2023年3月1日水曜日

mihana@ヤンキー経世済民漫画さんのツイート モズラー



https://podcasts.apple.com/jp/podcast/the-mmt-podcast-with-patricia-pino-christian-reilly/id1375093518?i=1000537676528

47:00

just primarily about making people and politicians more aware of its fundamental propositions okay so you know more recently i've gotten a little bit uh deeper a little articulating the whole inflation thing differently and what what we have are two different things and and these things need some actual research and of course the price level is a function of prices paid by government and i won't go into why uh and at price level um you know the markets can only determine relative value they can't determine 
absolute value the only information they get about 
absolute value comes from the government through the prices it pays and so the price level is where it is because of the prices the government pays we've got three models that demonstrate 
this very clearly the umkc buckaroo the denison dollar and franklin frank where uh you know one out it takes one hour the buckaroo is worth one hour of student labor because that's what you have to do to earn it and it stayed there for 25 years there's been no inflation okay the only way it would be worth less than that is if the school started paying more than one buck a roof per hour if it paid two per hour then it would be worth half as much and so we've had a uh internally stable currency in all three universities for you know a long very long time to demonstrate this so we know we're not going to get any change in the price level uh unless the government changes the prices it pays we can get changes in relative value we do get changes in relative value they happen all the time but that's not that's a different matter okay and so the next thing i do is i say so the only way you can get inflation which is a continuous change in the price level is if the but you know uh under that loose definition let's call it is if the um 
government decided to continuously pay more and more every year which is what indexation is roughly about and all the great latin american inflations were traced to indexation by an economist named previs you know a long time ago so that's fairly well established in the research okay but if we look more closely at the academic definition of inflation which is a continuous increase in prices what does that actually mean because in the present nothing's happening prices aren't they just are where they are uh you know the central bank can't tell you what the rate of inflation is instantaneously they can tell you last month that the cpi changed by a certain amount or if they can forecast what it might change by next but they can't tell you like what's this instantaneous rate they've no way no way of measuring no idea uh so what what is the rate of inflation so if you look the way i read the academic definition is it's a continuous increase in prices faced by today's agents as they make their day-to-day decisions in business and their personal lives which means it's the term structure of prices which means uh if you're a jeweler and you need to buy gold what's important to you is how much gold costs in the spot market but also how much it costs in the forward market because you have to buy your gold to build your products for your jewelry for next year and the year after and the difference between spot prices and forward prices of course are a function almost entirely of the interest rate particularly the policy rate okay and if you're a home builder and somebody buys a house and it's going to be ready in a year part of that cost is your cost of carry for a year which is uh the interest rate you're goin

もちろん、物価水準は政府が支払う価格の関数です。もちろん物価水準は政府が支払う価格の関数で、その理由については説明しませんが、物価水準では......市場は相対的価値しか決定できず、
絶対的価値を決定できません。政府が支払う価格によって物価水準が決まるのです このことを明確に示すモデルが3つあります UMCのバッキャロー デニソンのドル フランクリン・フランクです バッキャローは1時間かかるので学生の労働1時間の価値があります それを稼ぐにはそうしなければならないからです 25年間そのままで、インフレはありませんでした 唯一の方法は、その価値がそれ以下になる場合です それ以下の価値になるのは 学校が1時間あたり1ドル以上の屋根代を払うようになった場合です もし1時間あたり2ドル払うようになったら 価値は半分になります だから3つの大学では内部的に安定した通貨を 長い間使って実証しました だから物価水準に変化がないことは分かっています あー 政府が支払う価格を変えない限り、
相対的な価値の変化は起こります。相対的な価値の変化は常に起こりますが、それは別の問題です。緩やかな定義で言うと 政府が毎年継続的に支払いを増やすと決めた場合です これが指標化です ラテンアメリカの大インフレは全て指標化に起因しています 昔プレヴィスという経済学者が言っていましたので 研究ではかなり確立されています しかしもっと詳しく見てみると インフレの学術的な定義、つまり物価の継続的な上昇を詳しく見てみると、実際のところどうなのでしょう。中央銀行はインフレ率を瞬時に知ることはできません 先月はCPIがいくら変化したか、あるいは次にどう変化するかを予測することはできますが、この瞬時の率がどうであるかは知ることができません 測定する方法もなく、わかりません では、インフレ率とは何でしょう 私が読んだ学術的定義では、今日のエージェントが日々の生活を送る中で直面する継続した物価上昇のことです ということです。 つまり、価格の期間構造です。あなたが宝石商で金を買う必要がある場合、重要なのは金のスポット市場での価格と、フォワード市場での価格です。スポット価格とフォワード価格の差は、もちろん金利、特に政策金利の関数です。あなたが住宅建設業者なら、誰かが家を買って、1年後に完成する予定なら、その費用の一部は1年間の持ち越し費用です。

あるいは


ーーー
#122 Warren Mosler, Philippa Sigl-Glöckner, Achim Truger, Paul Sheard: T...
https://youtu.be/Loy-ttA2dqY

2021/11

4:56
the big problem i see with the euro area or the eu is that you have a partial and inconsistent pooling or sharing of sovereignty so on some dimensions monetary policy freedom of movement of people foreign trade on some dimensions the eu functions as if it's one big you know united states of europe whereas on other margins um particularly fiscal policy you have these 27 countries or 19 countries depending on what we're looking at behaving as separate nation states that does not make any sense so how do you solve this problem either they have to move in europe to a more consistent and functional sharing of sovereignty that means going towards a fiscal union going towards political union as well in a much truer sense or i think they have to start to repatriate the sovereignty that they pulled in the past back to the nation-state level this is the mmt podcast with patricia pino and christian riley hi i'm christian reilly and welcome to the modern monetary theory podcast you can find us on twitter at mmtpodcast and you could support the show by going to patreon.com mmt podcast if this is your first time hearing about mmt you might want to listen to our first three episodes for an introduction which i've linked to in the show notes along with some other things that relate to this particular episode and as ever i've linked to where you can support this podcast financially via patreon.com mmt podcast support starts at a dollar a month or a pound a month or whatever the equivalent is wherever you live and no matter what level of support you give you get early access to all of our episodes and patron only episodes where you can ask me and patricia mmt questions we're 100 listener funded your financial support really helps keep the show going and your support in other ways whether it's by recommending us to other people or just by listening and spreading the word about this stuff really helps too a big thank you to all of our supporters so far and thanks as ever for the time you put into understanding mmt let's dive in hello and uh hopefully welcome back everyone um but for those who couldn't make it to the earlier panels my name is christian reilly i'm the co-host of the mmt podcast and on behalf of the organizers of the second international european mmt conference i'd like to extend a warm welcome to you our audience from around the world and once again it's my great pleasure to moderate this final panel for today on the political economy of fiscal policy and again to maximize time for the discussion i'll briefly introduce our panelists on this panel we have mmt founder and author of the seven deadly innocent frauds of economic policy warren mosler we have professor akim truger who is currently serving as a member of the german council of economic experts we have philippa siegel gleckner who is the director of the economics think tank and forgive my pronunciation here uh desonat and in english i believe that's the department of the future uh which sounds great and uh we have paul sheard who is professor paul sheard who is currently research fellow at the harvard kennedy school after a career of holding chief economist positions at lehman brothers standard paul's rating services and snp s and p global so given that we have such a distinguished panel let's get straight into the topics for discussion and i thought i'd throw this question to warren to start with and then come to each panelist in turn for their thoughts and any other opening remarks so turning to you warren why would a national government want to deliberately create unemployment for any people who weren't here for your interview yesterday a little recap.

