and income.	The patient has a treatable “infection” (low demand). A “vaccine” (stimulus) can create “herd immunity” (full employment). 13
Monetarist	The money supply, not fiscal spending, is the key driver of nominal GDP. Fiscal spending financed by borrowing just shuffles money around.	The patient’s health is determined by their “blood volume” (money supply). Fiscal policy is like a “topical cream” that ignores the underlying circulatory issue. 18
Austrian School	Government spending, financed by taxes or debt, has a 100% opportunity cost. It misallocates resources (“malinvestment”) and prevents the market’s natural, painful-but-necessary healing process.	The patient has an “autoimmune disease” (malinvestment caused by prior bad policy). The stimulus “vaccine” will trigger a severe, damaging inflammatory response and worsen the underlying condition. 35
New Classical (Rational Expectations)	People and firms anticipate future tax increases to pay for current stimulus. They save more now, neutralizing the multiplier effect.	The patient is a “hypochondriac who reads medical journals.” They anticipate the side effects of the treatment and alter their behavior to counteract it, rendering the medicine inert. 13
Crowding Out (General Critique)	Government spending and borrowing drive up interest rates, “crowding out” private investment that would have otherwise occurred. The net effect can be small or even negative.	The stimulus “vaccine” (public spending) is so aggressive it kills off the body’s own “healthy bacteria” (private investment), leaving the patient no better off. 35

This messy picture is reflected in real-world data, which shows that the multiplier’s value is not a fixed constant but varies wildly depending on the context:

• Economic Conditions: Multipliers are consistently found to be larger during recessions, when there are idle labor and capital—a more “susceptible” population. In an expansion, when the economy is near full capacity, government spending is more likely to crowd out private activity, resulting in a smaller multiplier.³³
• Type of Spending: As noted, the “strain” of the virus matters. Infrastructure spending often has a low short-term multiplier due to implementation lags but a high long-run one due to productivity gains. Direct aid to low-income households has a high short-term multiplier.²¹
• Financing: How the spending is paid for—through taxes, borrowing, or printing money—dramatically alters the outcome and the size of any potential crowding-out effect.³⁵

This variance explains why the debate is so persistent; different assumptions and different economic conditions can lead to vastly different conclusions, all supported by some set of data.

The table below illustrates this with real-world estimates, showing that there is no single “multiplier,” but rather a whole family of them.

Table 3: Estimated Fiscal Multipliers for Different Policies (Real-World Data)

Policy Type	Estimated Multiplier	Context / Explanation
Spending Increases
Increase Food Stamps	1.72 – 1.74	Targets very high-MPC households, leading to immediate spending. High “transmission rate.” 21
Extend Unemployment Benefits	1.60 – 1.61	Also targets high-MPC households who need the income for consumption. 21
Increased Infrastructure Spending	1.57	High long-term potential, but subject to short-term lags. 21
Tax Cuts
Payroll Tax Holiday	1.23 – 1.29	Broadly distributed, including to many middle- and low-income workers. 21
Refundable Lump-Sum Rebate	1.22	Similar to a direct check, effective if it reaches high-MPC groups. 21
Make Bush Tax Cuts Permanent	0.32 – 0.35	Primarily benefits higher-income, low-MPC households. Low “transmission rate.” 21
Cut Corporate Tax Rate	0.32	Effect depends on whether firms invest the savings or pass them to shareholders (who may have a low MPC). 21

From Abstract Formula to Living Framework

My journey with the multiplier effect began with the frustration of a static formula and ended with the discovery of a dynamic, living framework.

The epidemiological analogy did not just provide a better way to explain the multiplier; it provided a better way to think about it.

It resolved the disconnect between the sterile equation and the vibrant, complex system it sought to describe.

The power of this new paradigm is its ability to translate abstract economics into intuitive, human-scale concepts.

It emphasizes the behavioral and dynamic nature of the economy, forcing us to consider not just the amount of a stimulus, but its design and target.

