{"title":"积极的金钱:渐进的解决方案还是特洛伊木马?","authors":"Christian Etzrodt","doi":"10.1093/cje/bead035","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Andrew Jackson and Ben Dyson made in 2012 a proposal for banking sector reform, which aimed at eliminating the ability of commercial banks to create money. They claim that their proposal would return the monopoly of money creation to the state, would reduce the debt level in society, and in turn would end the need for expensive bail-outs of too-big-to-fail banks by taxpayers. This paper will discuss the theory-external post-Keynesian criticism of the reform proposal as well as a theory-internal criticism, which focusses on the impact of this proposal for the banks’ customers, the commercial banks and the taxpayers. The analysis will show that Jackson and Dyson’s proposal is not a progressive solution but a Trojan Horse.","PeriodicalId":48156,"journal":{"name":"Cambridge Journal of Economics","volume":"23 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Positive money: progressive solution or Trojan Horse?\",\"authors\":\"Christian Etzrodt\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/cje/bead035\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Andrew Jackson and Ben Dyson made in 2012 a proposal for banking sector reform, which aimed at eliminating the ability of commercial banks to create money. They claim that their proposal would return the monopoly of money creation to the state, would reduce the debt level in society, and in turn would end the need for expensive bail-outs of too-big-to-fail banks by taxpayers. This paper will discuss the theory-external post-Keynesian criticism of the reform proposal as well as a theory-internal criticism, which focusses on the impact of this proposal for the banks’ customers, the commercial banks and the taxpayers. The analysis will show that Jackson and Dyson’s proposal is not a progressive solution but a Trojan Horse.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48156,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cambridge Journal of Economics\",\"volume\":\"23 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cambridge Journal of Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/cje/bead035\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cambridge Journal of Economics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/cje/bead035","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
Andrew Jackson和Ben Dyson在2012年提出了银行业改革的建议,旨在消除商业银行创造货币的能力。他们声称,他们的提议将把货币创造的垄断权交还给国家,将降低社会的债务水平,进而不再需要纳税人为“大到不能倒”的银行提供昂贵的纾困。本文将讨论对改革方案的理论-外部后凯恩斯主义批评以及理论-内部批评,重点讨论该方案对银行客户、商业银行和纳税人的影响。分析将表明,杰克逊和戴森的提议不是一个进步的解决方案,而是一个特洛伊木马。
Positive money: progressive solution or Trojan Horse?
Abstract Andrew Jackson and Ben Dyson made in 2012 a proposal for banking sector reform, which aimed at eliminating the ability of commercial banks to create money. They claim that their proposal would return the monopoly of money creation to the state, would reduce the debt level in society, and in turn would end the need for expensive bail-outs of too-big-to-fail banks by taxpayers. This paper will discuss the theory-external post-Keynesian criticism of the reform proposal as well as a theory-internal criticism, which focusses on the impact of this proposal for the banks’ customers, the commercial banks and the taxpayers. The analysis will show that Jackson and Dyson’s proposal is not a progressive solution but a Trojan Horse.
期刊介绍:
The Cambridge Journal of Economics, founded in 1977 in the traditions of Marx, Keynes, Kalecki, Joan Robinson and Kaldor, provides a forum for theoretical, applied, policy and methodological research into social and economic issues. Its focus includes: •the organisation of social production and the distribution of its product •the causes and consequences of gender, ethnic, class and national inequities •inflation and unemployment •the changing forms and boundaries of markets and planning •uneven development and world market instability •globalisation and international integration.