 so there's uh two levels uh to that question one level on the fundamental level if if the government wants to be able to provision itself to hire a military legal system public health workers by using its currency it has to have people who are willing to work for that currency people who are looking for jobs paid in that currency and people looking for work in that currency that's how we define unemployment people looking for paid work not people looking to volunteer for the american heart association or something like that and so to create unemployment governments impose tax liabilities this creates and i always use a tax on everybody's house as an example so we don't have to start thinking of complex interactions due to 

transactions taxes
 like income tax 
and that kind of thing so you put a tax on everybody's house and something they don't have the national currency and now now you've got a you know a drain in the bathtub and they need to get the water to be able to live and so um they're out looking for paid work that pays in that currency and now the government can hire them with it otherwise worthless currency so that that answers your question on one level and on a second level and this is a bit always been troublesome for me but it's something we have to deal with people like unemployment just as a population be because let's say you have 10 unemployment 90 of people have jobs a lot of them are fixed income and you know there's the last thing they want is inflation of course not that they can't keep up but they don't want to have to deal with that and um they like the idea that if the pipe breaks they need a plumber there's three or four plumbers who are out of work you know competing uh to to fix their their pipes or if they need home improvements and they need a carpenter there are people out of work looking for work they like that situation when you get a situation closer to full employment and it's hard to find people to come out because they already work you know they have work and jobs and you have to pay more you know to compete with what they're doing people don't like that and so uh you almost have to appeal to the um humanitarian side of people into the you know some form of empathy to uh get support for real full employment problems when you uh fulfill for real full employment policy not problems policy at uh you know at that level so let me leave it at that.


つまり、その質問には2つのレベルがあります基本的なレベルの1つのレベル政府が通貨を使用して軍事法制度の公衆衛生労働者を雇うためにそれ自体を提供できるようにしたい場合は、喜んで働く人々を持たなければなりません その通貨 その通貨で支払われる仕事を探している人々とその通貨で仕事を探している人々 それが私たちが失業を定義する方法です これが生み出す納税義務を課す。私はいつも例としてみんなの家に税金を使うので、所得税などの

取引税による複雑な相互作用について考え始める必要がない

ので、みんなの家に税金をかけ、 彼らは国の通貨を持っていませんが、今ではあなたが知っている浴槽の排水口があり、彼らは生きることができるように水を得る必要があります。 あなたはその通貨で支払う有給の仕事を探していて、政府はそれ以外の価値のない通貨で彼らを雇うことができるので、それはあるレベルと2番目のレベルであなたの質問に答えます。 それは人口と同じように失業のような人々に対処しなければならないものです.10人の失業者がいるとしましょう.90人が仕事を持っています.彼らの多くは債券であり、彼らが最後に望んでいるのはインフレです. ついていけませんが、彼らはそれに対処する必要はありません。パイプが壊れた場合、配管工が必要であるという考えが気に入っています。 彼らのパイプまたは家の改善が必要で大工が必要な場合 仕事を探している失業者がいる 完全雇用に近づいた状況が好きで、すでに働いているために出てくる人を見つけるのが難しい 彼らには仕事と仕事があり、彼らがやっていることと競争するためにもっとお金を払わなければならないことを知っています. あなたが本当の完全雇用政策を達成するとき、あなたがそのレベルで知っている問題政策ではなく、本当の完全雇用問題の支持を得ることへの共感の.

Episode 123 - Warren Mosler: Understanding The Price Level And Inflation: https://www.patreon.com/posts/59856379
More on quantitative easing:
Episode 59 - Warren Mosler: What Do Central Banks Do?:https://www.patreon.com/posts/39070023
Episode 143 - Paul Sheard: What Is Quantitative Easing?: https://www.patreon.com/posts/71589989?pr=true
Episodes on monetary operations:
Episode 20 - Warren Mosler: The MMT Money Story (part 1): https://www.patreon.com/posts/28004824

mihana@ヤンキー経世済民漫画 ⁦‪@mihana07‬⁩   MMT podcastのモズラー回聞いてたけど、付加価値税や所得税も含めて取引にかかる税金に対する事務コスト(法令遵守コスト)が高すぎるので、これら複雑なシステムは一掃してシンプルに資産課税だけでいいのでは?と提案していた podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the…   2023/03/01 9:53     https://twitter.com/mihana07/status/1630733078300590081?s=61&t=uiKXyzk4l3Lq5y6Ezdm54A mihana@ヤンキー経世済民漫画 @mihana07 · 53m Replying to  @mihana07 税金を計算したり、コンプライアンスのためにきっちり作業をすること自体が労働力の無駄遣い 税金の手続き+金融産業に無駄遣いされている労働力を、実際のモノやサービスを生産するように回す方が余程社会のためになると  労働力の無駄という観点から消費税やインボイスに反対する視点も大事かなと 1 1 3 185  mihana@ヤンキー経世済民漫画 @mihana07 · 50m そもそも人間社会は分業で恩恵を受けているんだから、取引のたびに課税するのは取引を阻害することになる だから取引に関する税金(transaction tax)は不要である タバコや酒など社会的に望ましくない行為への課税は否定しないが、事務コストが高くならないように設計するのが大事である 1 3 170  mihana@ヤンキー経世済民漫画 @mihana07 · 43m なぜ非政府部門が貯蓄するのか?についても、政府が税額控除溶かして貯蓄を増やして金融業界を儲からせているだけとしか思えないと痛烈に批判 米国GDPの大半が金融産業が何も生まないゴミ(trash)とまで表現していた  モズラーの意識は、いかにして実物資源の生産を増やすか?という点に集中している 1 3 126  mihana@ヤンキー経世済民漫画 @mihana07 · 40m インフレの分析も面白い 政府が通貨の独占的供給者で、価格の設定者 政府が支出をするときに「何にいくら支払うか」という決定が、絶対的価値(absolute value)として価格に影響を与える この政府価格を基準にして、民間市場で取引されるモノやサービスの価格が決定される  https://docs.google.com/document/u/0/d/1sySbx6EHOAYpAjE4FGnYApdZNyY6rh79KzajZxSU884/mobilebasic… 1 1 113  mihana@ヤンキー経世済民漫画 @mihana07 · 38m 政府が価格を決定している以上、経済学におけるインフレの定義「モノ・サービスの価格が継続的に上がっていく状況」というのもモズラーからすればしっくりこない 政府が徐々に価格を上げれば、価格が上がるというだけ 1 157  mihana@ヤンキー経世済民漫画 @mihana07 · 33m 政府は金融政策(金利)を通じても価格に影響を与えている 高い金利を維持すれば高い価格にコミットしているということ 金利の引き上げはすでにお金を持っている人へのベーシックインカム インフレが解決するわけもない だから恒久的なゼロ金利政策が良いと