It provides a shared language for complex ideas like heterogeneity (economic “super-spreaders”), leakages (the economy’s “immune system”), and time lags (the “incubation period”).

Most importantly, it helps organize the great economic debates not as intractable arguments, but as competing diagnostic models of a complex patient.

Perhaps the most profound lesson is that the deepest truths of a discipline are not always found within its formal boundaries.

By looking to a seemingly unrelated field like epidemiology, we can uncover more powerful and more human ways to understand how our economies work—not as predictable machines, but as complex, adaptive, and ultimately, contagious systems.

Works cited

1. Multiplier: What It Means in Finance and Economics – Investopedia, accessed on August 6, 2025, https://www.investopedia.com/terms/m/multiplier.asp
2. What Is the Multiplier Effect? Formula and Example – Investopedia, accessed on August 6, 2025, https://www.investopedia.com/terms/m/multipliereffect.asp
3. inomics.com, accessed on August 6, 2025, https://inomics.com/terms/multiplier-effect-1544827#:~:text=Put%20simply%2C%20the%20multiplier%20effect,can%20be%20used%20many%20times.
4. Multiplier Effect | INOMICS, accessed on August 6, 2025, https://inomics.com/terms/multiplier-effect-1544827
5. An Economist’s Guide to Epidemiology Models of … – MIT Economics, accessed on August 6, 2025, https://economics.mit.edu/sites/default/files/publications/JEP_CovidSubmission3Oct23.pdf
6. Notes On R0 | Population Sciences, accessed on August 6, 2025, https://populationsciences.berkeley.edu/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Jones-Notes-on-R0.pdf
7. The economic value of R0 for selective breeding against microparasitic diseases – PMC, accessed on August 6, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6993466/
8. Marginal Propensity to Consume (MPC) in Economics, With Formula – Investopedia, accessed on August 6, 2025, https://www.investopedia.com/terms/m/marginalpropensitytoconsume.asp
9. MPC and multiplier (video) – Khan Academy, accessed on August 6, 2025, https://www.khanacademy.org/economics-finance-domain/ap-macroeconomics/national-income-and-price-determinations/multipliers-ap/v/mpc-and-multiplier
10. The Keynesian Multiplier (DP IB Economics): Revision Note – Save My Exams, accessed on August 6, 2025, https://www.savemyexams.com/dp/economics/ib/22/hl/revision-notes/3-macroeconomics/3-6-demand-management-fiscal-policy/the-keynesian-multiplier/
11. 5.3 Multiplier analysis – Intro To Mathematical Economics – Fiveable, accessed on August 6, 2025, https://library.fiveable.me/introduction-to-mathematical-economics/unit-5/multiplier-analysis/study-guide/zWvDGD3l1xidhbKe
12. Multiplier Effect, accessed on August 6, 2025, https://www.albany.edu/~bd445/Economics_301_Intermediate_Macroeconomics_Slides_Spring_2014/Multiplier_Effect.pdf
13. What Is Keynesian Economics? – Back to Basics – Finance & Development, September 2014, accessed on August 6, 2025, https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/fandd/2014/09/basics.htm
14. Keynesian Economics: Theory and Applications – Investopedia, accessed on August 6, 2025, https://www.investopedia.com/terms/k/keynesianeconomics.asp
15. 32.1: The Great Depression and Keynesian Economics – Social Sci …, accessed on August 6, 2025, https://socialsci.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Economics/Principles_of_Economics_(LibreTexts)/32%3A_A_Brief_History_of_Macroeconomic_Thought_and_Policy/32.1%3A_The_Great_Depression_and_Keynesian_Economics
16. Keynesian economics – Wikipedia, accessed on August 6, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keynesian_economics
17. en.wikipedia.org, accessed on August 6, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiscal_multiplier#:~:text=In%20other%20words%2C%20an%20initial,1930%20and%20published%20in%201931.
18. Keynesian Multiplier: What It Is and How It’s Used – Investopedia, accessed on August 6, 2025, https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/09/keynesian-multiplier.asp
