WEBVTT

NOTE 05. Modern Monetary Theory: The Austrian Contribution (video)

1
00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:06.000
Okay, this morning's lecture is on the topic of modern monetary theory, the Austrian contribution.

2
00:00:06.000 --> 00:00:13.000
And it's in monetary theory that the Austrians diverge most from the mainstream.

3
00:00:13.000 --> 00:00:24.000
At least in micro theory they tend to use the same terminology, supply and demand, marginal utility, entrepreneur and so on.

4
00:00:24.000 --> 00:00:32.000
But in monetary theory, the Austrians approach it on a micro level.

5
00:00:32.000 --> 00:00:40.000
They don't use the same conceptual apparatus as mainstream neoclassical economists do.

6
00:00:40.000 --> 00:00:46.000
They don't use, for example, the quantity theory. They have serious objections to the quantity theory.

7
00:00:46.000 --> 00:00:53.000
What the Austrians have tried to do, and when I talk about Austrian monetary theory, by the way,

8
00:00:53.000 --> 00:01:13.000
I'm really talking about the contributions of Mises and Rothbard. They are, aside from contributions in business cycle and international monetary economics by Hayek, they are the really only Austrian monetary economists of the 20th century.

9
00:01:13.000 --> 00:01:21.000
It was their work that resulted in the development of Austrian monetary theory.

10
00:01:21.000 --> 00:01:29.000
And remember, both Mises and Rothbard, to some extent, started their careers as monetary theorists.

11
00:01:29.000 --> 00:01:36.000
Mises' first book in economics was The Theory of Money and Credit, which was mistranslated,

12
00:01:36.000 --> 00:01:42.000
as Guido Huelsmann has informed us, and should have been translated as the theory of fiduciary media.

13
00:01:42.000 --> 00:01:52.000
That is a theory of bank deposits and bank notes unbacked by reserves.

14
00:01:52.000 --> 00:01:59.000
And Rothbard, one of his earliest books, or in this case a booklet, was on what has government done to our money,

15
00:01:59.000 --> 00:02:06.000
which I mentioned as a very, very, not just a primer on money, but a very important contribution to the theory of fiat money.

16
00:02:06.000 --> 00:02:15.000
Also, America's Great Depression, which came out in the same year, is really applied monetary theory.

17
00:02:15.000 --> 00:02:23.000
And there's a long and important chapter in Man Economy and State on monetary theory.

18
00:02:23.000 --> 00:02:31.000
And prior to that chapter, there are two other chapters which lay the foundations for monetary theory.

19
00:02:31.000 --> 00:02:38.400
So, both were monetary theorists par excellence.

20
00:02:38.400 --> 00:02:45.660
So as I said, Mises' book, The Theory of Money and Credit, is really what we call the locus

21
00:02:45.660 --> 00:02:51.160
classicus, the classical source for Austrian monetary theory, for the praxeological analysis

22
00:02:51.160 --> 00:02:54.320
of money and prices.

23
00:02:54.320 --> 00:03:03.200
Professions from Menger to Wicksteed all developed, as we saw, the microeconomic aspects, that

24
00:03:03.200 --> 00:03:09.080
is, value theory, price theory, and distribution theory, or factor pricing theory.

25
00:03:09.080 --> 00:03:17.440
But they did so in a border context, and they realized that the main point or objective

26
00:03:17.440 --> 00:03:24.160
of economics was to explain money prices, but they never were able to integrate satisfactorily

27
00:03:24.160 --> 00:03:30.560
Money, Monetary Theory with Value Theory, and Mises in fact did this.

28
00:03:30.560 --> 00:03:36.800
Now, after the Marginal Revolution, they developed what was called the Neoclassical Dichotomy

29
00:03:36.800 --> 00:03:40.280
among the non-Austrian, or it was called the Classical Dichotomy later on, but it was really

30
00:03:40.280 --> 00:03:45.760
the Neoclassical Dichotomy, which means a split by the non-Austrian economists.

31
00:03:45.760 --> 00:03:53.320
So if you look at non-Austrian textbooks of the late 19th century, early 20th century,

32
00:03:53.320 --> 00:04:00.320
You'll see that money is pushed to the end of the textbook in separate chapters and the

33
00:04:00.340 --> 00:04:07.340
analysis uses different concepts. It doesn't use good old supply and demand. It uses macro

34
00:04:07.640 --> 00:04:14.640
concepts, such as the quantity theory. In this treatment of the non-Austrians, money

35
00:04:14.640 --> 00:04:21.640
In this treatment of the non-Austrians, money was really treated like a veil.

36
00:04:21.640 --> 00:04:25.640
It's a veil that obscured the real processes of the economy.

37
00:04:25.640 --> 00:04:30.640
Production was done with real factors of production.

38
00:04:30.640 --> 00:04:36.640
Exchange was really ultimately, even though we exchanged our labor services and our goods against money,

39
00:04:36.640 --> 00:04:42.640
production was the exchange ultimately of goods for goods or goods for services.

40
00:04:42.640 --> 00:04:49.640
Money was only an intermediary and didn't affect the real processes, unless it got out of order.

41
00:04:49.640 --> 00:04:58.640
If there was a rapid inflation or hyperinflation as it was in Germany, yes, then that could affect and distort the real processes of the economy.

42
00:04:58.640 --> 00:05:07.640
Or if there was a sudden and unexpected deflation as there was in the early 1930s, there could be problems with the real economy as a result.

43
00:05:07.640 --> 00:05:17.640
So that much was admitted, but it was an ad hoc explanation, because all along money was kept separately in the regular analysis.

44
00:05:17.640 --> 00:05:30.640
As I said, the typical approach was the quantity theory of Irving Fischer, which was written out as a very simple equation.

45
00:05:30.640 --> 00:05:44.240
the quantity equation, money times the velocity of circulation of money the

46
00:05:44.240 --> 00:05:48.520
number of times that money turns over, the average unit of money turns over in

47
00:05:48.520 --> 00:05:58.760
a given year will equal price. So very in a simplistic way if the money supply is

48
00:05:58.760 --> 00:06:26.760
is $100 and if on average those dollars are spent in transactions, let's say, five times during the year, the velocity of circulation money is therefore five and let's say that the good that's produced is pizzas and so price of pizza is ten.

49
00:06:26.760 --> 00:06:34.260
Well, then there would be 50 pizzas produced and sold on the market, okay?

50
00:06:34.260 --> 00:06:42.000
So the side in which we have spending is $500 spent in the economy, that is a money supply

51
00:06:42.000 --> 00:06:51.360
of $100 that turns over on the average five times a year, so $500 spent per year.

52
00:06:51.360 --> 00:06:57.520
And the income received by the producers of let's say pizzas is the $10 per pizza times

53
00:06:57.520 --> 00:07:00.960
the 50 pizzas that are sold in this case.

54
00:07:00.960 --> 00:07:06.680
So it was a macro concept or a macro approach, this quantity theory.

55
00:07:06.680 --> 00:07:14.280
Now this led to the implication that given that velocity was pretty much fixed by various

56
00:07:14.280 --> 00:07:20.440
institutional factors, the number of times per year workers were paid, the amount of

57
00:07:20.440 --> 00:07:26.320
of Money that people like to hold, and so on, certain business practices, we assume

58
00:07:26.320 --> 00:07:31.000
that to be fixed, and we also assume that the number of pizzas produced were fixed by

59
00:07:31.000 --> 00:07:40.360
the amount of labor, the amount of capital goods, and the type of technology in the economy.

60
00:07:40.360 --> 00:07:44.440
Well then, the only thing that could change, if there was an increase in the money supply,

61
00:07:44.440 --> 00:07:54.440
Let's say the money supply doubled to 200, well then prices would double to 20, which would mean that both sides would now be 1,000.

