SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Anemon Muş Alparslan Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 7 Sayı: 4

Fundamental Differences Between Post Keynesians in Determining Money Supply: Accommodationists and Structuralists

Para Arzının Belirlenmesinde Post Keynesyenler Arasındaki Temel Ayrılıklar: Uyumcular ve Yapısalcılar

Dicle Özdemir(MUĞLA SITKI KOÇMAN ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0002-7594-1054
Pages
125–131
Publication Date
2019-08-27
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The objective of this research is to examine the disaggrements between the structuralists and accommodationists, the two main branches of Post Keynesian theory, and to discuss these disagreements in terms of the Minsky's financial instability hypothesis, which sees liquidity preference and leveraged loans as the main reasons for financial instability.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The relationship between the slope of the money supply curve, the endogeneity of the money and the liquidity preference theory leads to a significant debate among the Post Keynesians.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Even though both the accommodationists and the structuralists accept bank credit as equivalent to money, they do not agree with the assumption that the credit supply is determined in whole or in part by credit demand.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The objective of this research is to examine the disaggrements between the structuralists and accommodationists, the two main branches of Post Keynesian theory, and to discuss these disagreements in terms of the Minsky's financial instability hypothesis, which sees liquidity preference and leveraged loans as the main reasons for financial instability.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Para arzı · İçsel Para · Post Keynesyen

Abstract

The relationship between the slope of the money supply curve, the endogeneity of the money and the liquidity preference theory leads to a significant debate among the Post Keynesians. Even though both the accommodationists and the structuralists accept bank credit as equivalent to money, they do not agree with the assumption that the credit supply is determined in whole or in part by credit demand. More importantly, with regard to the concept of endogeneity of money, there are also different explanations in the form of "bank loan" as defined by the structuralists or "loan money" made by the accommodationists. The objective of this research is to examine the disaggrements between the structuralists and accommodationists, the two main branches of Post Keynesian theory, and to discuss these disagreements in terms of the Minsky's financial instability hypothesis, which sees liquidity preference and leveraged loans as the main reasons for financial instability.

Özet

Para arz eğrisinin eğimi ve paranın içselliği ile likidite tercihi teorisi arasındaki bağlantı Post Keynesyenler arasında önemli bir tartışma konusudur. Gerek uyumcu Post Keynesyen yaklaşım gerekse yapısalcı Post Keynesyen yaklaşım banka kredisini para ile eş değer olarak görseler de kredi arzının tamamen ya da kısmen kredi talebi ile belirlenip belirlenmediği hakkında farklı görüşlere sahiptirler. Daha da önemlisi paranın içselliği konusunda yapısalcıların “banka kredisi” ve uyumcuların “kredi parası” şeklinde şeklinde farklı tamımlama durumu da söz konusudur. Bu çalışmada söz konusu Post Keynesyen teorinin iki ana kolunu oluşturan uyumcular ve yapısalcılar arasındaki paranın içselliğine istinaden ortaya çıkan görüş ayrılıklarının temeli tartışılacak ve söz konusu ayrışma, likidite tercihi ve kaldıraçlı kredileri finansal istikrarsızlıkların ana nedeni olarak gören Minsky’nin finansal istikrarsızlık hipotezi açısından yeniden incelenecektir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Özdemir, D. (2019). Fundamental Differences Between Post Keynesians in Determining Money Supply: Accommodationists and Structuralists. Anemon Muş Alparslan Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, Cilt: 7 Sayı: 4, 125–131. https://doi.org/10.18506/anemon.426782

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (38)