19. The Multiplier Effect – Economy Insights, accessed on August 6, 2025, https://www.economyinsights.com/p/the-multiplier-effect
20. www.stlouisfed.org, accessed on August 6, 2025, https://www.stlouisfed.org/open-vault/2020/february/meet-multiplier-effect#:~:text=The%20multiplier%20effect%20doesn’t,a%20change%20in%20consumer%20spending.
21. Fiscal Multiplier: Definition, Formula, and Example – Investopedia, accessed on August 6, 2025, https://www.investopedia.com/terms/f/fiscal-multiplier.asp
22. Multiplier Effect – A-Level Economics – Study Mind, accessed on August 6, 2025, https://studymind.co.uk/notes/multiplier-effect-a-level-economics/
23. The Macroeconomic Consequences of Infrastructure Investment, accessed on August 6, 2025, https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w27625/w27625.pdf
24. Keynesian Multiplier – Overview, Components, How to Calculate, accessed on August 6, 2025, https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/economics/keynesian-multiplier/
25. Lesson summary: The expenditure and tax multipliers (article) – Khan Academy, accessed on August 6, 2025, https://www.khanacademy.org/economics-finance-domain/ap-macroeconomics/national-income-and-price-determinations/multipliers-ap/a/lesson-summary-the-expenditure-and-tax-multipliers
26. Marginal Propensity to Consume (MPC) – (AP Macroeconomics) – Vocab, Definition, Explanations | Fiveable, accessed on August 6, 2025, https://library.fiveable.me/key-terms/ap-macro/marginal-propensity-to-consume-mpc
27. www.economicsobservatory.com, accessed on August 6, 2025, https://www.economicsobservatory.com/what-size-fiscal-multiplier#:~:text=When%20consumers%20are%20liquidity%2Dconstrained,is%20the%20role%20of%20expectations.
28. The potential macroeconomic benefits from increasing infrastructure investment, accessed on August 6, 2025, https://www.epi.org/publication/the-potential-macroeconomic-benefits-from-increasing-infrastructure-investment/
29. What is the fiscal multiplier and why is it so controversial? – Exploring Economics, accessed on August 6, 2025, https://www.exploring-economics.org/en/discover/fiscal-multiplier/
30. Why Do Economists Still Disagree over Government Spending Multipliers?, accessed on August 6, 2025, https://www.clevelandfed.org/publications/economic-commentary/2014/ec-201409-why-do-economists-still-disagree-over-government-spending-multipliers
31. Fiscal Multiplier – Definition, Formula, Factors, Measure, accessed on August 6, 2025, https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/economics/fiscal-multiplier/
32. Fiscal Multipliers : Size, Determinants, and Use in Macroeconomic Projections – International Monetary Fund (IMF), accessed on August 6, 2025, https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/tnm/2014/tnm1404.pdf
33. 5.7 The size of the multiplier and the impact of fiscal policy – The Economy 2.0 – CORE Econ, accessed on August 6, 2025, https://books.core-econ.org/the-economy/macroeconomics/05-macroeconomic-policy-07-multiplier-and-fiscal-policy.html
34. What Is Monetarism? – Back to Basics – Finance & Development …, accessed on August 6, 2025, https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/fandd/2014/03/basics.htm
35. The Keynesian Multiplier Concept Ignores Crucial Opportunity Costs …, accessed on August 6, 2025, https://mises.org/quarterly-journal-austrian-economics/keynesian-multiplier-concept-ignores-crucial-opportunity-costs
36. Fiscal multiplier – Wikipedia, accessed on August 6, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiscal_multiplier
37. Fiscal multiplier effect of infrastructure investment, accessed on August 6, 2025, https://www.gihub.org/infrastructure-monitor/insights/fiscal-multiplier-effect-of-infrastructure-investment/
38. Effects of Physical Infrastructure Spending on the Economy and the Budget Under Two Illustrative Scenarios, accessed on August 6, 2025, https://www.cbo.gov/publication/57407