IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/fip/fedmsr/99.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Ricardian equivalence and money dominated in return: are they mutually consistent generally?

Author

Listed:
  • Neil Wallace

Abstract

Different conclusions about the effects of open market operations are reached even among economists using full employment and rational expectations models. I show that these differences can be attributed to different assumptions regarding the concept of the deficit that is held fixed for an open market operation, the diversity among agents, and the features generating money demand. With regard to those features, I argue that plausible ways of explaining the holding of low-return money preclude the kind of perfect credit markets needed to obtain Ricardian equivalence.

Suggested Citation

  • Neil Wallace, 1985. "Ricardian equivalence and money dominated in return: are they mutually consistent generally?," Staff Report 99, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.
    • Handle: RePEc:fip:fedmsr:99
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.minneapolisfed.org/research/sr/sr99.pdf
    File Function: Full Text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wallace, Neil, 1981. "A Modigliani-Miller Theorem for Open-Market Operations," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 71(3), pages 267-274, June.
    2. Miller, Preston, 1976. "A compound note : Or, a note on Harry Johnson's note on the theory of transactions demand for cash," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 2(1), pages 113-120, January.
    3. Sargent, Thomas J & Wallace, Neil, 1982. "The Real-Bills Doctrine versus the Quantity Theory: A Reconsideration," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 90(6), pages 1212-1236, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. P. Antipa & C. Chamley, 2017. "Monetary and Fiscal Policy in England during the French Wars (1793-1821)," Working papers 627, Banque de France.
    2. Stanley Fischer, 1982. "A Framework for Monetary and Banking Analysis," NBER Working Papers 0936, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Mark Gertler & Peter Karadi, 2013. "QE 1 vs. 2 vs. 3. . . : A Framework for Analyzing Large-Scale Asset Purchases as a Monetary Policy Tool," International Journal of Central Banking, International Journal of Central Banking, vol. 9(1), pages 5-53, January.
    4. Benigno, Pierpaolo & Robatto, Roberto, 2019. "Private money creation, liquidity crises, and government interventions," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 42-58.
    5. Pietro Reichlin, 2018. "Money Creation: Tax or Public Liquidity?," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 50(5), pages 1073-1094, August.
    6. Michael Sproul, 1998. "Backed Money, Fiat Money, and the Real Bills Doctrine," UCLA Economics Working Papers 774B, UCLA Department of Economics.
    7. Stephen D. Williamson & Randall Wright, 2010. "New monetarist economics: methods," Review, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, vol. 92(May), pages 265-302.
    8. Ozhan, Galip Kemal, 2020. "Financial intermediation, resource allocation, and macroeconomic interdependence," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 265-278.
    9. Andreas Schabert, 2003. "On the Relevance of Open Market Operations," Working Paper Series in Economics 4, University of Cologne, Department of Economics.
    10. Sargent, Thomas J. & Wallace, Meil, 1983. "A model of commodity money," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(1), pages 163-187.
    11. Ozhan, Galip Kemal, 2021. "News-driven international credit cycles," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    12. Lloyd, S. P., 2017. "Unconventional Monetary Policy and the Interest Rate Channel: Signalling and Portfolio Rebalancing," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 1735, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    13. Lawrence Christiano & Daisuke Ikeda, 2011. "Government Policy, Credit Markets and Economic Activity," NBER Working Papers 17142, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    14. Ricardo Reis, 2016. "Can the Central Bank Alleviate Fiscal Burdens?," Discussion Papers 1701, Centre for Macroeconomics (CFM).
    15. Dirk Niepelt, 2020. "Monetary Policy with Reserves and CBDC: Optimality, Equivalence, and Politics," Working Papers 20.05, Swiss National Bank, Study Center Gerzensee.
    16. Sergeyev, Dmitriy & Iovino, Luigi, 2018. "Central Bank Balance Sheet Policies Without Rational Expectations," CEPR Discussion Papers 13100, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    17. Koijen, Ralph S.J. & Koulischer, François & Nguyen, Benoît & Yogo, Motohiro, 2021. "Inspecting the mechanism of quantitative easing in the euro area," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 140(1), pages 1-20.
    18. Kerstin Bernoth & Marcel Fratzscher & Philipp König, 2014. "Schwache Preisentwicklung und Deflationsgefahr im Euroraum: Grenzen der konventionellen Geldpolitik," DIW Wochenbericht, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research, vol. 81(12), pages 235-249.
    19. Antinolfi, Gaetano & Keister, Todd, 2006. "Discount Window Policy, Banking Crises, And Indeterminacy Of Equilibrium," Macroeconomic Dynamics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 10(1), pages 1-19, February.
    20. Brunnermeier, Markus K. & Niepelt, Dirk, 2019. "On the equivalence of private and public money," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 27-41.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:fip:fedmsr:99. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kate Hansel (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cfrbmus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.