Search results

The revival of the quantity theory of money which was advanced by M. Friedman and the Chicago School in the 1960s led me to an investigation of the contributions of Greek economists during the twentieth century, to this indisputably long‐lived theory.

Allyn Young′s lectures, as recorded by the young Nicholas Kaldor, survey the historical roots of the subject from Aristotle through to the modern neo‐classical writers. The focus throughout is on the conditions making for economic progress, with stress on the institutional developments that extend and are extended by the size of the market. Organisational changes that promote the division of labour and specialisation within and between firms and industries, and which promote competition and mobility, are seen as the vital factors in growth. In the absence of new markets, inventions as such play only a minor role. The economic system is an inter‐related whole, or a living “organon”. It is from this perspective that micro‐economic relations are analysed, and this helps expose certain fallacies of composition associated with the marginal productivity theory of production and distribution. Factors are paid not because they are productive but because they are scarce. Likewise he shows why Marshallian supply and demand schedules, based on the “one thing at a time” approach, cannot adequately describe the dynamic growth properties of the system. Supply and demand cannot be simply integrated to arrive at a picture of the whole economy. These notes are complemented by eleven articles in the Encyclopaedia Britannica which were published shortly after Young′s sudden death in 1929.

The purpose of this paper is to explain the structure of Islamic monetary transformation into 100 percent reserve requirement monetary system in terms of the foundational epistemology of the unity of divine knowledge (tawhid). This approach is a scholarly originality in the field of epistemological formalism concerning Islamic theory and perspectives in economic reasoning in comparative perspectives.

The role of micro-money pursuing projects and real economic exchange relations is shown to arise by a natural causality in the ethical social economy (SE). This results in a microeconomic perspective of the quantity theory of money with ethical and social implications. A comparative study of endogenous money in the quantity theory of money points out significant differences between the theory of endogenous money in Islam and mainstream methodologies. A formal model of micro-money and its organismic endogenous relationship with the real economy is formulated with the goal of realizing social well-being, economic stabilization, and sustainability of development regimes.

This is a conceptual paper, though with the potential for continued work in applying the theory of micro-money in the Islamic methodological perspective of unity of knowledge. This is an original contribution of this paper. Islamic economists have not been able to produce a rigorous theory of micro-money. They have also not been able to situate the study of Islamic economics with its specific contribution to the field of the nature of money in project-specific financing of Islamic projects by the money-finance-real economy inter-causal relations. Thus, the findings of this paper, though of the conceptual nature, open doors to a vast field of methodological development and its application to the problem of micro-money modeling. Such a conceptual finding arising from the methodological theory of unity of knowledge and applied to the topic of micro-money along with some examples of potentiality of these approaches constitutes a vastly original field of findings as contribution. Thereby, an analytical model is established in the Islamic social economy (ISE) perspective. The model is used to explain monetary transmission and functioning of monetary policy with instruments that avoid interest rate and comply with Islamic financing requirements. The resulting model of money, finance, and real economy (MFE) systemic interrelationship in reference to the epistemology of unity of knowledge leads into the construction of a 100 percent reserve requirement monetary system with the gold-backed micro-money as currency complementing real economic transactions.

The present paper is of a conceptual type based on the essential ontological and epistemological foundation of Islamic social and economic thought and bearing a deeply scientific implication. The conceptual part of this paper becomes a study in the foundations. The second part follows into the study of application in the real world of micro-money in terms of financing projects. Micro-money pursues projects in the Islamic economy due to its very nature of ethical and social choices. The paper shows that such a micro-money transmission is realized by the money-finance-real economy integrated model. Thereby, some real-world examples of such transformations are given. All these together substantiate the conceptual-analytical-empirical nature of the study conducted.

The development of the micro-money transmission system of generalized circular causation interrelations between MFE activities as a return to 100 percent reserve requirement monetary system with the gold standard is the profound theory that has been propounded. Its applied perspectives are implied through the MFE-model wherein micro-money pursues social projects. Furthermore, the possibility and practicality of such a conceptual model of micro-money and its transmission mechanism in the real economy are established by real-world examples of kinds of micro-money that are found to circulate or are recommended by some studies in the literature.

The conceptual part of the paper presents a model of generalized epistemological model of unity of knowledge characterizing the MFE circular causal interrelations as the organismic meaning of social ethics and evolutionary learning. The social implications are the epistemic foundations of the derived model in the midst of choices of life-fulfillment projects that micro-money finances and the economy sustain.

This is an original paper premised on the general and the specific Islamic epistemological criterion of unity of knowledge as a generalized system theory. It is now particularized to the case of money and real economy by using the Islamic perspective of creating conditions to regenerate resources continuously in SE with ethical implications. The paper is equally informative to all who like to understand the social and ethical nature of endogenous relations between money and the real economy as two great institutions of the national economy. These together bestow well-being to the society at large in the construction of SE. Specific attention in this regard is given to ISE.

