IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ins/quaeco/qf0602.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Some observations about the endogenous money theory

Author

Listed:
  • Bertocco Giancarlo

    (Department of Economics, University of Insubria, Italy)

Abstract

The endogenous money theory constitutes the core element of the post-keynesian monetary theory. The first formulation of this theory can be found in the works of Kaldor published in the 1970s. Taking these studies as a starting point, the post-keynesians elaborated two versions of the endogenous money theory which differ in their assumptions about the behaviour of the monetary authorities and the banking system, and hence offer different conclusions about the slope of the money supply curve. The aim of this paper is to evaluate the importance of the endogenous money theory using a criterion which can be defined on the basis of Keynes’s distinction between a real exchange economy and a monetary economy. As is well known, Keynes (1933a, 1933b) uses the former term to refer to an economy in which money is merely a tool to reduce the cost of exchange and whose presence does not alter the structure of the economic system, which remains substantially a barter economy. A monetary economy instead refers to an economic system in which the presence of fiat money radically changes the nature of exchange and the characteristics of the production process. Keynes (1933a, p. 410) notes that the classical economists formulated an explanation of how the real-exchange economy works, convinced that this explanation could be easily applied to a monetary economy. He believed that this conviction was unfounded and stressed the need to elaborate a ‘monetary theory of production, to supplement the real–exchange theories which we already possess’ (Keynes, 1933a, p. 411). The specification of the elements determining the non-neutrality of money is thus the key factor differentiating Keynes’s theory from the classical one.1 The criterion used to evaluate the significance of the endogenous money theory is whether it enables us to elaborate on and to broaden the explanation of the justification the nonneutrality of money formulated by Keynes. In The General Theory the reasons for the non-neutrality of money are grounded in the store of wealth function of money; the liquidity preference theory is the element on which the keynesian explanation of income fluctuation is based. The importance of the money endogeneity theory can therefore be assessed in relation to its ability to specify determinant factors for the non-neutrality of money that have not been highlighted by the liquidity preference theory; in other words, the significance of the endogenous money theory depends on its capacity to bring out elements of a monetary economy that have been overlooked in the liquidity preference theory. This paper presents the following results. First of all, it shows that the endogenous money theory makes it possible to extend the analysis of the factors accounting for the non-neutrality of money beyond what Keynes has done in The General Theory; in particular this paper argues that the theory of money endogeneity obtains this result by underlying the means of payment function of money. Second, the work shows that the money endogeneity theory gives credence to certain points developed by Keynes in some works published in 1933 and between 1937 and 1939. Third, the work emphasises that the novel aspects of the money endogeneity theory do not depend on the particular version of this theory, i.e. they do not depend on the slope of the credit supply curve. Finally, in the paper the most significant aspects of the money endogeneity theory are presented by means of a theoretical model that distinguishes clearly between the credit market and the money market. It is shown that an important element of the money endogeneity theory is that it elaborates an alternative credit theory to the neoclassical one.The paper is divided into three parts. In the first one, the most relevant aspects of the money endogeneity theory are presented starting from Kaldor’s work, and we bring out the consistency between that theory and the considerations formulated by Keynes in some writings which preceded and followed the publication of The General Theory. In the second part the two versions of the money endogeneity theory are analysed and it is noted that the debate between the supporters of these two versions risks overshadowing the innovative aspects of the money endogeneity theory that do not depend on the slope of the credit and money supply curves. Then in the third part, the aspects that distinguish a monetary economy from a real-exchange economy and that emerge because of the money endogeneity theory are described.