62
00:07:54.440 --> 00:08:00.440
Doubling of the money supply would bring about an exact doubling of the price level.

63
00:08:00.440 --> 00:08:09.440
Or to put it more generally, a given percentage increase in the money supply would result in the same percentage increase in the price level.

64
00:08:09.440 --> 00:08:18.440
And that was how the value of money was explained, and again I'm simplifying tremendously here, by the non-Austrians.

65
00:08:18.440 --> 00:08:26.440
Now Mises succeeded in repairing the split between monetary theory and value theory.

66
00:08:26.440 --> 00:08:32.440
And let's first start with what Mises sought to accomplish.

67
00:08:32.440 --> 00:08:39.440
He wanted to integrate the theory of money into the overall framework of supply and demand,

68
00:08:39.440 --> 00:08:46.440
which for the Austrian meant that you had to explain demand and supply ultimately by marginal utility.

69
00:08:46.440 --> 00:08:57.440
You had to apply the theory of marginal utility to the explanation of why people held money, why people demanded money.

70
00:08:57.440 --> 00:09:11.440
Now, Menger and Boehm-Bawerk both made a start towards this, but neither developed any sort of complete theory.

71
00:09:11.440 --> 00:09:15.440
So let's start with what Mises saw as the definition of money.

72
00:09:15.440 --> 00:09:18.440
First of all, you have to have a definition of what the supply of money is.

73
00:09:18.440 --> 00:09:25.440
And Mises defined it theoretically, he took his definition from Menger as the general medium of exchange.

74
00:09:25.440 --> 00:09:49.440
That was the primary function of money. The other functions that we hear about in our textbooks, store value, the standard of deferred payments, or we might say also the unit of account, or store value, all of those functions are derivative from the main function of the medium of exchange.

75
00:09:49.440 --> 00:10:00.440
So when we say it's a general even exchange, we mean that people routinely and universally accept money for the most precious items that they have, including their labor.

76
00:10:00.440 --> 00:10:09.440
So no one thinks twice about working for, let's say, 500 dollars, even if they're paper dollars.

77
00:10:09.440 --> 00:10:20.440
We readily accept that because we have confidence that we can turn around and use those dollars to purchase the things that we have placed the highest values on.

78
00:10:20.440 --> 00:10:32.440
Now generally, when Mises wrote, before he wrote, economists generally distinguished between banknotes and token coins on one hand, and demand deposits and checking account balances on the other hand.

79
00:10:32.440 --> 00:10:42.440
They believe that banknotes and token coins were part of the money supply, but that demand deposits or checking account balances were not.

80
00:10:42.440 --> 00:10:51.440
So the money supply, before Mises wrote, was generally defined as consisting of the standard money, which was either gold or silver,

81
00:10:51.440 --> 00:10:59.440
plus banknotes that were denominated in fixed amounts of gold and silver and any token coins that were issued.

82
00:10:59.440 --> 00:11:04.440
They did not consider checking accounts as part of the money supply, for the most part.

83
00:11:04.440 --> 00:11:10.440
Certainly Irving Fisher, who Milton Friedman referred to as the greatest economist that America has produced,

84
00:11:10.440 --> 00:11:19.440
did not consider checking accounts as part of the money supply, something that we do today, as every economist would include today.

85
00:11:19.440 --> 00:11:26.440
So, Mises came up with a taxonomy of money. He based himself on Menger's essentialist approach.

86
00:11:26.440 --> 00:11:56.440
and he summed that approach up in the following way, he said the greatest mistake that can be made in economic investigation is to fix attention on mere appearances and to fail to perceive the fundamental difference between things whose externals alone are similar or to discriminate between fundamentally similar things whose externals alone are different so Mises came up with a new taxonomy of money and let me show you what that taxonomy looked like

87
00:11:56.440 --> 00:12:17.680
Mises started with what he called money in the narrow sense, which we might think about

88
00:12:17.680 --> 00:12:19.620
as cash.

89
00:12:19.620 --> 00:12:24.360
Money could either be commodity money like gold and silver, or it could be credit money.

90
00:12:24.360 --> 00:12:30.760
That is, it could be bank notes that were previously redeemable in gold and silver,

91
00:12:30.760 --> 00:12:35.160
as was the case, for example, in Great Britain before 1797.

92
00:12:35.160 --> 00:12:43.160
Great Britain went off the gold and silver standard during the Napoleonic Wars and the

93
00:12:43.160 --> 00:12:50.960
paper pound became the money or cash in the system because banks were permitted to suspend

94
00:12:50.960 --> 00:12:55.440
Payment in gold and silver, including the Bank of England.

95
00:12:55.440 --> 00:13:01.320
So the paper pound became money from 1797 until 1821.

96
00:13:01.320 --> 00:13:07.720
But everyone expected that after the war ended, the paper pound would once again be convertible

97
00:13:07.720 --> 00:13:10.240
into gold and silver.

98
00:13:10.240 --> 00:13:17.200
So in the case of credit money, it's not just the supply and demand for the money that determines

99
00:13:17.200 --> 00:13:18.200
the value of money.

100
00:13:18.200 --> 00:13:19.980
We'll talk about that in more detail.

101
00:13:19.980 --> 00:13:31.980
It's also the expectation that that money will be redeemable in the commodity money at sooner or later point in the future.

102
00:13:31.980 --> 00:13:40.980
Finally, fiat money. Fiat money is a paper money in which there is no prospect that it will ever again be convertible,

103
00:13:40.980 --> 00:13:47.980
or no immediate or plausible prospect that it will be convertible ever again in commodity money,

104
00:13:47.980 --> 00:13:55.140
Mises distinguished those three types of basic cash in the system.

105
00:13:55.140 --> 00:13:59.900
His next category was money substitutes.

106
00:13:59.900 --> 00:14:03.660
He said, given that we have either commodity money or credit money or fiat money, let's

107
00:14:03.660 --> 00:14:08.340
say we have a commodity money, people deposit that in a banking system.

108
00:14:08.340 --> 00:14:12.260
Once you have a banking system, people will deposit part of their cash in the banking

109
00:14:12.260 --> 00:14:13.700
system.

110
00:14:13.700 --> 00:14:22.020
That part of their cash that is completely backed up, I'm sorry, that part of their deposits,

111
00:14:22.020 --> 00:14:26.340
whether it's in exchange for bank notes or checking account deposits, that is completely

112
00:14:26.340 --> 00:14:30.940
backed up by cash he called money certificates.

113
00:14:30.940 --> 00:14:37.620
That part of their deposits and bank notes that are not backed up he called fiduciary

114
00:14:37.620 --> 00:14:40.620
media.

115
00:14:40.620 --> 00:14:48.620
You trust that when you come in to redeem your bank note or your checking account deposit

116
00:14:48.620 --> 00:14:52.620
that it will be there.

117
00:14:52.620 --> 00:14:58.980
He then identified the category of money in the broad sense, or MBS, and in today's world

118
00:14:58.980 --> 00:15:02.180
that would be known as M1.

119
00:15:02.180 --> 00:15:06.100
And what he said was this, he said that that would be equal to money in the narrow sense,

120
00:15:06.100 --> 00:15:13.460
That is, under a commodity system, all the gold coins in the system, plus money certificates,

121
00:15:13.460 --> 00:15:21.340
that proportion of the banknotes and deposits in circulation, that is completely backed

122
00:15:21.340 --> 00:15:28.860
by gold, let's assume we have a gold standard, plus fiduciary media, that proportion of the

123
00:15:28.860 --> 00:15:33.720
banknotes and deposits that are not backed, minus bank reserves, because the bank reserves

124
00:15:33.720 --> 00:15:40.720
The gold is being held by the banks from the total amount of gold coin in the system because that's being substituted for by the money certificates.