A Framework for the Analysis of the Price Level and Inflation

A Framework for the Analysis of the Price Level and Inflation

Warren Mosler

10/23/2021

Introduction

The purpose of this chapter is to present a framework for the analysis of the price level and inflation. MMT (Modern Monetary Theory) is currently the only school of economic thought that, in direct contrast to other schools of thought, specifically identifies and models both the source of the price level and the dynamics behind changes in the price level with MMT offering a unique understanding of inflation as academically defined as part of its general framework for analysis that applies to all currency regimes.

I was asked to do a chapter on 'inflation' under the textbook definition which is 'a continuous increase in the price level.' However, under close examination this turns out to be elusive at best. At any point in time the price level is presumably both static and quantitatively undefinable. That's why even the most sophisticated central bank research uses abstractions, the most familiar being the Consumer Price Index (CPI) which consists of selected goods and services designed to reflect a cost of living rather than 'the price level.' Nor can central banks determine a continuous rate of change of this abstraction. They can only tell you how the CPI has changed in the past, and they can attempt to forecast future changes. Even worse, they assume the source of the price level to be entirely historic, derived from an infinite regression into the past that, in theory, predates the birth of the universe.   

I. The MMT Money Story

The MMT money story presumes a state that desires to provision itself via a monetary system sequenced as follows:

  1. Imposition of coercive tax liabilities
  2. State spending[1] 
  3. Payment of taxes and purchase of state securities

Again, with a more extended narrative:

1. The state imposes tax liabilities with penalties for non-payment. The tax credits required for the payment of taxes are units of the state's currency, issued only by the state.

2. The tax liabilities, by design, create sellers of goods and services seeking the appropriate tax credits in exchange, the latter by definition being unemployment.[2]

3. The state then provisions itself by spending its currency to purchase the goods and services it desires.

4. Taxes can then be paid and, if offered for sale by the state, state securities can then be purchased. 

5. State spending in excess of tax receipts remains outstanding as the net financial assets in the economy that fulfill savings desires until used to pay taxes.

II. The MMT Micro Foundation- The Currency as a Public Monopoly 

The MMT money story begins with the imposition of coercive tax liabilities to create a notional demand for that currency. That notional demand is the sum of units of the currency needed to pay taxes and fund residual savings desires, as evidenced by what is offered for sale by agents seeking that currency in exchange for their goods and services. With today's state currencies, for example, the non-government sectors offer goods and services for sale until they have satisfied their need to pay taxes and their desires to net save. 

The state monetary system is a public monopoly with the state the sole supplier of that which it requires for the payment of taxes. The state therefore necessarily dictates terms of exchange when spending to purchase goods and services, with the quantity that it can buy inversely related to the prices it pays. For example, if the tax liabilities are $100 and savings desires are $20, and the state offers to pay $1 per day for labor, the state will be able to obtain 120 days of labor. If instead the state pays $2 per day for labor, it will obtain only 60 days of labor. In both examples the non-government sectors are selling labor at the state's price to the point where agents of those sectors have sufficient funds to comply with their tax liabilities and to net save as desired. 

For a given fixed nominal tax liability and savings desire, when paying higher prices the state both redefines the value of the currency downward and purchases less in real terms. Therefore, the state can, as a matter of arithmetic, when paying higher prices only buy more real goods and services by increasing tax liabilities or through increased savings desires. That is, to return to the prior example where tax liabilities were $100, savings desires $20, and the labor wage was increased from $1 per day to $2 per day, a tax increase to $200 (assuming savings desires constant in real terms) or an increase of savings desires to $140 would result in the state obtaining the same 120 days of labor as it received with the $1 wage.

In the US, tax liabilities tend to increase as the US government pays higher prices due to federal, state, and local transactions taxes that are based on prices. These include income taxes where higher nominal incomes result in higher tax liabilities, and sales taxes where higher prices also result in higher tax liabilities. 

Additionally, savings desires are based on real rather than nominal considerations. Retirement savings desires, for example, are based on the presumed cost of living during retirement years. As prices rise, those nominal savings desires rise accordingly. Business liquidity needs and inventory and receivables financing needs also rise as prices rise. 

Therefore, in general, an economy experiencing a continuous increase in prices requires a continuous nominal increase in what is casually called 'the money supply' that constitutes the economy's net savings of financial assets. Without this increase, real savings desires cannot be achieved, as then evidenced by unemployment and excess capacity in general. This, in fact, is my narrative for the 1979 recession. Fiscal balance tightened as tax liabilities increased faster than government spending, and the real public debt growth further decelerated due to the increases in the price level, with the combination driving the economy into a severe recession.  

III. The Source of the Price Level 

With the state the sole supplier of that which it demands for payment of taxes, the economy needs the state's currency and therefore state spending sets the terms of exchange; the price level is a function of prices paid by the state when it spends. 

There are two primary dynamics involved in the determination of the price level. The first is the introduction of absolute value of the state's numeraire, which takes place by the prices the state pays when it spends. Moreover, the only information with regard to absolute value as measured in units of the state's currency is the information transmitted by state spending. Therefore, all nominal prices can necessarily be traced back to prices the state pays when spending its currency. 

The second dynamic is the transmission of this information by markets allocating by price as they express indifference levels between buyers and sellers, and all in the context of the state's institutional structure. 

The price level, therefore, consists of prices dictated by government spending policy along with all other prices subsequently derived by market forces operating within government institutional structure.

IV. Agents of the State

The US Congress has designated agents to work on its behalf. These include the Federal Reserve Bank which operates the monetary system, commercial bank members of the Federal Reserve System that are federally regulated and supervised, and the US Treasury which executes purchases and sales as directed by legislation, by instructing the Federal Reserve Bank to debit or credit appropriate accounts. 

