Re: two currencies and Korean war

["Alan G. Isaac" <aisaac@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

>Isaac said:
>> I said chartalism is weak because it does not
>> explicitly acknowledge the role of expectations, which are
>> fundamental.

On Sat, 5 Jan 2002 mosler@xxxxxxxx wrote:
> Of course it does.

Well let us look at how advocates are actually talking about it.
  http://wfhummel.cnchost.com/metallismchartalism.html
I do not see the work `expectations' even once.
I would say that is a failure to ``explicitly acknowledge'' the role
of expectations.  More important of course is that expectations be
explicitly acknowledged to be *fundamental*.

>>  Expectations drive asset holding of all kinds, including
>> cash.

> Obviously.

One would think.

>>  Chartalism discusses one way in which expectations supporting
>> the holding of money can be institutionally supported.

> ???  It does affirm that something must exist, one way
> or another, for there to be a desire to hold it.

Well we may have to enter into a defintion of chartalism, but I say it
is fair to represent it by the most public words of its advocates.
Again looking at William H's page:
``The value of State money derives from the
fact that nearly all households, require some of its IOUs in order to pay
taxes or other fees to the State.''

Cheers,
Alan