  1. Arestis, P. and Howells, P. (1996). Theoretical Reflections on Endogenous Money: theProblem with `Convenience Lending. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 20(5), pp. 539-551
  2. Bertocco, G. (2001). Is Kaldor's Theory of Money Supply Endogeneity Still Relevant? Metroeconomica, Volume 52, Issue 1, pages 95–120.
  3. Carvalho F. C. (2013). Keynes and the endogeneity of money. Review of Keynesian Economics, 1, (4), 431-446.
  4. Dow, S. C. (1997). Endogenous money. In: G.C. Harcourt and P.A. Riach (eds). A Second Edition of the General Theory. London: Routledge, 1997, pp. 63-71.
  5. Earley, J.S. (1994). Joseph Schumpeter: a frustated ‘creditist. In G. Dymski and R. Pollin (eds), New Perspectives in Monetary Macroeconomics: Explorations in the Tradition of Hyman P. Minsky. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
  6. Foley, D. (2009). The Anatomy of Financial and Economic Crisis.http://blog.santafe.edu/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/anatfineconcrisesrev4.pdf
  7. Goodhart, C. (1989). Has Moore become too horizontal? Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, 12(1), 29-34.
  8. Hannsgen, G. (2005). “Minsky’s acceleration channel and the role of money.” Journal of Post Keynesian Economics 27: 471–490.
  9. Hein, E. (2009). A Post-Keynesian perspective on "financialisation". IMK Studies 01-2009, IMK at the Hans Boeckler Foundation, Macroeconomic Policy Institute.
  10. Kaldor, N. (1970). The new monetarism. Lloyds Bank Review, 97: 1-7Kaldor, N. (1982). The Scourge of Monetarism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  11. Kaldor, N. (1985). How monetarism failed. Challenge, May-June, 4-13.Lavoie, M. (1986). Systematic Financial Fragility. Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, Vol. 9, No. 2.
  12. Lavoie, M. (1992). Foundations of Post-Keynesian Economic Analysis. Edward Elgar, England.
  13. Lavoie, M. (1996). Horizontalism, structuralism, liquidity preference and principle of increasing risk. Scottish Journal of Political Economy, 43(3), 275-300Lavoie, M. (2006). Endogenous money: Accommodationist. In P.Arestis and M.Sawyer (eds), A Handbook of Alternative Monetary Economics. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar, 17-34.
  14. Lavoie M. and Seccareccia M. (2001). Minsky’s financial fragility hypothesis: a missing macroeconomic link? In R. Bellofiore and P. Ferri (eds.), Financial Fragility and Investment in the Capitalist Economy: the Economic Legacy of Hyman Minsky, Vol. II, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, pp. 76-96.
  15. Minsky, H. (1982). The Financial Instability Hypothesis: an interpretation of Keynes and an Alternative to Standard Theory. In Inflation, Recession and Economic Policy, Wheatsheaf Books Ltd., Great Britain.
  16. Mollo, Maria de L. R. (1999). The Endogeneity of Money: Post Keynesian and MarxianConcepts Compared. Research in Political Economy, 17, pp.3-26.
  17. Moore, B. J. (1988). Horizontalists and Verticalists: The Macroeconomics of Credit Money. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
  18. Moore, B. J. (1989). On the endogeneity of money once more: Comment. Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, 11(3), 479-87.
  19. Moore, B. J. (1998). Accommodation to accommodationism: A note. Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, 21(1), 175-78.
  20. Palley, T.I. (1991). The endogenous money supply: consensus and disagreement. Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, vol.13, n.3.
  21. Palley, T.I. (1997). Endogenous Money and the Business Cycle. Journal of Economics, 65, no. 2 (1997): 133–149.
  22. Palley, T.I. (2001). Endogenous Money: What it is and Why it Matters.http://www.thomaspalley.com/docs/articles/macro_theory/endogenous_money.pdf
  23. Palley, T.I. (2014). Milton Friedman’s economics and political economy: an old Keynesian critique. Working Paper 134, IMK/Macroeconomic Policy Institute, Dusseldorf, Germany, July.
  24. Palley, T.I. (2017). The theory of endogenous money and the LM schedule: prelude to a reconstruction of IS-LM. In Advances in Endogenous Money Analysis, edited by L. P.Rochon and S. Rossi. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 88–110
  25. Papadimitriou, D. B. & Wray, L. R. (1997). The Economic Contributions of Hyman Minsky: Varieties of Capitalism and Institutional Reform. Economics Working Paper Archive wp_217, Levy Economics Institute.
  26. Pollin, R. (1991). Two Theories of Money Supply Endogeneity: some empirical evidence. Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, vol.13, n. 3.
  27. Rochon, L. P. (1999a). The Creation and Circulation of Endogenous Money: A Circuit Dynamique Approach. Journal of Economic Issues, vol. XXXIII, no.1, March
  28. Rochon, L. P. (1999b). Credit, money, and production: an alternative post-Keynesian approach. Edward Elgar publishing.
  29. Rochon, L. P. & Vernengo, M. (2004). Interest Rates, Effective Demand, and Financial Fragility: Edward Nell and The Trieste Tradition. In Growth, Distribution and Effective Demand: Alternatives to Economic Orthodoxy (Essays in honor of Edward J. Nell, edited by G. Argyrous, M. Forstater, and G. Mongiovi, M. E, Sharpe Inc.
  30. Rousseas, S. (1985). A mark-up theory of bank loan rates. Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, 8, 153-144.
  31. Sawyer, M. C. (1996). Money, finance and interest rates. In: Keynes, Money and the Open Economy: essays in honor of Paul Davidson. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 1996
  32. Sawyer, M. (2003). Employer of Last Resort: Could it deliver full employment and price stability. Journal of Economic Issues, 37(4), 881-907.
  33. Wray, L. R. (1990). Money and Credit in Capitalist Economies: The Endogenous Money Approach, Edward Elgar, Aldershot.
  34. Wray, R. (1992). Alternative Approaches to Money and Interest Rate. Journal of Economic Issues, vol. xxvi, no.4
  35. Wray, R. (2007). Endogenous Money: Structuralist and Horizontalist. Working Paper No. 512, The Levy Economics Institute and University of Missouri–Kansas City.
  36. Wray, L. Randall (2014). From the state theory of money to modern money theory: An alternative to economic orthodoxy. Working Paper, Levy Economics Institute, No. 792
  37. Trifonov, T. & Trifonova, V. (2012). Endogenous Money and Central Bank’s Control on the Short-Term Interest Rates, DOI: 10.7763/IPEDR. 2012. V54. 18
  38. Tymoigne, E. (2006). The Minskyan System, Part II: Dynamics of the Minskyan Analysis and the Financial Fragility Hypothesis. The Levy Economics Institute Working Paper Collection, Working Paper No. 453