125
00:15:40.720 --> 00:15:53.720
Now, let me just give you a simple example. If there's $10,000 in gold coin and there's $5,000 in bank notes and deposits and banks hold $2,500 in bank reserves, that means that there's a 50% reserve ratio.

126
00:15:53.720 --> 00:16:00.280
$10,000 in bank notes and deposits, and banks hold $2,500 in bank reserves, that means

127
00:16:00.280 --> 00:16:03.740
that there's a 50% reserve ratio.

128
00:16:03.740 --> 00:16:05.640
What would be the total money supply?

129
00:16:05.640 --> 00:16:12.320
Well, it would be the, in a broad sense, and this is what Mises thought of as the total

130
00:16:12.320 --> 00:16:19.720
money supply, it would be the $10,000 in gold, plus the $2,500 in money certificates, those

131
00:16:19.720 --> 00:16:24.520
was backed up by gold, plus the $2,500 in the money that was simply created out of thin

132
00:16:24.520 --> 00:16:31.520
air by the banks, minus the $2,500 that was backing the money certificates.

133
00:16:31.520 --> 00:16:41.660
So in total then, you would have $12,500 in the system, so that the banks would have brought

134
00:16:41.660 --> 00:16:49.380
What about, through their lending operations, in this case, a 25% increase in the money

135
00:16:49.380 --> 00:16:55.180
supply that would have driven up prices roughly by 25%, maybe more, maybe less.

136
00:16:55.180 --> 00:17:00.860
Mises did not believe in the quantity theory in which there was strict proportionality.

137
00:17:00.860 --> 00:17:06.260
Another way of adding it up was simply to take the $10,000 worth of gold coins and add

138
00:17:06.260 --> 00:17:34.260
So this is Mises' new taxonomy of money. What was innovative about it was that Mises was the first one to say that money, or a definition of money, in this case money in the board sense, included not just bank notes, but any checking account deposits, whether they were backed or unbacked by the Federal Reserve.

139
00:17:34.260 --> 00:17:41.740
are un-backed by the cash in the system.

140
00:17:41.740 --> 00:17:47.080
There were some other 19th century economists, particularly in the United States, that recognized

141
00:17:47.080 --> 00:17:56.160
the fact that checking account deposits, just like bank notes, were part of the money supply.

142
00:17:56.160 --> 00:18:01.440
So Mises points out that, look, whether you pay in bank notes or with checking account

143
00:18:01.440 --> 00:18:15.440
The effect is the same. Both banknotes and a check written on your deposits are final means of payments. You've completely discharged your debt to the seller or to the creditor.

144
00:18:15.440 --> 00:18:29.440
Since the two things function the same, since banknotes and checking account deposits function the same, or essentially the same in Mangerian terminology, they in fact must both be part of the money supply.

145
00:18:29.440 --> 00:18:34.440
It would be inconsistent to include bank notes and not to include checking account money.

146
00:18:40.440 --> 00:18:52.440
Now what was interesting was that Mises classified most historical periods of paper money not as fiat money.

147
00:18:52.440 --> 00:18:55.440
He didn't consider it to be fiat money, he considered it to be credit money.

148
00:18:55.440 --> 00:19:16.440
Because, in his experience, every single period in which paper money developed, whether it was during a war or during an emergency, always resulted in the currency being eventually redeemable again in gold or silver.

149
00:19:16.440 --> 00:19:38.440
So people always had this expectation that eventually the government, after the war is over, after the king has bankrupted the country and has caused a hyperinflation, as in France, by issuing paper money, eventually the paper money is going to be in some way tied back to gold or silver.

150
00:19:38.440 --> 00:19:49.440
So, Mises made the following statements. This is very interesting. He admitted theoretically that we could have a purely paper money.

151
00:19:49.440 --> 00:20:00.440
But he didn't think that he ever really saw an actual instance of this, in which paper money was a fiat money, a money that was simply, as Murray Rothbard points out, a pure name.

152
00:20:00.440 --> 00:20:07.440
A fiat money is literally a pure name. The dollar is a pure name. The government could stamp that on here.

153
00:20:07.440 --> 00:20:12.440
It could stamp it on your bottle of water. It could stamp $100 on that bottle of water.

154
00:20:12.440 --> 00:20:21.440
If it was legitimately stamped by the Treasury, that would circulate because it's the name which the government monopolizes under fiat money.

155
00:20:21.440 --> 00:20:26.440
That is the essence of money.

156
00:20:26.440 --> 00:20:42.440
So Mises again theoretically admitted this, so did Wieser. They admitted that could happen. Mises even said that at some point in the future it may be the case that the commodity money gold loses its non-monetary functions.

157
00:20:42.440 --> 00:20:51.440
That is that people no longer like or use gold as jewelry or industrial purposes. So that gold becomes simply a money commodity.

158
00:20:51.440 --> 00:21:01.440
But even in that case, it's not a fiat money. Its supply is still controlled by the market. It's still controlled by the cost of producing gold.

159
00:21:01.440 --> 00:21:13.440
So, let me just read you Mises' statement regarding fiat money. And this is where Rothbard, as I'll show you, where one of his great achievements come in.

160
00:21:13.440 --> 00:21:18.440
Mises says, it can hardly be contested that fiat money, in the strict sense of the word, is theoretically conceivable.

161
00:21:18.440 --> 00:21:37.440
It goes on to say, whether fiat money has ever actually existed is, of course, another question, and one that cannot offhand be answered affirmatively.

162
00:21:37.440 --> 00:21:47.440
It can hardly be doubted that most of those kinds of money that are not commodity money must be classified as credit money, but only detailed historical investigation could clear this matter up.

163
00:21:47.440 --> 00:22:07.440
Now, even as late as 1966, in the third edition of Human Action, we've had 20 years of the Bretton Woods system in which Americans could not convert their dollars into gold, in which foreign governments were permitted to, but Americans were not.

164
00:22:07.440 --> 00:22:12.440
In fact, Americans were not able to convert dollars into gold since 1933.

165
00:22:12.440 --> 00:22:22.440
So, yet Mises still was reluctant to admit that the dollar was a pure fiat currency and he says, this is in Human Action,

166
00:22:22.440 --> 00:22:32.440
it is not the task of catallactics, meaning economics in a narrow sense, but of economic history to investigate whether there appeared in the past specimens of fiat money

167
00:22:32.440 --> 00:22:36.440
or whether all sorts of money which were not commodity money were credit money.

168
00:22:36.440 --> 00:22:46.440
So in 1966, he's still thinking that the dollar might not really be a fiat money, that in fact it probably is a credit money.

169
00:22:46.440 --> 00:22:51.440
But to clear this question up, we do have to have an historical investigation.

170
00:22:51.440 --> 00:23:02.440
Mises never explained how the transition occurred during history from commodity money to credit money, finally to fiat money.

171
00:23:02.440 --> 00:23:32.440
of Money. That was left to Rothbard. Now one problem with Mises' monetary theory, he did include demand deposits, or checking account money, as we said, as a money substitute. But he had a problem with savings deposits. Now, as early as the 1920s and even earlier, banks, even though in the small print, if you had

172
00:23:32.440 --> 00:23:41.440
The past book savings deposit would say they could require you to give 30 days notice before you could withdraw money from your savings account.

173
00:23:41.440 --> 00:23:47.440
So technically it was an investment deposit, meaning that they would make short-term loans with that money.