Commercial bank Fed members have demand accounts at the Fed called reserve accounts. Federal tax liabilities are discharged by either the payment of Federal Reserve Notes (cash) or by the Fed debiting a member bank reserve account, and, if it is a bank client initiating the payment, by the member bank simultaneously debiting the bank account of the client making the payment. Non-bank entities can only make payments to the Fed indirectly through a Fed member bank as a correspondent, or by using cash.

Banks, as agents of the government, likewise influence the price level, as bank lending supports client borrowing to spend on goods and services. Government regulation and supervision controls the prices paid with funds borrowed from the commercial banks. And, with the unlimited liquidity inherent in a floating exchange rate policy, without regulation banks could lend without limit and without collateral requirements or other means of controlling the prices paid by borrowers, which could quickly impair the government's ability to provision itself and catastrophically devalue the currency. 

 

V. The Determination of the Price Level

The state sets the terms of exchange for its currency with the prices it pays when it spends, and not per se by the quantity of currency that it spends. For example, if the state has an open-ended offer to hire soldiers at $50,000 per year, the price level as thereby defined will remain constant regardless of how many soldiers are hired and regardless of the state's total spending. The state has set the value of its numeraire exogenously, providing that information of absolute value that market forces then utilize to allocate by price with exchange values of other goods and services determined in the marketplace. Without the state supplied information, however, there would be no expression of relative value in terms of that currency.       

Should the state decide, for example, to increase the price it pays for its soldiers to $55,000 per year, it would be redefining the value of its currency downward and increasing the general price level by 10%, as market forces reflect that increase in the normal course of allocating by price and determining relative value. And for as long as the state continues to pay soldiers $55,000 per year, assuming constant relative values, the price level will remain unchanged. And, for example, the state would have to continually increase the rate of pay by 10% annually to support a continuous annual increase of the price level of 10%.   

VI. Inflation Dynamics

I begin with an academic definition of the rate of inflation: 

"The continuous increase in the term structure of prices faced by economic agents today for purchases and sales for future delivery dates." 

This can also be referred to as forward pricing, and it's an expression of the policy rate of interest determined by central bank policy.    

MMT makes a distinction between changes over time of the price level, vs the rate of inflation which is expressed by the current term structure of prices. 

The price level changes with prices paid by the state when it spends (fiscal policy) while changes in the term structure of policy interest rates (monetary policy) alter the term structure of prices. And while the term structure of prices is not a forecast of changes in the price level, that is not to say it doesn't influence the future direction of the price level. 

Interest rate policy also functions as a fiscal transfer as the state is a net payer of interest to the other sectors of the economy. With public debt levels in excess of 100% of GDP, for example, a 1% rate hike, ultimately adds interest income payments of over 1% of GDP to the economy. This increase in state spending directly increases nominal incomes, and, to the extent agents receiving the interest payments increase their spending, state interest payments support sales, output, and employment. 

State interest expense also reduces fiscal space as it partially satisfies the need to pay taxes and to net save that is created by state tax liabilities, which means there will be that many fewer goods and services offered for sale to comply with the remaining tax liabilities. This means the state's real purchases of goods and services are reduced by interest payments as per the same framework for analysis discussed in the previous examples.     

Therefore, as described above, I conclude that the state's payment of interest, implemented by the state to slow the rate of growth and work to counter price increases, is far more likely to do the reverse.   

Also of note is that interest payments are necessarily to those who already have money, and are also paid proportionately to the amount of money one has. In prior publications, I've labeled a positive interest rate policy 'basic income for those who already have money' which, when stated as such, has no political support whatsoever. Yet, as monetary policy that, presumably, fights inflation, central bank rate increases receive widespread support. 

To summarize, I see interest rate policy as both backwards and confused. First, the rate of inflation academically defined is an expression of the central bank's policy rates, so rate hikes directly increase that measure of inflation. 

Second, rate hikes constitute additional state deficit spending, which tends to also be an inflationary bias given currency institutional structure.

And third, for me the payment of funds only to those who already have money as a cure for what's believed is inflation does not serve public purpose.    

VII. Interest Rates and Wages

An increase in the Central Bank's policy rate in the first instance increases state deficit spending and total income in the economy. This means wages are then a smaller percentage of total income which to some degree, depending on propensities to spend, implies that the relative value of wages has decreased. 

This further implies that if wages are indexed to the general price level in the context of a positive policy interest rate, an increase in the wage will cause a larger increase in the general price level, which will then trigger a higher wage, in an accelerating spiral. 

However, in the context of a 0% rate policy, a wage increase would not be magnified by this process. 

What I'm suggesting is that this combination of wage indexation and high policy rates of interest selectively observed in nations experiencing undesired increases in the price level ironically contributes to accelerating rates of increase the interest rate policy is meant to contain.   

    

VIII. The Hierarchy of Demand   

Demand originates with the state. Without state spending the value of the currency is unspecified and there is no aggregate demand. Only subsequent to state spending can the currency obtain absolute value and non-government spending take place.   

IX. Conclusion

This chapter provides a framework for the analysis of the price level and inflation. The framework is that of the currency itself as a public monopoly, with the state setting nominal demand with its tax liabilities, as well as  providing the tax credits that allow compliance with those tax liabilities. 

This understanding entirely explains the source of the absolute nominal value price level over time. Also implied is the role of interest rates with regard to the academic definition of inflation and the influence of policy rates on market-determined expressions of relative value. 

References

Armstrong, P. and Mosler, W. B. (2020), 'Weimar Republic

Hyperinflation through a Modern Monetary Theory Lens', Weimar-

Republic-Hyperinflation-through-a-Modern-Monetary-Theory-Lens.pdf

(moslereconomics.com) accessed 25/10/2021.

Forstater. M. and Mosler, W. B. (2005),'The Natural rate of Interest is

Zero', Journal of Economic Issues, Vol. XXXIX, No. 2, June.

Mosler, W. B. (1993), 'Soft Currency Economics', Soft-Curency-

Economics-paper.pdf (moslereconomics.com) accessed 25/10/2021.

Mosler, W. B. (2010), The Seven Deadly Innocent Frauds of Economic

Policy, US Virgin Islands: Valance.

Mosler, W.B. (2020), 'MMT White Paper' MMT White Paper - Mosler

Economics / Modern Monetary Theory accessed 25/10/2021.

