Appena pubblicato sui Working papers di Siena
Bofinger and Ries versus
Borio and Disyatat: macroeconomics after endogenous money. A brief note.
Sergio Cesaratto
Abstract
A paper by Peter
Bofinger and Mathias Ries (2017a/b) strays from the recent rethinking in
monetary analysis to criticise Summers’ “saving glut” explanation of the
prevalence of low real interest rates. A similar critical perspective is held
by Borio and Disyatat (e.g. 2011a/b, 2015), who are criticised, however, by
Bofinger and Reis for their Wicksellian background. In this note, we compare
and assess these two different views. Both Bofinger and Reis (B&R) and
Borio and Disyatat (B&D) reject traditional “loanable fund theory” in
favour of an endogenous money view of credit, but while B&R regard conventional
marginalist (real) theory as inconsistent with the endogenous money view, B&D,
following Wicksell, regard it as
consistent. We sympathize with B&R’s criticism of conventional theory, especially
their Keynesian view of the interest rate as a purely monetary phenomenon. Interestingly,
B&R refer to the problems of marginalist capital theory as undermining the
natural interest rate concept.
Nessun commento:
Posta un commento