174
00:23:47.440 --> 00:23:58.440
But after a while, because of central bank policy, and certainly in the 1920s and 1930s, savings accounts could be withdrawn on demand at par.

175
00:23:58.440 --> 00:24:07.440
So if you had $10,000 in a savings account and you wanted to go purchase something for $10,000, you could immediately go to the bank and withdraw that money on demand.

176
00:24:07.440 --> 00:24:21.440
The bank would not invoke that 30-day clause, that 30-day warning that you would have to give them that you wanted the money back.

177
00:24:21.440 --> 00:24:29.440
Mises had an ambivalent attitude towards the inclusion of savings deposits in his broader definition of money.

178
00:24:29.440 --> 00:24:35.440
As early as 1924, he recognized that institutional developments had led banks to,

179
00:24:35.440 --> 00:24:41.440
quote, undertake the obligation to pay out small sums of savings deposits at any time without notice.

180
00:24:41.440 --> 00:24:47.440
He was saying that, in fact, banks were not invoking that clause that you had to give them notice.

181
00:24:47.440 --> 00:24:55.440
and this circumstance, he went on to say, induced small business people in lower income households to use these deposits as current accounts.

182
00:24:55.440 --> 00:25:04.440
He's admitting that people are using them almost as checking accounts, except they simply have to walk to the bank to withdraw the money, despite the fact that they were technically investment deposits.

183
00:25:04.440 --> 00:25:13.440
Thus, Mises implied that at least some portion of savings deposits functioned economically as money substitutes and should be included in the broad concept of money.

184
00:25:13.440 --> 00:25:19.360
of Money. At least he was implying that, because as we said, small businesses and low-income

185
00:25:19.360 --> 00:25:24.960
people were using them as everyday checking deposits. Now, the second thing, Mises did

186
00:25:24.960 --> 00:25:30.120
place much of the blame for the financial and exchange rate instability that occurred

187
00:25:30.120 --> 00:25:39.800
in the early 1930s on the widespread treatment of savings deposits as current money, or as

188
00:25:39.800 --> 00:25:46.800
He pointed out that this development was actively sought and encouraged by the banks.

189
00:25:47.160 --> 00:25:52.960
The banks wanted people to have confidence that they could take the money out of savings

190
00:25:52.960 --> 00:25:58.640
accounts at any time, because that would increase the amount of deposits they got, which could

191
00:25:58.640 --> 00:26:02.360
be loaned out, and it would increase their interest income.

192
00:26:02.360 --> 00:26:09.360
And the central banks made sure that if any of these banks were unable to pay, they would

193
00:26:09.800 --> 00:26:36.800
were there to bail these banks out. In other words, they attempted, though there wasn't any sort of deposit insurance at this point, they attempted to ensure that the instantaneous convertibility of savings deposits, which the commercial banks promised to their customers, would actually be something that people believed in, that people had trust in.

194
00:26:36.800 --> 00:26:46.800
So Mises points out that it wasn't hot money flowing from one country to the other or capital flight in the 1930s that added to the problem of the Great Depression.

195
00:26:46.800 --> 00:26:57.800
What he said was it was this attempt by both central banks and commercial banks to get people to use savings accounts as if they were checking accounts that caused a lot of the problems.

196
00:26:57.800 --> 00:27:15.800
So that when people began to fear that, for example, you know, the Austrian bank, the credit onshore, when that collapsed, many foreign firms and governments had deposits, savings deposits, they were getting interest on, that they immediately pulled out.

197
00:27:15.800 --> 00:27:21.800
And this made the financial situation more unstable than it already was.

198
00:27:21.800 --> 00:27:32.800
Now what did he, despite this brilliant analysis of savings deposits and how they had come to operate as part of the money supply, Mises pulled back from including them in the money supply.

199
00:27:32.800 --> 00:27:44.800
So in 1966 in the third edition, he referred to them, at one point he referred to them as demand deposits not subject to check, but then inconsistently denied that they were money substitutes.

200
00:27:44.800 --> 00:27:54.800
Rather, he identified savings deposits as the foremost among what he called secondary media of exchange, which included highly marketable financial assets.

201
00:27:54.800 --> 00:28:05.800
So he included savings deposits, he included blue chip stocks, he included government bonds, not as money, but as secondary media of exchange that people could easily liquidate.

202
00:28:05.800 --> 00:28:18.800
So if you needed cash for a current purpose, you could sell your IBM stock or you could sell your government treasury bill pretty quickly for actual cash.

203
00:28:18.800 --> 00:28:28.800
But the problem is, by then, 1966, we have a Federal Reserve system, we have federal deposit insurance of savings and checking accounts,

204
00:28:28.800 --> 00:28:43.800
Whereas, you're never completely certain of what price you're going to get for your IBM stock or your treasury bill, you are certain that you're going to get the full face value or par value of your savings account.

205
00:28:43.800 --> 00:28:53.800
So, you're not selling something. When you go cash in your savings account, you're not selling some sort of financial asset for a price on a market. It isn't a market.

206
00:28:53.800 --> 00:29:05.800
All it is, is converting a claim to ready cash, so it should have been counted as part of the money supply. Mises did not do that. That's another improvement we'll see that Rothbard made.

207
00:29:05.800 --> 00:29:19.800
Now, what about the demand for money? The early Austrians had problems in applying marginal utility theory to money because of what was called by a German who was an anti-Austrian, his name was Karl Helfrich,

208
00:29:19.800 --> 00:29:26.800
who became the chairman of the German Central Bank

209
00:29:26.800 --> 00:29:32.800
which was the cause of the hyperinflation in Germany.

210
00:29:32.800 --> 00:29:36.800
Helfrich wrote a big book on money and he criticized the Austrians.

211
00:29:36.800 --> 00:29:42.800
He said, look, you can never apply marginal utility to money because of the Austrian Circle.

212
00:29:42.800 --> 00:29:44.800
So he used this term which has stuck in the literature

213
00:29:44.800 --> 00:29:52.800
and which was supposed to be referring to a major failing of the Austrian value theory.

214
00:29:52.800 --> 00:29:55.800
The Austrian Circle looks like this. This is what Helfrich said.

215
00:30:00.800 --> 00:30:05.800
He said, in order to figure out the value of money, let's look at the top, the marginal utility of money,

216
00:30:05.800 --> 00:30:09.800
that is how an individual values money against other goods and services,

217
00:30:09.800 --> 00:30:13.800
which would determine how much that individual would hold in his or her cash balance.

218
00:30:13.800 --> 00:30:17.800
In order to figure that out, that person has to know the purchasing power of money.

219
00:30:17.800 --> 00:30:19.800
That is, what is the value of money on the market?

220
00:30:19.800 --> 00:30:27.800
To know how many dollars to hold, you have to know how much lunch is going to be every day, during your pay period,

221
00:30:27.800 --> 00:30:34.800
how much, I live in New York, how much a subway is going to cost, how much a glass of beer will cost,

222
00:30:34.800 --> 00:30:36.800
how much a restaurant meal will cost, how much a shirt will cost.

223
00:30:36.800 --> 00:30:43.800
the value of money before you can judge subjectively how much money to hold for the future and you make that judgment by comparing goods with money but the money has to have a previous purchasing power so he went on to say

224
00:31:06.800 --> 00:31:11.800
The marginal utility of money then does determine the demand for money,

225
00:31:11.800 --> 00:31:15.800
how much money people want to hold, which, given the supply of money,

226
00:31:15.800 --> 00:31:17.800
the demand and supply determines the purchasing power of money,

227
00:31:17.800 --> 00:31:20.800
which in turn determines the marginal utility of money.