Suggested Citation

  • Bertocco Giancarlo, 2006. "Some observations about the endogenous money theory," Economics and Quantitative Methods qf0602, Department of Economics, University of Insubria.
  • Handle: RePEc:ins:quaeco:qf0602
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.eco.uninsubria.it/RePEc/pdf/QF2006_2.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Giuseppe Fontana, 2003. "Post Keynesian Approaches to Endogenous Money: A time framework explanation," Review of Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(3), pages 291-314.
    2. Nicholas Kaldor, 1975. "What is Wrong with Economic Theory," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 89(3), pages 347-357.
    3. Lavoie, Marc, 1996. "Horizontalism, Structuralism, Liquidity Preference and the Principle of Increasing Risk," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 43(3), pages 275-300, August.
    4. Arestis, Philip & Howells, Peter, 1999. "The Supply of Credit Money and the Demand for Deposits: A Reply," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 23(1), pages 115-119, January.
    5. Paul Davidson, 1991. "Is Probability Theory Relevant for Uncertainty? A Post Keynesian Perspective," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 5(1), pages 129-143, Winter.
    6. Paul Davidson, 2002. "Financial Markets, Money and the Real World," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2467.
    7. Giuseppe Fontana, 2000. "Post Keynesians and Circuitists on Money and Uncertainty: An Attempt at Generality," Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(1), pages 27-48, September.
    8. Kaldor, Nicholas, 1972. "The Irrelevance of Equilibrium Economics," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 82(328), pages 1237-1255, December.
    9. Trevithick, J A, 1994. "The Monetary Prerequisites for the Multiplier: An Adumbration of the Crowding-Out Hypothesis," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 18(1), pages 77-90, February.
    10. Nicholas Kaldor, 1985. "How Monetarism Failed," Challenge, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(2), pages 4-13, May.
    11. Hicks, J. R., 1969. "A Theory of Economic History," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198811633.
    12. Giancarlo Bertocco, 2007. "The characteristics of a monetary economy: a Keynes--Schumpeter approach," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 31(1), pages 101-122, January.
    13. Paul Davidson, 1978. "Money and the Real World," Palgrave Macmillan Books, Palgrave Macmillan, edition 0, number 978-1-349-15865-2, December.
    14. Bibow, Jorg, 1995. "Some Reflections on Keynes's 'Finance Motive' for the Demand for Money," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 19(5), pages 647-666, October.
    15. L. Randall Wray, 1992. "Commercial Banks, the Central Bank, and Endogenous Money," Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(3), pages 297-310, March.
    16. L. Randall Wray, 1998. "Understanding Modern Money," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 1668.
    17. L. Randall Wray, 1998. "Modern Money," Macroeconomics 9810002, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. Marc Lavoie, 1992. "Foundations of Post-Keynesian Economic Analysis," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 275.
    19. Arestis, Philip & Howells, Peter, 1996. "Theoretical Reflections on Endogenous Money: The Problem with 'Convenience Lending.'," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 20(5), pages 539-551, September.
    20. Thomas I. Palley, 1996. "Post Keynesian Economics," Palgrave Macmillan Books, Palgrave Macmillan, number 978-0-230-37412-6, December.
    21. Kaldor, Nicholas, 1980. "Monetarism and UK Monetary Policy," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 4(4), pages 293-318, December.
    22. Thomas I. Palley, 2002. "Endogenous Money: What it is and Why it Matters," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(2), pages 152-180, May.
    23. David H. Romer, 2000. "Keynesian Macroeconomics without the LM Curve," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 14(2), pages 149-169, Spring.
    24. Philip Arestis, 1997. "Money, Pricing, Distribution and Economic Integration," Palgrave Macmillan Books, Palgrave Macmillan, number 978-0-230-37448-5, December.
    25. Thomas I. Palley, 1996. "Accommodationism versus Structuralism: Time for an Accommodation," Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(4), pages 585-594, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Marco Missaglia, 2013. "Neoclassical and Keynesian macro models: thinking about the ‘special case’," Chapters, in: Jesper Jespersen & Mogens Ove Madsen (ed.), Teaching Post Keynesian Economics, chapter 11, pages 187-211, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    2. Alberto Botta, 2011. "Fiscal Policy, Eurobonds and Economic Recovery: Some Heterodox Policy Recipes against Financial Instability and Sovereign Debt Crisis," Economics and Quantitative Methods qf1114, Department of Economics, University of Insubria.