Forstater. M. and Mosler, W. B. 'A General Analytical Framework for the Analysis of Currencies and Other Commodities' 

http://moslereconomics.com/mandatory-readings/a-general-analytical-framework-for-the-analysis-of-currencies-and-other-commodities/

         

   

 

   


[1] Lending is the purchase of a financial assets such as a promissory note, and therefore is a subset of spending in general, which includes purchases of non financial assets

[2] Unemployment defined as those seeking work in exchange for the state's currency


物価水準とインフレ分析の枠組み

ウォーレン・モスラー

2021 年 10 月 23 日

序章

この章の目的は、物価水準とインフレを分析するためのフレームワークを提示することです。MMT (Modern Monetary Theory) は現在、他の学派とは対照的に、物価水準の源泉と物価水準の変化の背後にあるダイナミクスの両方を具体的に特定し、モデル化する唯一の経済学派です。すべての通貨体制に適用される分析のための一般的な枠組みの一部として学術的に定義されたインフレの理解。

私は、「物価水準の継続的な上昇」という教科書の定義の下で、「インフレ」に関する章を書くように依頼されました。しかし、よく調べてみると、これはせいぜいとらえどころのないものであることがわかります。いつの時点でも、価格水準はおそらく静的であり、定量的に定義することはできません。そのため、最も洗練された中央銀行の調査でさえ抽象化を使用しています。最もよく知られているのは、「物価水準」ではなく生活費を反映するように設計された選択された商品とサービスで構成される消費者物価指数 (CPI) です。また、中央銀行は、この抽象化の継続的な変化率を決定することもできません。彼らはCPIが過去にどのように変化したかを伝えることしかできず、将来の変化を予測しようとすることができます. さらに悪いことに、彼らは価格水準の源泉が完全に歴史的なものであると想定しています。   

I. MMTマネーストーリー

MMT マネー ストーリーは、次の順序で並べられた通貨システムを介して自分自身を準備することを望んでいる状態を想定しています。

  1. 強制的な納税義務の賦課
  2. 州の支出[1] 
  3. 税金の支払いと国債の購入

再び、より拡張された物語で:

1. 州は納税義務を課し、不払いには罰則を課します。税金の支払いに必要な税額控除は、州のみが発行する州の通貨の単位です。

2. 税金負債は、意図的に、適切な税額控除を求める商品やサービスの販売者を生み出します。後者は、定義上、失業です。[2]

3. 次に、国家は、望む商品やサービスを購入するために通貨を使うことで、自らを提供します。

4. その後、税金を支払うことができます。また、州が売却を申し出た場合は、州の証券を購入することができます。

5. 税収を超える国家支出は、税金の支払いに使用されるまで、貯蓄欲求を満たす経済の純金融資産として未払いのままです。

Ⅱ.The MMT Micro Foundation - 公的独占としての通貨 

MMT マネー ストーリーは、その通貨に対する想定上の需要を生み出すために、強制的な納税義務を課すことから始まります。その概念上の需要は、商品やサービスと引き換えにその通貨を求めるエージェントが売りに出すものから明らかなように、税金を支払い、残りの貯蓄欲求に資金を供給するために必要な通貨単位の合計です。たとえば、今日の国家通貨では、非政府部門は、税金を支払う必要性と純貯蓄への欲求が満たされるまで、商品やサービスを売りに出しています。

州の通貨システムは、州が税金の支払いに必要とする唯一の供給者である公的独占です。したがって、国は商品やサービスを購入する際の交換条件を必然的に決定し、国が購入できる量は国が支払う価格に反比例します。たとえば、納税額が 100 ドルで貯蓄希望額が 20 ドルで、州が労働に対して 1 日あたり 1 ドルを支払うと申し出た場合、州は 120 日間の労働を得ることができます。代わりに、州が労働に対して 1 日あたり 2 ドルを支払う場合、州は 60 日間の労働しか得られません。どちらの例でも、非政府部門は、これらの部門のエージェントが納税義務を遵守し、必要に応じて純貯蓄するのに十分な資金を確保できるようになるまで、州の価格で労働力を販売しています。

所与の固定名目納税義務と貯蓄欲求に対して、より高い価格を支払うとき、国家は通貨の価値を下方に再定義し、実質ベースでの購入を減らします。したがって、算数の問題として、より高い価格を支払っても、納税額を増やすか、貯蓄欲求を高めることによって、より多くの実際の商品やサービスを購入することができます。つまり、税負担が 100 ドルで、貯蓄が 20 ドルを希望し、労働賃金が 1 日あたり 1 ドルから 2 ドルに引き上げられた前の例に戻ると、200 ドルに増税されます (貯蓄の希望が実質的に一定であると仮定すると)。貯蓄欲求が 140 ドルに増加すると、州は 1 ドルの賃金で受け取ったのと同じ 120 日間の労働を得ることになります。

米国では、価格に基づく連邦、州、および地方の取引税により、米国政府がより高い価格を支払うため、納税義務が増加する傾向があります。これらには、名目所得が高いほど納税義務が高くなる所得税や、物価が高いほど納税義務が高くなる消費税が含まれます。

さらに、貯蓄の欲求は、名目上の考慮事項ではなく、実際の考慮事項に基づいています。たとえば、退職後の貯蓄の希望は、退職後の推定生活費に基づいています。物価が上昇すると、それに応じて名目上の貯蓄欲求も高まります。価格が上昇するにつれて、ビジネスの流動性のニーズと在庫および債権の資金調達のニーズも高まります。

したがって、一般に、物価が継続的に上昇している経済では、経済の金融資産の純貯蓄を構成する「マネーサプライ」と呼ばれるものの継続的な名目上の増加が必要です。この増加がなければ、失業や一般的な余剰能力によって証明されるように、真の貯蓄欲求を達成することはできません。実際、これは 1979 年の景気後退に対する私の物語です。税負担が政府支出よりも速く増加し、物価水準の上昇により実質公的債務の伸びがさらに鈍化したため、財政収支は引き締まり、経済は深刻な不況に陥りました。  

III. 物価水準の源泉

国家は税金の支払いを要求するものの唯一の供給者であるため、経済は国家の通貨を必要とし、したがって国家の支出が交換条件を設定します。物価水準は、支出時に州が支払う価格の関数です。

価格レベルの決定には、2 つの主要なダイナミクスが関係しています。1 つ目は、国家が支出するときに支払う価格によって行われる、国家のヌメレールの絶対価値の導入です。さらに、州の通貨単位で測定される絶対値に関する唯一の情報は、州の支出によって伝達される情報です。したがって、すべての名目価格は、国家が通貨を使うときに支払う価格に必然的に遡ることができます。

2 番目のダイナミクスは、市場が買い手と売り手の間の無関心レベルを表現し、すべて国の制度的構造の文脈で価格を割り当てることによって、この情報を伝達することです。

したがって、価格レベルは、政府の支出政策によって決定される価格と、政府の制度構造内で機能する市場の力によってその後導出されるすべての価格で構成されます。

IV. 国の代理人

米国議会は、その代理として働くエージェントを指定しています。これらには、金融システムを運営する連邦準備銀行、連邦政府によって規制および監督されている連邦準備制度の商業銀行メンバー、および連邦準備銀行に引き落としまたは引き落としを指示することにより、法律の指示に従って売買を実行する米国財務省が含まれます。適切なアカウントに入金します。