228
00:31:20.800 --> 00:31:23.800
So what he was saying was that, all the Austrians were saying was that

229
00:31:23.800 --> 00:31:27.800
the purchasing power of money determines the purchasing power of money, indirectly.

230
00:31:27.800 --> 00:31:31.800
So it was a circle, which could not be broken.

231
00:31:31.800 --> 00:31:45.800
Once again, you have to know what prices are before you know how many of these pieces of paper, which we call a dollar, that you want to hold in your wallet, in your checking account, in your savings account.

232
00:31:45.800 --> 00:31:51.800
Because if prices were lower, you would want to hold fewer of these dollars. You could purchase more with each one.

233
00:31:51.800 --> 00:32:01.800
If prices were higher, you would want to hold more of these dollars. Each single dollar would have a lower value to you, and you would want to hold more purchasing power.

234
00:32:01.800 --> 00:32:05.800
In any case, that was the Austrian Circle. Now, how did Mises get out of the Austrian Circle?

235
00:32:05.800 --> 00:32:22.800
He got out of it through something that we call the regression theorem, which was a great theoretical breakthrough.

236
00:32:22.800 --> 00:32:43.800
Let me point something out. As J.V. Say said in 1803, in response to previous economists who would claim that human beings could create goods, Say basically said human beings cannot create matter at all. Only God can create matter.

237
00:32:43.800 --> 00:32:55.800
Human beings can transform resources and various elements of their environment into other forms that have greater use to them or greater utility to them, but they can't create anything.

238
00:32:55.800 --> 00:33:06.800
Well, one thing that human beings can create is new ideas, new systems of thought, new concepts, and Mises created this new theory.

239
00:33:06.800 --> 00:33:09.800
He was a creative genius.

240
00:33:09.800 --> 00:33:23.040
Now, what he said was the following. In fact, Helfrich has made an elementary error. Because

241
00:33:23.040 --> 00:33:29.080
it's not the purchasing power of tomorrow that determines the marginal utility of money

242
00:33:29.080 --> 00:33:35.080
today. We have to date these things. What Mises pointed out was that when we make our

243
00:33:35.080 --> 00:33:44.080
Let's take our judgment about how much money to hold for tomorrow. We do so based on what the value of money is today.

244
00:33:44.080 --> 00:33:47.080
So let me show you what I mean by that.

245
00:33:47.080 --> 00:34:02.080
What Mises did, and I'm kind of small to see, but the purchasing power of money in time T0, which is today,

246
00:34:02.080 --> 00:34:11.200
or let's put it this way, I have the arrows going in the opposite direction, meaning that

247
00:34:11.200 --> 00:34:16.840
the amount of money that you demand, that you'll demand today, so the monetary demand

248
00:34:16.840 --> 00:34:21.440
depends on what the purchasing power of money was today.

249
00:34:21.440 --> 00:34:26.440
So you see the prices around you, you determine the value of money, the marginal utility of

250
00:34:26.440 --> 00:34:35.720
Money and so on, or actually let me, because I have these hours going backwards, let's

251
00:34:35.720 --> 00:34:42.400
start here, let's start to the right.

252
00:34:42.400 --> 00:34:46.880
The supply and demand for money yesterday, T minus one, determines what the purchasing

253
00:34:46.880 --> 00:34:53.720
power of money was yesterday, so the supply and demand for money was yesterday.

254
00:34:53.720 --> 00:35:08.720
Now, today what you do then is you look at prices yesterday, before you go into the market and you determine based on how much a dollar can purchase, how many dollars you want to hold and how many dollars you want to spend.

255
00:35:08.720 --> 00:35:13.720
So you determine the marginal utility of money, the value of a dollar in relation to other goods and services.

256
00:35:13.720 --> 00:35:19.720
That, in turn, determines today's demand for money.

257
00:35:19.720 --> 00:35:27.720
And given the supply of money, either, let's say, on the gold standard, supply and demand determines today's purchasing power of money.

258
00:35:27.720 --> 00:35:31.720
So we're not saying that the purchasing power of money determines the purchasing power of money.

259
00:35:31.720 --> 00:35:35.720
We're saying that there is a human judgment and choice being made.

260
00:35:35.720 --> 00:35:41.720
Human beings are looking back at yesterday's purchasing power.

261
00:35:41.720 --> 00:35:44.720
There's always a pre-existing set of money prices.

262
00:35:44.720 --> 00:35:48.720
You look at those prices, you determine the purchasing power of money.

263
00:35:48.720 --> 00:35:51.720
You know what money can exchange for on the market yesterday.

264
00:35:51.720 --> 00:35:54.720
And you might make a judgment about what it will be tomorrow,

265
00:35:54.720 --> 00:35:56.720
but it's always based on what it was yesterday.

266
00:35:56.720 --> 00:36:00.720
And then you determine subjectively how many units of money to hold,

267
00:36:00.720 --> 00:36:02.720
which determines your demand for money.

268
00:36:02.720 --> 00:36:04.720
And we'll talk more about holding money and so on.

269
00:36:04.720 --> 00:36:10.720
and that in conjunction with the supply of money will determine today's purchasing power of money.

270
00:36:10.720 --> 00:36:15.720
At the end of the market day there will be certain prices that have emerged that will be different from yesterday's.

271
00:36:15.720 --> 00:36:18.720
So the following day you will do the same thing.

272
00:36:18.720 --> 00:36:26.720
Tomorrow you look at what today's prices were, determine the marginal utility of money which will determine your demand for money

273
00:36:26.720 --> 00:36:29.720
and given the supply that will determine a new purchasing power of money.

274
00:36:29.720 --> 00:36:47.720
Now, the second objection that came up was, well, all Mises has done is come up with a regressus ad infinitum in Latin,

275
00:36:47.720 --> 00:37:06.720
Meaning, we explain the value of money by continually going back in time and never, ever ultimately explaining where the purchasing power of money came from initially.

276
00:37:06.720 --> 00:37:10.720
So, it regresses infinitely back in time.

277
00:37:10.720 --> 00:37:12.720
Well, Mises points out, well, that's not true.

278
00:37:12.720 --> 00:37:25.720
Because, in fact, regression theorem tells us that the value of money emerged the day after border ended.

279
00:37:25.720 --> 00:37:52.720
That if you go back again to the last day of barter, when people were only using gold, let's say, for ornamental purposes, for jewelry, for rituals, and so on, then it was simply the marginal utility of gold on the last day of barter, and you can't really see it there, but I have that as t minus n minus one.

280
00:37:52.720 --> 00:37:56.420
In other words, let's say we've had n days of a monetary economy.

281
00:37:56.420 --> 00:38:01.420
Well, the day before t minus n minus 1, the day before the monetary economy started,

282
00:38:01.420 --> 00:38:13.620
on that day, the value of gold, the marginal utility of gold, was determined at that moment by the uses of gold, just like any other good.

283
00:38:13.620 --> 00:38:19.920
So when we go out and today you purchase a Wendy's hamburger, your demand for that hamburger,

284
00:38:19.920 --> 00:38:25.520
Your decision to purchase that hamburger depends on your value scale at that moment.

285
00:38:25.520 --> 00:38:32.720
There is no temporal component in determining the marginal utility of any other good except money.

286
00:38:32.720 --> 00:38:38.720
So the value of gold was determined on the last day of border, the subjective value,

287
00:38:38.720 --> 00:38:46.920
which gave rise to demand for gold and given the supply of gold in the system, you had a price of gold.

288
00:38:46.920 --> 00:38:52.920
The price of gold on the border was in terms of every other good that it exchanged for.