    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. Giancarlo Bertocco, 2005. "The Role of credit in a Keynesian monetary economy," Review of Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(4), pages 489-511.
    2. Giuseppe Fontana, 2004. "Rethinking Endogenous Money: A Constructive Interpretation Of The Debate Between Horizontalists And Structuralists," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55(4), pages 367-385, November.
    3. Hein, Eckhard, 2010. "The rate of interest as a macroeconomic distribution parameter: Horizontalism and Post-Keynesian models of distribution of growth," MPRA Paper 23372, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Mark Setterfield, 2014. "An essay on horizontalism, structuralism and historical time," Working Papers 1402, Trinity College, Department of Economics.
    5. Boermans, Martijn Adriaan & Moore, Basil J, 2008. "Locked-in and Sticky Textbooks: Mainstream Teaching of the Money Supply Process," MPRA Paper 14845, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised Apr 2009.
    6. Marc Lavoie, 2001. "Endogenous Money in a Coherent Stock-Flow Framework," Macroeconomics 0103007, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Eckhard Hein, 2006. "Money, interest and capital accumulationin Karl Marx's economics: a monetary interpretation and some similaritiesto post-Keynesian approaches," The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(1), pages 113-140.
    8. Eckhard Hein, 2007. "Interest Rate, Debt, Distribution And Capital Accumulation In A Post‐Kaleckian Model," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(2), pages 310-339, May.
    9. M. Lopreite, 2012. "The endogenous money hypothesis and securitization: the Euro area case (1999-2010)," Economics Department Working Papers 2012-EP02, Department of Economics, Parma University (Italy).
    10. Georgios Argitis & Stella Michopoulou, 2011. "Are Full Employment and Social Cohesion Possible Under Financialization?," Forum for Social Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(2), pages 139-155, January.
    11. Eckhard Hein, 2006. "Interest, Debt and Capital Accumulation—A Kaleckian Approach," International Review of Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(3), pages 337-352.
    12. Bill Lucarelli, 2011. "The Economics of Financial Turbulence," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 14252.
    13. Giuseppe Fontana & Ezio Venturino, 2003. "Endogenous Money: An Analytical Approach," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 50(4), pages 398-416, September.
    14. Aleš Krejdl, 2003. "Alternativní postkeynesovské modely determinace peněžní zásoby [Alternative post-keynesian models of money supply determination]," Politická ekonomie, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2003(2), pages 263-285.
    15. Eckhard Hein, 2017. "Post-Keynesian macroeconomics since the mid 1990s: main developments," European Journal of Economics and Economic Policies: Intervention, Edward Elgar Publishing, vol. 14(2), pages 131-172, September.
    16. Hein, Eckhard, 2004. "Money, credit and the interest rate in Marx's economic. On the similarities of Marx's monetary analysis to Post-Keynesian economics," MPRA Paper 18608, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Joerg Bibow, 2005. "Liquidity Preference Theory Revisited—To Ditch or to Build on It?," Method and Hist of Econ Thought 0508003, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. Thomas I. Palley, 2013. "Horizontalists, verticalists, and structuralists: the theory of endogenous money reassessed," Review of Keynesian Economics, Edward Elgar Publishing, vol. 1(4), pages 406—424-4, OCT.
    19. Marc Lavoie & Wynne Godley, 2000. "Kaleckian Models of Growth in a Stock-Flow Monetary Framework: A Neo-Kaldorian Model," Economics Working Paper Archive wp_302, Levy Economics Institute.
    20. Hein, Eckhard, 2002. "Money, interest, and capital accumulation in Karl Marx's economics: A monetary interpretation," WSI Working Papers 102, The Institute of Economic and Social Research (WSI), Hans Böckler Foundation.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ins:quaeco:qf0602. 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: Segreteria Dipartimento (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/feinsit.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.