首页> 外文OA文献 >What has happened to monetarism? An investigation into the Keynesian roots of Milton Friedman's monetary thought and its apparent monetarist legacies
【2h】

What has happened to monetarism? An investigation into the Keynesian roots of Milton Friedman's monetary thought and its apparent monetarist legacies

机译:货币主义发生了什么?对米尔顿弗里德曼货币思想的凯恩斯根源及其明显的货币主义遗产的考察

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

It is widely perceived that today's conventional monetary wisdom, and the common practice of monetary policy based thereupon, is essentially monetarist by nature, if not by name. One objective of this paper is to assess whether monetarism has had a lasting effect on the theory and practice of monetary policy; another is to scrutinize the key dividing lines between Milton Friedman's monetary thought and that of John Maynard Keynes. Among the paper's main theoretical findings are that the key issue is the theory of interest, which is at the root of differences in approach to money demand and liquidity preference. Similarities are more pronounced with respect to the supply of money and monetary policy control issues. However, while Keynes favored a stabilized wage unit combined with a flexible central bank to steer interest rates and aggregate demand, Friedman advocated a stabilized central bank combined with a free interest rate and employment determination in financial and labor markets, respectively. Additional differences arise at the practical and empirical levels: the dynamics of adjustment processes and expectation formation on the one hand, and the relative efficiency and riskiness of market-driven versus government-guided adjustments on the other. The puzzling fact is that, despite today's dominant market-enthusiast ideology, Friedman's idea of delegation
机译:人们普遍认为,当今的常规货币智慧以及以此为基础的货币政策的通行做法,本质上是货币主义者,即使不是名字也是如此。本文的一个目的是评估货币主义是否对货币政策的理论和实践产生了持久的影响。另一点是审查米尔顿·弗里德曼(Milton Friedman)和约翰·梅纳德·凯恩斯(John Maynard Keynes)的货币思想之间的主要分界线。在本文的主要理论发现中,关键问题是利益理论,这是货币需求和流动性偏好方法差异的根本所在。在货币供应和货币政策控制问题上,相似之处更为明显。然而,尽管凯恩斯主张稳定工资单位并结合灵活的中央银行来控制利率和总需求,但弗里德曼却主张稳定的中央银行结合自由利率和金融和劳动力市场的就业决定。在实践和经验层面还存在其他差异:一方面是调整过程和预期形成的动态,另一方面是市场驱动的调整与政府指导的调整的相对效率和风险。令人费解的事实是,尽管当今市场狂热者意识形态占主导地位,弗里德曼的委派思想

著录项

  • 作者

    Bibow Juf6rg;

  • 作者单位
  • 年度 2002
  • 总页数
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号