289
00:38:52.920 --> 00:39:00.920
So, on the first day in which someone said, you know what, everybody in the society accepts gold or uses gold directly,

290
00:39:00.920 --> 00:39:11.920
and therefore I'm going to exchange my goods for gold not because I want to use gold directly, but because I want to go and buy wheat, or I want to go and buy a plow.

291
00:39:11.920 --> 00:39:21.920
At that point then, people can take gold and demand it as money because there is a pre-existing purchasing power under barter.

292
00:39:21.920 --> 00:39:26.920
So it does come to a close. It is not regressus ad infinitum.

293
00:39:26.920 --> 00:39:35.920
The value of money can be traced back, the temporal element in determining the value of money can be traced back to the last day of barter.

294
00:39:35.920 --> 00:40:00.920
Now, a general equilibrium economist, who we talked about yesterday, John Hicks, satirized Mises' explanation, his regression theorem, and said that, well then, money becomes the ghost of gold, according to von Mises.

295
00:40:00.920 --> 00:40:15.680
Money is not the ghost of gold, but it certainly, the fiat money that we have today has a connection

296
00:40:15.680 --> 00:40:17.280
to gold.

297
00:40:17.280 --> 00:40:24.600
The paper dollar, despite what Hicks said, would never have come onto the market or arisen

298
00:40:24.600 --> 00:40:26.320
spontaneously on the market.

299
00:40:26.320 --> 00:40:32.100
or even it couldn't be forced into existence by governments either because people would

300
00:40:32.100 --> 00:40:35.160
not know what the value of a paper dollar was.

301
00:40:35.160 --> 00:40:42.220
The paper dollar had to have some connection to a commodity that had a pre-existing purchasing

302
00:40:42.220 --> 00:40:43.220
power.

303
00:40:43.220 --> 00:40:45.300
In this case it was a gold dollar.

304
00:40:45.300 --> 00:40:52.240
So if you want to use these terms, which was an attempt to belittle Mises' explanation,

305
00:40:52.240 --> 00:40:53.240
it's certainly true.

306
00:40:53.240 --> 00:40:57.240
It is the ghost or the shadow of gold, in some sense.

307
00:41:00.240 --> 00:41:06.240
That's not to say that the dollar itself isn't a real money today, even though it is a pure fiat currency. It certainly is.

308
00:41:08.240 --> 00:41:15.240
So those are some of Mises' most important concepts in monetary theory. I want to mention a few others.

309
00:41:15.240 --> 00:41:28.240
One, he did criticize the idea that you could average up the value of money into one single unitary figure.

310
00:41:28.240 --> 00:41:31.240
That is, that you could figure out a single price level.

311
00:41:31.240 --> 00:41:40.240
As Mises points out, the purchasing power of money consists of an array of different specific quantities of individual goods

312
00:41:40.240 --> 00:41:44.240
that the monetary unit will exchange for at any point in time.

313
00:41:44.240 --> 00:42:14.220
For example, right now, the purchasing power of money is, let's say, one Coke, because let's say a Coke is a dollar, or one-third of a Wendy's hamburger, that's three dollars, or, as I found out yesterday, when my wife told me that a Rolling Stones concert ticket was $175, one-one-hundred-and-seventy-fifth of a Rolling Stones concert ticket, or one-sixty-thousandth of a Cadillac Escalade, and so on.

314
00:42:14.240 --> 00:42:24.240
So, there's almost an infinite array that constitutes the purchasing power of money.

315
00:42:24.240 --> 00:42:33.240
And since those are all heterogeneous goods, you cannot add up and average out that array into a single price index,

316
00:42:33.240 --> 00:42:41.240
as all modern economists attempt to do, which really was a method of approach that began with Fisher.

317
00:42:41.240 --> 00:42:50.240
And I won't go into details, but Mises has some very interesting critiques or very very interesting criticisms of Fischer's concept.

318
00:42:50.240 --> 00:43:00.240
What I do want to point out is that Mises makes a very interesting comment in Human Action.

319
00:43:00.240 --> 00:43:03.240
Mises pointed out that there are many different ways. They're all arbitrary.

320
00:43:03.240 --> 00:43:19.360
A judicious housewife knows much more about price changes as far as they affect her own

321
00:43:19.360 --> 00:43:23.000
household than the statistical averages can tell.

322
00:43:23.000 --> 00:43:27.560
She has little use for computations disregarding changes both in quality and in the amount

323
00:43:27.560 --> 00:43:32.680
of goods which she is able or permitted to buy at the prices entering into the computation.

324
00:43:32.680 --> 00:43:37.240
If she measures the changes from her personal appreciation by taking prices of only two

325
00:43:37.240 --> 00:43:42.320
or three commodities as a yardstick, she is no less scientific and no more arbitrary than

326
00:43:42.320 --> 00:43:46.160
the sophisticated mathematicians in choosing their methods for manipulating the data of

327
00:43:46.160 --> 00:43:47.160
the market.

328
00:43:47.160 --> 00:43:52.320
And we saw back in the mid-90s, they took out the price of houses and they put in rents

329
00:43:52.320 --> 00:43:53.880
because of the housing bubble.

330
00:43:53.880 --> 00:43:58.200
Price of housing was rising at a much higher level because of low interest rates or a much

331
00:43:58.200 --> 00:44:00.700
higher rate than rents were.

332
00:44:00.700 --> 00:44:07.500
So it made the consumer price index look better from the point of view of inflation.

333
00:44:07.500 --> 00:44:11.140
And also the problem with quality changes.

334
00:44:11.140 --> 00:44:18.420
In order for these statistics, these price indices to have meaning, they have to have

335
00:44:18.420 --> 00:44:20.100
the same goods.

336
00:44:20.100 --> 00:44:25.140
But we know goods are always changing in quality and new goods are always coming into the basket.

337
00:44:25.140 --> 00:44:30.100
So before they changed the basket to include cell phones, I don't know if they did or

338
00:44:30.100 --> 00:44:45.100
You didn't have cell phones in the basket. You had a huge part of the money, or a large amount of money that was spent on the so-called average consumer basket of goods, was spent on cell phones, but that had a zero weight in the basket.

339
00:44:45.100 --> 00:44:51.100
So what Mises is saying is that there's no scientific way of measuring inflation.

340
00:44:51.100 --> 00:45:13.100
Historically, statistics are interesting and they can show us the magnitude of inflation, but a housewife or someone who goes shopping regularly and habitually buys certain goods, on her own can figure out, more relevantly to herself certainly, what inflation is, how bad inflation is.

341
00:45:13.100 --> 00:45:20.100
And Murray Rothbard was always saying that he hated the CPI because it didn't give a good big weight to books and he was always buying books.

342
00:45:20.100 --> 00:45:23.100
The price of books were going up at a very rapid rate and they still are.

343
00:45:23.100 --> 00:45:27.100
Well, you can tell if you're students, you can see the way textbooks have increased.

344
00:45:27.100 --> 00:45:31.100
And being a parent of a student, tuition isn't weighted.

345
00:45:31.100 --> 00:45:36.100
To me, it has a huge weight in my budget right now.

346
00:45:36.100 --> 00:45:40.100
And that's going up more rapidly.

347
00:45:40.100 --> 00:45:58.100
Finally, about Mises, Mises pointed out that the quantity theory was wrong because it implied that a given change, a percentage change in the quantity of money resulted in all other things equal a given percentage change in prices.

348
00:45:58.100 --> 00:46:02.100
So if the money supply went up by 10%, prices would go up by 10%.

349
00:46:02.100 --> 00:46:16.100
Mises pointed out that this was not correct, that in fact, you had to analyze changes in the purchasing power of money through what he called a step-by-step process, which was later called period analysis.

350
00:46:16.100 --> 00:46:23.100
And basically what that was was the following. You focus on where the new money comes into the system, where it's injected into the system.