The rediscovery of Austrian economics during the last 15 years has led to the reappearance of Menger, Mises, Hayek and, to a lesser extent, Böhm‐Bawerk in the footnotes. Next to nothing is heard of Friedrich von Wieser, Menger's successor in Vienna and inventor of the name “Austrian School”. Why is Wieser neglected in the Austrian Revival? Perhaps because economic theorists and policy makers in many countries have again become very interested in the possibilities of the market and in the applicability of the quantity theory of money — whereas Wieser was critical of both. Or perhaps because Wieser advocated an alliance of economics and sociology — whereas sociology is not very much in vogue now.

Nobody concerned with political economy can neglect the history of economic doctrines. Structural changes in the economy and society influence economic thinking and, conversely, innovative thought structures and attitudes have almost always forced economic institutions and modes of behaviour to adjust. We learn from the history of economic doctrines how a particular theory emerged and whether, and in which environment, it could take root. We can see how a school evolves out of a common methodological perception and similar techniques of analysis, and how it has to establish itself. The interaction between unresolved problems on the one hand, and the search for better solutions or explanations on the other, leads to a change in paradigma and to the formation of new lines of reasoning. As long as the real world is subject to progress and change scientific search for explanation must out of necessity continue.

According to the New Monetary Economics (NME), the introduction of non‐tangible payments media would altogether invalidate current monetary economics. After an illustration of the main tenets of the NME, critically analyses its rejection of both the quantity theory and liquidity preference on the basis of Keynes′ theory of money.

This paper is a review essay of Leeson, R. (Ed.), Keynes, Chicago and Friedman (2 volumes), Pickering and Chatto, London, 2003. These volumes contain a comprehensive collection of previously published papers, and also some interesting new materials, relating to the controversy about the accuracy of Milton Friedman's depiction of the “oral tradition” in monetary economics at the University of Chicago in the 1930s and 1940s. As such, the work is a notable addition to the scholarly literature. The broader issue raised by this collection is the precise relationship between Friedman's “monetarism” and the so‐called “Keynesian economics” of the neoclassical synthesis, and specifically, whether there was any real difference between them.

Based on Geoffrey Harcourt's Palgrave volumes, this review article attempts to picture how, in a Cambridge environment, Keynes's fragmentary monetary theory of production grew organically out of Marshall's equally fragmentary monetary theory of exchange. The dangers associated with Keynes's close links with Marshall are alluded to. Indeed, without taking account of the classical spirit of Sraffa's work, Keynes's monetary theory may quite easily be integrated into the Marshallian‐neoclassical framework of analysis. However, theorising, not literally, but in the spirit of Keynes and Sraffa, within a Ricardian‐Pasinettian framework of vertical integration, opens the way to a Classical‐Keynesian monetary theory of production.

At present, countries are concerned about inflation and the impact of inflation on each country’s economic growth. This inflation has been said by economists that inflation is a phenomenon of currency and currency, which has caused inflation in some countries by their monetary policy. According to the economic theory of Karl Marx, Irving Fisher, Friedman, inflation is caused by a continuous increase in the money supply.

The economic theories of Fisher, Friedman and an econometric model are applied to analyse the relationship between money supply and inflation. Besides, Vietnam’s and China’s research data are also collected in the period of 2012-2016.

It is found out that the continuous increase in the money supply causes inflation in the long-term, but the continuous increase in the money supply growth does not cause inflation in a short time, this was analyzed based on the theory of monetary quantity. Moreover, Chia’s and Vietnam’s correlations of the money supply growth and inflation are 99.1 per cent. These correlations are very close.

Research results show that money supply and inflation are closely related, and the money supply directly affects economic growth. Therefore, the government should have the relevant monetary policy to grow the economy and proposals to make monetary policy, control inflation levels and stimulate economic growth.

Austrian views on money and the gold standard are consonant with the general characteristics of the school. First, Austrians are concerned with the complete picture, with how a whole economic system and alternative sets of institutions function. They are alert to the question of unplanned order and of how the decentralised decisions and specialised activities of millions of people can mesh without central planning. They investigate how the market and prices function as a vast communications system and computer, transmitting information and incentives and so enlisting knowledge scattered over many millions of minds that would otherwise necessarily go to waste. They recognise why accurate economic calculation is impossible under socialism. Second, the Austrians appreciate the implications of incomplete, imperfect and scattered knowledge and also the implications of change and unpredictability in human affairs. They pay attention to disequilibrium, to processes as well as end positions, and to entrepreneurial altertness and creativity. Instead of supposing, for example, that cost curves and demand curves are somehow “given” to business decision makers, they recognise it as one of the functions of the competitive process to press for discovery of ways to get the cost curves down — if one speaks of such curves at all. Third, Austrians have certain methodological predilections. They reject the tacit view of economic activity as the result of interplay among objective conditions and impersonal forces. They take pains to trace their analyses back to the subjective perceptions, decisions and actions of individuals trying to cope with a complex and unpredictably changeable world; they recognise introspection as one legitimate source of the facts underpinning economic theory. (While thus practising methodological individualism, they do not subordinate the big question of system‐wide co‐ordination to an excessively narrow focus on the administration of individual firms and households.) Finally, although Austrians like to think of their economics as value‐free and not logically tied to any particular policy position, their insights into positive economics, coupled with plausible value judgements of a humanitarian and individualistic nature, undeniably do lead them to favour free markets.