Dear users, today we have a very personal request. We have decided to offer our learning materials free of charge because we believe in an open, pluralist economic science that is available to everyone, worldwide. We do this without advertising because we want to remain independent of commercial interests. But our commitment to independence and open access also has its price. Every year we have large costs for programming, staff and to support our authors. If everyone reading this gave a small amount, we could keep Exploring Economics thriving for years to come - but 99% of our users don't give. So today we ask you to protect Exploring Economics's independence. The heart and soul of Exploring Economics is a community of people working to bring you unlimited access to high-qualitiy, economic learning and teaching material. Please take just a few moments to help us keep Exploring Economics going. Thank you!
We are a registered non-profit organization | Bank account: Netzwerk Plurale Ökonomik e.V., IBAN: DE91 4306 0967 6037 9737 00, SWIFT-BIC: GENODEM1GLS | Imprint
Horizontalists, verticalists, and structuralists: The theory of endogenous money reassessed
IMK - Institut für Makroökonomie und Konjunkturforschung, Hans-Böckler-Stiftung, 2013
Exploring Economics Working Paper Selection
We collect and republish selected Working Papers and Journal Articles on Exploring Economics.
Horizontalists, verticalists, and structuralists: The theory of endogenous money reassessed
Abstract: This paper uses the occasion of the twenty-fifth anniversary of Basil Moore’s book, Horizontalists and Verticalists, to reassess the theory of endogenous money. The paper distinguishes between horizontalists, verticalists, and structuralists. It argues Moore’s horizontalist representation of endogenous money was an over-simplification that discarded important enduring insights from monetary theory. The structuralist approach to endogenous money retains the basic insight that the money supply is credit driven but remedies horizontalism’s omissions and over-simplifications. Twenty-five years later, horizontalism has largely morphed into structuralism. The theoretical challenge going forward is to develop the role of money and finance in a Keynesian theory of output determination. As regards monetary policy, the challenge is how to conduct policy in a world of endogenous money. These concerns emanate naturally from a structuralist perspective on endogenous money.
Editors' note: We would like to thank Thomas Palley for permitting his paper to be made available on our site.
Stay tuned!
Subscribe to our newsletter to learn about new debates, conferences and writing workshops.
Comment from our editors:
This paper is a masterly overview of the theory of endogenous money, its origins, various trains of thought, and implications for macroeconomic theory. With monetary theory arguably constituting the core of the dispute between the neoclassical school of economic thought and thus its modern-day cousin, the New Keynesian analytical framework on the one hand and the (Post-)Keynesian school on the other, Palley's paper is a superb introduction into heterodox economic thinking.
This material has been suggested and edited by:
Donate
This project is brought to you by the Network for Pluralist Economics (Netzwerk Plurale Ökonomik e.V.). It is committed to diversity and independence and is dependent on donations from people like you. Regular or one-off donations would be greatly appreciated.