351
00:46:23.100 --> 00:46:32.100
The government spends new money on weapons guidance systems. They buy more defense computers from, let's say, Silicon Valley.

352
00:46:32.100 --> 00:46:37.100
They therefore, let's say, create new money to make these purchases.

353
00:46:37.100 --> 00:46:50.100
Now, what happens? Well, initially, the people who get the new money, the first people to receive that money are the stockholders and workers in high-tech firms, in a specific point, in California.

354
00:46:50.100 --> 00:46:56.100
Now let's say the workers increase their demand for beer because they have higher cash balances now. They have more money than they want to hold.

355
00:46:56.100 --> 00:47:03.100
Prices haven't gone up yet. They don't go up instantaneously and proportionally. Now the price of beer goes up.

356
00:47:03.100 --> 00:47:12.100
The stockholders in these companies increase their demand for fine wines from Napa Valley, so the price of wine goes up.

357
00:47:12.100 --> 00:47:21.100
You and I are on the East Coast, people who are on the East Coast, we're paying higher prices for beer and wine, yet our incomes haven't changed.

358
00:47:21.100 --> 00:47:28.100
So, there is a step-by-step redistribution of wealth away from people who receive the new money late or not at all,

359
00:47:28.100 --> 00:47:34.100
to the people, including the government, who create and receive the new money initially.

360
00:47:34.100 --> 00:47:37.100
Now, let's take a few steps further.

361
00:47:37.100 --> 00:47:46.100
The people in the Napa Valley where wine is produced, the people in Milwaukee who are producing beer, they're much more prosperous.

362
00:47:46.100 --> 00:47:48.100
They have higher cash balances.

363
00:47:48.100 --> 00:47:56.100
Their marginal utility of money drops because now money has a lower value to them because they have more of it vis-à-vis other goods.

364
00:47:56.100 --> 00:48:02.100
So they spend, let's say, more money on going out to dinner for steak dinners.

365
00:48:02.100 --> 00:48:12.100
So now the demand for beef goes up. Now I'm paying higher prices not only for beer and wine, but for steak.

366
00:48:12.100 --> 00:48:23.100
And let's assume also that they begin buying more automobiles from Detroit. So now the price of American cars is going up.

367
00:48:23.100 --> 00:48:34.100
So now what has happened? There are four prices that have risen and people who are not yet part of this chain of spending of the new money have their real income shrinking.

368
00:48:34.100 --> 00:48:44.100
Eventually, maybe 12 months down the line, 18 months down the line, that new money will be spent in New York where I work.

369
00:48:44.100 --> 00:49:02.100
in New York, the prices of let's say hotels in New York haven't risen, the prices of Broadway shows haven't risen yet, they'll also start taking more advantage of financial services which are produced in New York.

370
00:49:02.100 --> 00:49:09.100
Now finally, 18 months later, the demand for a PACE MBA, PACE University MBA goes up by using the MBA program.

371
00:49:09.100 --> 00:49:15.100
So the price of, so finally the price of this tuition goes up and I get a raise.

372
00:49:15.100 --> 00:49:21.100
So for 18 months, what has happened to my real income? It shrunk.

373
00:49:21.100 --> 00:49:30.100
Not only that, the second point that Mises made is that there is a permanent redistribution or reallocation of resources.

374
00:49:30.100 --> 00:49:36.100
In other words, the people that gain, the people that are the early receivers of the new money

375
00:49:36.100 --> 00:49:44.100
demand different things than the people that are the late receivers of the money or people on fixed incomes.

376
00:49:44.100 --> 00:49:51.100
So because income has been redistributed and wealth has been redistributed to them, the structure of demand in the economy changes.

377
00:49:51.100 --> 00:50:00.100
So let's say retired people on fixed incomes in Florida find that their wealth is permanently reduced and their incomes are permanently reduced.

378
00:50:00.100 --> 00:50:02.100
They never get any of that new money.

379
00:50:02.100 --> 00:50:08.100
So what you'll see then is, is possibly condominiums in Florida actually falling in price.

380
00:50:08.100 --> 00:50:11.100
Even though there's a general inflation in the economy.

381
00:50:11.100 --> 00:50:19.100
Because people are demanding, the people that demand those things have suffered a loss in real income.

382
00:50:19.100 --> 00:50:23.100
And as Mises points out, money therefore is non-neutral.

383
00:50:23.100 --> 00:50:31.100
That is, increasing the money supply will not increase all prices proportionately and instantaneously.

384
00:50:31.100 --> 00:50:37.100
It takes time for the purchasing power of money to adjust to a change in the money supply, number one.

385
00:50:37.100 --> 00:50:42.100
And number two, when it does adjust, it adjusts unevenly.

386
00:50:42.100 --> 00:50:50.100
So at the end of the whole process, certain prices will have risen by, let's say, 15%,

387
00:50:50.100 --> 00:50:55.100
other prices may have risen only by 3% and some prices may have actually fallen.

388
00:50:55.100 --> 00:51:12.100
With the implication that resources then will move into those areas that have higher prices and higher profits and away from areas in which profits did not increase or actually fell or where there were losses.

389
00:51:12.100 --> 00:51:17.100
So there will be a readjustment of real resources as a result of the change in the money supply.

390
00:51:17.100 --> 00:51:21.100
And if this wasn't the case, Mises points out, then why would anybody inflate?

391
00:51:21.100 --> 00:51:29.100
Why would a government ever inflate if, as soon as you created new money, all prices went up proportionally?

392
00:51:29.100 --> 00:51:43.100
There would be no reason for inflation. It's precisely because money is non-neutral that governments are lured into inflation to inflate the money supply, or their central banks.

393
00:51:43.100 --> 00:51:55.100
Now, by the way, in current monetary theory, there's a difference made between what happens in the short run and what happens in the long run.

394
00:51:55.100 --> 00:52:08.100
In the short run, they admit that money is non-neutral, not in the Austrian sense of percolating or rippling through the economy at a different speed and affecting prices at different times,

395
00:52:08.100 --> 00:52:37.100
In the long run, they still believe, as in the Naive Quantity Theory, that if you increase the money supply by 10%, eventually, in the long run, all other things equal, all prices will eventually rise by 10%, which is crazy.

396
00:52:37.100 --> 00:52:43.700
and it was Mises who developed and Mises alone was responsible for this step-by-step analysis

397
00:52:43.700 --> 00:52:50.700
or sometimes called process analysis or a period analysis.

398
00:52:50.700 --> 00:52:55.520
And by the way, no matter how quickly people spend their money, there's still a sequence

399
00:52:55.520 --> 00:52:57.860
in which people receive the money, okay?

400
00:52:57.860 --> 00:53:01.140
So even if the whole thing happened in a day, it doesn't matter how quickly it happens,

401
00:53:01.140 --> 00:53:06.660
whether it happens over 18 months or one day, it still happens in a sequence.

402
00:53:06.660 --> 00:53:10.860
That is, some people get the money first, spend it before prices have risen, they gain.

403
00:53:10.860 --> 00:53:14.340
The people that get the money at the end of the day, after most prices have risen, and

404
00:53:14.340 --> 00:53:19.660
most of the money has been spent, are the ones that suffer, because there's been some

405
00:53:19.660 --> 00:53:27.020
criticisms of Austrian economic, of Mises' analysis to the effect that, well, in today's

406
00:53:27.020 --> 00:53:30.900
world where, you know, money can be spent instantaneously, you know, you can spend on

407
00:53:30.900 --> 00:53:36.500
the internet and so on, well, you know, all prices go up very rapidly.

