Re: tax driven currency - Paul Davidson's comments -Reply

[Edward Nell <NellE@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

One might add, in Vol II Marx presents a 'circuitiste' approach to money,
presaging the work of the current French circulationist School (Deleplace
and Nell, MONEY IN MOTION).  He tries to set out the pattern of circulation
by which a given amount of money can 'monetize' all the transactions
involved in exchanging inputs and hiring labor to produce and sell output,
for the economy as a whole.  He is not successful in solving the
problem, but he poses it very nicely.

>>> Christopher Niggle <niggle@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 06/06/98 02:58pm >>>

June 6

I am in agreement with Paul Davidson's comments on Mosler's views on
money, but can't resist picking one nit.

Marx does NOT hold to the quantity theory of money in Volume III of
Capital.  To the contrary, his theoretical statements and discussions of
historical examples of financial crises reads very much like Keynes and
Minsky....extended discussions of the effects of speculative borrowing
and
lending, money supply endogeneity, the role of interest rates, and so
forth.

Of course, Marx himself never finished preparing that work for
publication, and the Volume I discussion of money does focus on
convertible
paper currency and commodity money forms.  But still, Marx apparently
worked out very sophisticated and reasonably accurate monetary
theory: a
kind of "pre Keynesian" model.

Chris Niggle