The Nursing Home Industry: A Reply

I expand on the ownership-based approach to money and argue that core elements of conflicting commodity, state, credit, and ownership-based money views can be integrated into a theory of money through a framework based on claims to property and the associated categories of settlement assets and money of account. This new synthesis reveals that, in all major ownership-based societies, individuals have entered into economic dealings by issuing enforceable claims to their property on the basis of ownership and security. Claims to property historically emerged in two forms: (i) debtor-issued claims, including negotiable instruments and book accounts; and (ii) creator-issued claims, such as bank notes and bank deposits. Commodities, coins, and state instruments attain their monetary roles because they allow private claims to be finally settled. Eight archetypes of monetary arrangements, reflecting the historical evolution of monetary systems, are identified and compared. I demonstrate the role of property assets in money creation, the proper significance of money of account, and delineate the role of state-issued payment instruments.     

Reply

Zangenehzadeh concludes that student evaluations of faculty performance result in higher grades, and he makes estimates of the amount of inflation. An exchange ensues with Robert C. Scott on the significance of the methodology on the results.     

Reply

This note argues that the comment by Withagen (1990) is based on a purely mathematical point of view. From an economic point of view the criticism is not so interesting and does not affect the major conclusions of Gradus (1989).     

Modern Money Theory: A Reply to Palley

Abstract

Modern Money Theory (MMT) has explained why monetarily sovereign governments have a very flexible policy space that is unconstrained by hard financial limits. It has provided institutional and theoretical insights about the workings of economies with monetarily sovereign and non-sovereign governments. It has also provided policy insights with respect to financial stability, price stability and full employment. Yet there have been many critics of MMT, including Palley (2014). Critiques of MMT can be grouped into five categories: views about the origins of money and the role of taxes in the acceptance of government currency, views about fiscal policy, views about monetary policy, the relevance of MMT conclusions for developing economies, and the validity of the policy recommendations of MMT. This paper addresses Palley's criticism of MMT using the circuit approach and national accounting identities, and by progressively adding additional economic sectors.