Nonneutrality of Money in Classical Monetary Thought
13 Pages Posted: 6 Nov 2012
Date Written: 1991
Abstract
Contrary to the strawman “classical” model of the textbooks, the original classical economists did not believe that money-stock changes affect only the price level and not real output and employment. Most classicals saw money as having powerful short-run real effects and perhaps some residual long-run effects as well. Concern for money’s impact on real activity strongly influenced the classicals’ views of the desirability or undesirability of monetary expansion and contraction.
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation
Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?
Recommended Papers
-
Inflation and Unemployment: A Layperson's Guide to the Phillips Curve
-
By Marko Terviö
-
The Phillips Curve and NAIRU Revisited: New Estimates for Germany
By Bernd Fitzenberger, Wolfgang Franz, ...
-
The Quantity Theory of Money is Valid - The New Keynesians are Wrong!
By Bernd Süssmuth and Claude Hillinger
-
The Current Crisis and the Culpability of Macroeconomic Theory
By Paul Ormerod