商業銀行の連邦準備制度理事会メンバーは、連邦準備制度理事会に準備口座と呼ばれる需要口座を持っています。連邦税債務は、連邦準備銀行券(現金)の支払い、または連邦準備制度理事会が加盟銀行の準備預金口座から引き落とすことによって免責されます。また、連邦準備制度理事会が銀行の顧客である場合は、加盟銀行が同時に加盟銀行の銀行口座から引き落としを行うことによって免除されます。支払いを行うクライアント。銀行以外の事業体は、Fed 加盟銀行をコレスポンデントとして間接的に介して、または現金を使用して、Fed にのみ支払いを行うことができます。

銀行は、政府の代理人として、同様に物価水準に影響を与えます。銀行の融資は、商品やサービスに費やす顧客の借入をサポートするからです。政府の規制と監督により、商業銀行から借りた資金で支払われる価格が管理されます。そして、変動為替レート政策に固有の無制限の流動性により、規制がなければ、銀行は無制限に、担保要件や借り手が支払う価格を制御するその他の手段なしで貸し出すことができます。通貨。

 

V. 価格水準の決定

国家は、国家が支出する通貨の量自体ではなく、国家が支出するときに支払う価格で通貨の交換条件を設定します。たとえば、州が年間 50,000 ドルで兵士を雇う無制限のオファーを持っている場合、それによって定義された価格レベルは、雇われた兵士の数や州の総支出に関係なく一定のままです。国家はそのヌメレールの価値を外生的に設定し、市場の力が市場で決定された他の商品やサービスの交換価値を価格で割り当てるために利用する絶対価値の情報を提供します. しかし、国が提供する情報がなければ、その通貨に関して相対的な価値を表現することはできません。       

たとえば、州が兵士に支払う価格を年間 55,000 ドルに引き上げることを決定した場合、通貨の価値を下方に再定義し、一般的な物価水準を 10% 引き上げることになります。価格によって配分し、相対価値を決定する通常のコース。そして、州が兵士に年間 55,000 ドルを支払い続ける限り、相対価値が一定であると仮定すると、価格水準は変化しません。また、たとえば、州は、毎年 10% の物価水準の継続的な上昇をサポートするために、毎年 10% ずつ賃金率を継続的に引き上げる必要があります。   

Ⅵ.インフレのダイナミクス

インフレ率の学術的な定義から始めます。

「今日の経済主体が直面している価格の期間構造の継続的な上昇は、将来の納期の購入と販売に関係しています。」

これはフォワード・プライシングとも呼ばれ、中央銀行の政策によって決定される政策金利の表現です。    

MMT は、物価水準の経時変化と、物価の現在の期間構造によって表されるインフレ率とを区別します。

物価水準は、支出時に国が支払う価格によって変化し(財政政策)、政策金利の期間構造の変化(金融政策)は物価の期間構造を変化させます。また、物価の期間構造は、物価水準の変化を予測するものではありませんが、物価水準の将来の方向性に影響を与えないわけではありません。

金利政策は、国家が経済の他の部門への利子の純支払者であるため、財政移転としても機能します。GDP の 100% を超える公的債務水準では、たとえば 1% の利上げは、最終的に GDP の 1% を超える金利収入の支払いを経済に追加します。この州の支出の増加は名目所得を直接増加させ、利子の支払いを受け取るエージェントが支出を増やす限り、州の利払いは売上、生産、および雇用を支えます。

州の利子費用は、税金を支払う必要性と、州の税金負債によって生み出される純貯蓄の必要性を部分的に満たすため、財政余地も減らします。これは、前の例で説明した分析のフレームワークと同じように、州の商品とサービスの実際の購入が利子の支払いによって減額されることを意味します。     

したがって、上で説明したように、州が成長率を鈍化させ、物価上昇に対抗するために実施する州の利子の支払いは、逆の結果をもたらす可能性がはるかに高いと結論付けています。   

また、利子の支払いは、すでにお金を持っている人に必ず行われ、お金の額に比例して支払われることにも注意してください。以前の出版物で、私は正の金利政策を「すでにお金を持っている人のためのベーシックインカム」と呼んでいました。しかし、おそらくインフレと戦う金融政策として、中央銀行の利上げは幅広い支持を受けています。

要約すると、私は金利政策が後退しており、混乱していると考えています。まず、学術的に定義されたインフレ率は中央銀行の政策金利を表したものであるため、利上げはそのインフレ率を直接上昇させます。

第二に、利上げは追加の国家赤字支出を構成し、通貨の制度的構造を考えると、これもインフレバイアスになる傾向があります。

そして第三に、私にとっては、インフレと考えられているものを治療するためにすでにお金を持っている人だけに資金を支払うことは、公的な目的には役立たない.    

VII. 金利と賃金

第一に、中央銀行の政策金利の上昇は、国家の赤字支出と経済の総収入を増加させます。これは、総所得に占める賃金の割合が小さくなることを意味し、支出傾向にもよりますが、賃金の相対的な価値が低下したことを意味します。

これはさらに、正の政策金利の文脈で賃金が一般物価水準に連動する場合、賃金の上昇は一般物価水準の大幅な上昇を引き起こし、それが賃金の上昇を加速的に引き起こすことを意味します。螺旋。

ただし、0% の金利政策のコンテキストでは、このプロセスによって賃金の上昇が拡大されることはありません。

私が示唆しているのは、物価水準の望ましくない上昇を経験している国で選択的に観察された賃金のインデックス化と高い政策金利のこの組み合わせが、皮肉なことに、金利政策が封じ込めることを意図した上昇率の加速に寄与しているということです.   

    

VIII. 需要のヒエラルキー   

需要は州に由来します。国の支出がなければ、通貨の価値は特定されず、総需要もありません。国家支出の後でのみ、通貨は絶対的な価値を得ることができ、非政府支出が行われます。   

IX. 結論

この章では、物価水準とインフレを分析するためのフレームワークを提供します。その枠組みは、公的な独占としての通貨自体の枠組みであり、州はその税債務を伴う名目需要を設定し、それらの税債務の遵守を可能にする税額控除を提供します。

この理解は、時間の経過に伴う名目絶対値の価格レベルの原因を完全に説明しています。また、インフレーションの学術的定義に関する金利の役割と、市場が決定する相対価値の表現に対する政策金利の影響も暗示されています。

