----- Original Message -----
From: John Hermann
To: understandingmoney@googlegroups.com
Sent: Friday, May 04, 2012 7:50 PM
Subject: Re: Endogenous versus Exogenous Money
Thanks Joe.
It may be argued that the processes of the government selling sovereign bonds to the private sector, and their subsequent purchase from the private sector by the central bank, are the equivalent (putting aside the issue of the flow of interest) of the government selling those bonds directly to the central bank, thereby enabling it to introduce newly created money into the economy -- as required for its healthy development. On this basis it has been argued that it is not really necessary to have the government going to the trouble of manufacturing bonds at all. Thus the central bank would simply create base money according to the economy's perceived needs, in collaboration with Treasury. This is the pure exogenous route -- with all its attendant potential dangers.
If one prefers the endogenous route (which is my position), then one needs to devise a mechanism for implementing it. And at present the universally accepted mechanism is open market operations (buying and selling sovereign securities, in order to manipulate interest rates in such a manner as to keep inflation within certain agreed bounds). If anyone can think of a better mechanism for implementing an endogenously driven banking system, I would be very interested to learn how it operates.
John Hermann
On 5/05/2012 10:08 AM, Joe Leote wrote:
This is a short essay covering much information about the debate over Endo/Exo -genous money:
http://cas.umkc.edu/econ/economics/faculty/wray/papers/Desai.pdf
one item of note is the idea that Treasury securities provide a type of "endogenous" liquidity that renders Fed control over the monetary base less effective as an "exogenous" factor. Very good discussion of money as unique to an economic context.
Joe