参考文献

Armstrong、P.およびMosler、WB(2020)、「ワイマール共和国」

現代貨幣理論のレンズを通して見たハイパーインフレ」、ワイマール-

Republic-Hyperinflation-through-a-Modern-Monetary-Theory-Lens.pdf

(moslereconomics.com) 2021 年 10 月 25 日アクセス。

フォースターター。M. and Mosler, WB (2005), 「自然利子率は

Zero'、Journal of Economic Issues、Vol。XXXIX、いいえ。6月2日。

Mosler, WB (1993), 'Soft Currency Economics', Soft-Currency-

Economics-paper.pdf (moslereconomics.com) は 2021 年 10 月 25 日にアクセスしました。

Mosler, WB (2010), The Seven Deadly Innocent Frauds of Economics

ポリシー、米領バージン諸島: ヴァランス。

Mosler、WB (2020)、「MMT ホワイト ペーパー」 MMT ホワイト ペーパー - Mosler

経済学/現代金融理論は、2021 年 10 月 25 日にアクセスしました。

フォースターター。M. and Mosler, WB 「通貨およびその他の商品の分析のための一般的な分析フレームワーク」

http://moslereconomics.com/mandatory-readings/a-general-analytical-framework-for-the-analysis-of-currencies-and-other-commodities/




A Framework for the Analysis of the Price Level and Inflation

A Framework for the Analysis of the Price Level and Inflation

A Framework for the Analysis of the Price Level and Inflation

A Framework for the Analysis of the Price Level and Inflation

Warren Mosler

10/23/2021

Introduction

The purpose of this chapter is to present a framework for the analysis of the price level and inflation. MMT (Modern Monetary Theory) is currently the only school of economic thought that, in direct contrast to other schools of thought, specifically identifies and models both the source of the price level and the dynamics behind changes in the price level with MMT offering a unique understanding of inflation as academically defined as part of its general framework for analysis that applies to all currency regimes.

I was asked to do a chapter on 'inflation' under the textbook definition which is 'a continuous increase in the price level.' However, under close examination this turns out to be elusive at best. At any point in time the price level is presumably both static and quantitatively undefinable. That's why even the most sophisticated central bank research uses abstractions, the most familiar being the Consumer Price Index (CPI) which consists of selected goods and services designed to reflect a cost of living rather than 'the price level.' Nor can central banks determine a continuous rate of change of this abstraction. They can only tell you how the CPI has changed in the past, and they can attempt to forecast future changes. Even worse, they assume the source of the price level to be entirely historic, derived from an infinite regression into the past that, in theory, predates the birth of the universe.  

I. The MMT Money Story

The MMT money story presumes a state that desires to provision itself via a monetary system sequenced as follows:

  1. Imposition of coercive tax liabilities
  2. State spending[1] 
  3. Payment of taxes and purchase of state securities

Again, with a more extended narrative:

1. The state imposes tax liabilities with penalties for non-payment. The tax credits required for the payment of taxes are units of the state's currency, issued only by the state.

2. The tax liabilities, by design, create sellers of goods and services seeking the appropriate tax credits in exchange, the latter by definition being unemployment.[2]

3. The state then provisions itself by spending its currency to purchase the goods and services it desires.

4. Taxes can then be paid and, if offered for sale by the state, state securities can then be purchased.

5. State spending in excess of tax receipts remains outstanding as the net financial assets in the economy that fulfill savings desires until used to pay taxes.

II. The MMT Micro Foundation- The Currency as a Public Monopoly 

The MMT money story begins with the imposition of coercive tax liabilities to create a notional demand for that currency. That notional demand is the sum of units of the currency needed to pay taxes and fund residual savings desires, as evidenced by what is offered for sale by agents seeking that currency in exchange for their goods and services. With today's state currencies, for example, the non-government sectors offer goods and services for sale until they have satisfied their need to pay taxes and their desires to net save.

The state monetary system is a public monopoly with the state the sole supplier of that which it requires for the payment of taxes. The state therefore necessarily dictates terms of exchange when spending to purchase goods and services, with the quantity that it can buy inversely related to the prices it pays. For example, if the tax liabilities are $100 and savings desires are $20, and the state offers to pay $1 per day for labor, the state will be able to obtain 120 days of labor. If instead the state pays $2 per day for labor, it will obtain only 60 days of labor. In both examples the non-government sectors are selling labor at the state's price to the point where agents of those sectors have sufficient funds to comply with their tax liabilities and to net save as desired.

For a given fixed nominal tax liability and savings desire, when paying higher prices the state both redefines the value of the currency downward and purchases less in real terms. Therefore, the state can, as a matter of arithmetic, when paying higher prices only buy more real goods and services by increasing tax liabilities or through increased savings desires. That is, to return to the prior example where tax liabilities were $100, savings desires $20, and the labor wage was increased from $1 per day to $2 per day, a tax increase to $200 (assuming savings desires constant in real terms) or an increase of savings desires to $140 would result in the state obtaining the same 120 days of labor as it received with the $1 wage.

In the US, tax liabilities tend to increase as the US government pays higher prices due to federal, state, and local transactions taxes that are based on prices. These include income taxes where higher nominal incomes result in higher tax liabilities, and sales taxes where higher prices also result in higher tax liabilities.

Additionally, savings desires are based on real rather than nominal considerations. Retirement savings desires, for example, are based on the presumed cost of living during retirement years. As prices rise, those nominal savings desires rise accordingly. Business liquidity needs and inventory and receivables financing needs also rise as prices rise.

Therefore, in general, an economy experiencing a continuous increase in prices requires a continuous nominal increase in what is casually called 'the money supply' that constitutes the economy's net savings of financial assets. Without this increase, real savings desires cannot be achieved, as then evidenced by unemployment and excess capacity in general. This, in fact, is my narrative for the 1979 recession. Fiscal balance tightened as tax liabilities increased faster than government spending, and the real public debt growth further decelerated due to the increases in the price level, with the combination driving the economy into a severe recession.  

III. The Source of the Price Level

With the state the sole supplier of that which it demands for payment of taxes, the economy needs the state's currency and therefore state spending sets the terms of exchange; the price level is a function of prices paid by the state when it spends.

There are two primary dynamics involved in the determination of the price level. The first is the introduction of absolute value of the state's numeraire, which takes place by the prices the state pays when it spends. Moreover, the only information with regard to absolute value as measured in units of the state's currency is the information transmitted by state spending. Therefore, all nominal prices can necessarily be traced back to prices the state pays when spending its currency.

The second dynamic is the transmission of this information by markets allocating by price as they express indifference levels between buyers and sellers, and all in the context of the state's institutional structure.

The price level, therefore, consists of prices dictated by government spending policy along with all other prices subsequently derived by market forces operating within government institutional structure.

IV. Agents of the State

The US Congress has designated agents to work on its behalf. These include the Federal Reserve Bank which operates the monetary system, commercial bank members of the Federal Reserve System that are federally regulated and supervised, and the US Treasury which executes purchases and sales as directed by legislation, by instructing the Federal Reserve Bank to debit or credit appropriate accounts.

Commercial bank Fed members have demand accounts at the Fed called reserve accounts. Federal tax liabilities are discharged by either the payment of Federal Reserve Notes (cash) or by the Fed debiting a member bank reserve account, and, if it is a bank client initiating the payment, by the member bank simultaneously debiting the bank account of the client making the payment. Non-bank entities can only make payments to the Fed indirectly through a Fed member bank as a correspondent, or by using cash.

Banks, as agents of the government, likewise influence the price level, as bank lending supports client borrowing to spend on goods and services. Government regulation and supervision controls the prices paid with funds borrowed from the commercial banks. And, with the unlimited liquidity inherent in a floating exchange rate policy, without regulation banks could lend without limit and without collateral requirements or other means of controlling the prices paid by borrowers, which could quickly impair the government's ability to provision itself and catastrophically devalue the currency.

 

V. The Determination of the Price Level

The state sets the terms of exchange for its currency with the prices it pays when it spends, and not per se by the quantity of currency that it spends. For example, if the state has an open-ended offer to hire soldiers at $50,000 per year, the price level as thereby defined will remain constant regardless of how many soldiers are hired and regardless of the state's total spending. The state has set the value of its numeraire exogenously, providing that information of absolute value that market forces then utilize to allocate by price with exchange values of other goods and services determined in the marketplace. Without the state supplied information, however, there would be no expression of relative value in terms of that currency.      

Should the state decide, for example, to increase the price it pays for its soldiers to $55,000 per year, it would be redefining the value of its currency downward and increasing the general price level by 10%, as market forces reflect that increase in the normal course of allocating by price and determining relative value. And for as long as the state continues to pay soldiers $55,000 per year, assuming constant relative values, the price level will remain unchanged. And, for example, the state would have to continually increase the rate of pay by 10% annually to support a continuous annual increase of the price level of 10%.  

VI. Inflation Dynamics

I begin with an academic definition of the rate of inflation:

"The continuous increase in the term structure of prices faced by economic agents today for purchases and sales for future delivery dates."

This can also be referred to as forward pricing, and it's an expression of the policy rate of interest determined by central bank policy.    

MMT makes a distinction between changes over time of the price level, vs the rate of inflation which is expressed by the current term structure of prices.

The price level changes with prices paid by the state when it spends (fiscal policy) while changes in the term structure of policy interest rates (monetary policy) alter the term structure of prices. And while the term structure of prices is not a forecast of changes in the price level, that is not to say it doesn't influence the future direction of the price level.

Interest rate policy also functions as a fiscal transfer as the state is a net payer of interest to the other sectors of the economy. With public debt levels in excess of 100% of GDP, for example, a 1% rate hike, ultimately adds interest income payments of over 1% of GDP to the economy. This increase in state spending directly increases nominal incomes, and, to the extent agents receiving the interest payments increase their spending, state interest payments support sales, output, and employment.

State interest expense also reduces fiscal space as it partially satisfies the need to pay taxes and to net save that is created by state tax liabilities, which means there will be that many fewer goods and services offered for sale to comply with the remaining tax liabilities. This means the state's real purchases of goods and services are reduced by interest payments as per the same framework for analysis discussed in the previous examples.    

Therefore, as described above, I conclude that the state's payment of interest, implemented by the state to slow the rate of growth and work to counter price increases, is far more likely to do the reverse.  

Also of note is that interest payments are necessarily to those who already have money, and are also paid proportionately to the amount of money one has. In prior publications, I've labeled a positive interest rate policy 'basic income for those who already have money' which, when stated as such, has no political support whatsoever. Yet, as monetary policy that, presumably, fights inflation, central bank rate increases receive widespread support.

To summarize, I see interest rate policy as both backwards and confused. First, the rate of inflation academically defined is an expression of the central bank's policy rates, so rate hikes directly increase that measure of inflation.

Second, rate hikes constitute additional state deficit spending, which tends to also be an inflationary bias given currency institutional structure.

And third, for me the payment of funds only to those who already have money as a cure for what's believed is inflation does not serve public purpose.    

VII. Interest Rates and Wages

An increase in the Central Bank's policy rate in the first instance increases state deficit spending and total income in the economy. This means wages are then a smaller percentage of total income which to some degree, depending on propensities to spend, implies that the relative value of wages has decreased.

This further implies that if wages are indexed to the general price level in the context of a positive policy interest rate, an increase in the wage will cause a larger increase in the general price level, which will then trigger a higher wage, in an accelerating spiral.

However, in the context of a 0% rate policy, a wage increase would not be magnified by this process.

What I'm suggesting is that this combination of wage indexation and high policy rates of interest selectively observed in nations experiencing undesired increases in the price level ironically contributes to accelerating rates of increase the interest rate policy is meant to contain.  

   

VIII. The Hierarchy of Demand   

Demand originates with the state. Without state spending the value of the currency is unspecified and there is no aggregate demand. Only subsequent to state spending can the currency obtain absolute value and non-government spending take place.  

IX. Conclusion

This chapter provides a framework for the analysis of the price level and inflation. The framework is that of the currency itself as a public monopoly, with the state setting nominal demand with its tax liabilities, as well as  providing the tax credits that allow compliance with those tax liabilities.

This understanding entirely explains the source of the absolute nominal value price level over time. Also implied is the role of interest rates with regard to the academic definition of inflation and the influence of policy rates on market-determined expressions of relative value.

References

Armstrong, P. and Mosler, W. B. (2020), 'Weimar Republic

Hyperinflation through a Modern Monetary Theory Lens', Weimar-

Republic-Hyperinflation-through-a-Modern-Monetary-Theory-Lens.pdf

(moslereconomics.com) accessed 25/10/2021.

Forstater. M. and Mosler, W. B. (2005),'The Natural rate of Interest is

Zero', Journal of Economic Issues, Vol. XXXIX, No. 2, June.

Mosler, W. B. (1993), 'Soft Currency Economics', Soft-Curency-

Economics-paper.pdf (moslereconomics.com) accessed 25/10/2021.

Mosler, W. B. (2010), The Seven Deadly Innocent Frauds of Economic

Policy, US Virgin Islands: Valance.

Mosler, W.B. (2020), 'MMT White Paper' MMT White Paper - Mosler

Economics / Modern Monetary Theory accessed 25/10/2021.

Forstater. M. and Mosler, W. B. 'A General Analytical Framework for the Analysis of Currencies and Other Commodities'

http://moslereconomics.com/mandatory-readings/a-general-analytical-framework-for-the-analysis-of-currencies-and-other-commodities/

         

   

 

   


[1] Lending is the purchase of a financial assets such as a promissory note, and therefore is a subset of spending in general, which includes purchases of non financial assets

[2] Unemployment defined as those seeking work in exchange for the state's currency