408
00:53:36.500 --> 00:53:43.500
It's not that they do all go up very rapidly. They still go up one after the other. It's still a step-by-step process, and that's important.

409
00:53:43.500 --> 00:53:52.500
Okay, let's talk a little bit about Rothbard now and his contributions to Austrian monetary theory.

410
00:53:52.500 --> 00:54:02.500
He developed the theory of how fiat money comes about, and that's done, as I said, in his small booklet, What Has Government Done to Our Money?

411
00:54:02.500 --> 00:54:20.460
What he did was to develop what I might call a historico-logical theory of how fiat money

412
00:54:20.460 --> 00:54:21.460
developed.

413
00:54:21.460 --> 00:54:24.940
He bases himself basically on Mises' regression theorem.

414
00:54:24.940 --> 00:54:31.620
He points out that, yes, fiat money cannot develop by some king simply putting his picture

415
00:54:31.620 --> 00:54:51.620
King Nitwit puts his picture on a piece of paper and calls it one nit and then disperses it among the public and says you have a monetary economy now, go forth and spend and make everybody prosperous.

416
00:54:51.620 --> 00:55:00.620
People wouldn't know how much to charge for the goods they're selling because it has no pre-existing purchasing power, nor could it be a social compact.

417
00:55:00.620 --> 00:55:06.620
In other words, for a while, the general media of exchange in Colonial Virginia were tobacco leaves.

418
00:55:06.620 --> 00:55:17.620
Well, did people get together and say, let's have a town meeting, we have these problems with barter, including the lack of coincidence of wants.

419
00:55:17.620 --> 00:55:22.620
So let's all agree to accept tobacco leaves. It didn't happen that way either.

420
00:55:22.620 --> 00:55:29.620
It happened over the course of centuries that gold and silver emerged as the general media of exchange.

421
00:55:29.620 --> 00:55:37.620
and then eventually towards the end of the 18th century, the 19th century, gold became the general medium of exchange.

422
00:55:37.620 --> 00:55:43.620
The government may have had something to do with driving silver out. That still has to be explored.

423
00:55:43.620 --> 00:55:53.620
Now, what Rothbard did was to look back in history. It was more sociology than specific history.

424
00:55:53.620 --> 00:55:56.620
What he said was generally what happened was this.

425
00:55:56.620 --> 00:56:05.620
Initially, you had a gold standard. The king saw that one way of increasing his revenues was to monopolize the mint.

426
00:56:05.620 --> 00:56:12.620
So he took over the function of minting money. He took that function over and he charged a monopoly price.

427
00:56:12.620 --> 00:56:20.620
That's called seigneurage. That's a monopoly price for the minting of money.

428
00:56:27.620 --> 00:56:36.620
It comes from the French. It comes from seigneur. It's the prerogative of the Lord to print money.

429
00:56:36.620 --> 00:56:54.620
The story is that that seniorage initially during the feudal era referred to the fact that the Lord of the Manor had the right to spend the first evening with the new bride of his serf or vassal.

430
00:56:54.620 --> 00:57:00.620
He didn't actually do that. He would allow the vassal to buy his way out with a certain sum of money.

431
00:57:00.620 --> 00:57:06.620
So, in some sense, when government inflates, we get the same thing being done to us.

432
00:57:06.620 --> 00:57:09.620
I won't get any more explicit than that.

433
00:57:09.620 --> 00:57:22.620
Then, what the king did, since he was vain, he substituted a name for the standard weight of gold.

434
00:57:22.620 --> 00:57:27.620
Gold and silver were initially money circulated simply by weight and not by tail.

435
00:57:27.620 --> 00:57:57.580
Payal, Payal being the name. So you substitute a brand name. Then as banks emerged, people began to accept banknotes, as we talked about in checking account deposits, denominated in the name, so now you had dollars or francs or pounds, even though they still referred to and were defined as a specific weight of gold,

436
00:57:57.620 --> 00:58:04.620
The dollar was defined from 1834 to 1933 as about one-twentieth of an ounce of gold.

437
00:58:04.620 --> 00:58:11.620
The pound was defined as about one-fourth of an ounce of gold from 1821 to 1931.

438
00:58:11.620 --> 00:58:17.620
But now people see this paper money that's circulating and that has its name on it.

439
00:58:17.620 --> 00:58:24.620
Now, since these banks or fractional reserve banks, as fractional reserve banks grow up,

440
00:58:24.620 --> 00:58:28.100
They get into trouble at various times in history.

441
00:58:28.100 --> 00:58:29.500
They ask the government to bail them out.

442
00:58:29.500 --> 00:58:36.980
The government then legally permits them to suspend payment of gold in exchange for the

443
00:58:36.980 --> 00:58:39.620
paper money.

444
00:58:39.620 --> 00:58:41.940
And so people continue to use the paper money.

445
00:58:41.940 --> 00:58:43.620
It now becomes what?

446
00:58:43.620 --> 00:58:49.380
We have a progression, or I would call it not a progression, but a devolution away from

447
00:58:49.380 --> 00:58:53.300
gold or commodity money towards credit money.

448
00:58:53.300 --> 00:58:57.020
But now people become used to the fact that it's the paper that's the money.

449
00:58:57.020 --> 00:59:01.780
Now eventually they go back onto the gold standard after the war or after the bank crisis

450
00:59:01.780 --> 00:59:03.540
is over.

451
00:59:03.540 --> 00:59:08.820
But now people have in their minds that the dollar is the actual piece of paper that they're

452
00:59:08.820 --> 00:59:12.460
holding and the gold somehow is backing it up.

453
00:59:12.460 --> 00:59:19.980
Governments encourage this by setting up a central bank which issues its own paper money.

454
00:59:19.980 --> 00:59:32.980
The Bank of England issued its own paper money, which is backed up by gold, and it's defined as the weight of gold, but now they even have more confidence in banks, because look, we have the full faith and credit of the British government behind these notes.

455
00:59:32.980 --> 00:59:43.980
So that causes people to further, it furthers their belief that it's the paper that's the actual money.

456
00:59:43.980 --> 00:59:53.980
And the commercial banks begin holding the central bank notes, which themselves are convertible into gold, but they begin holding those notes as reserves.

457
00:59:53.980 --> 01:00:11.980
So, when you cash a check, you don't get the gold, you get the paper pound notes issued by the Bank of England, which does promise to convert that into a fourth of an ounce of gold, approximately, for every one pound note.

458
01:00:11.980 --> 01:00:19.980
Going further, Rothbard points out that then governments begin implementing a gold bullion standard.

459
01:00:19.980 --> 01:00:26.980
Meaning that, well, before that, they begin to centralize the gold reserves.

460
01:00:26.980 --> 01:00:31.980
They tell the banks, look, give us all the gold, we'll keep them in our vaults, you just keep our paper notes.

461
01:00:31.980 --> 01:00:34.980
So they centralize the gold reserves.

462
01:00:34.980 --> 01:00:43.100
Why do they begin to convert their notes into only gold bullion, big bars of gold?

463
01:00:43.100 --> 01:00:49.060
And they encourage people to use their notes or checking accounts at the commercial banks

464
01:00:49.060 --> 01:00:50.340
for everyday transactions.

465
01:00:50.340 --> 01:00:59.540
So the circulation of gold coins diminishes and you just see paper money.

466
01:00:59.540 --> 01:01:06.020
So now the gold coin is all locked up in the vaults and for the most part it's people,

467
01:01:06.020 --> 01:01:10.220
big businesses involved in international trade that will convert the notes into big

468
01:01:10.220 --> 01:01:15.180
bars of gold bullion that are not convenient for everyday transactions but they are convenient

469
01:01:15.180 --> 01:01:24.820
for shipping back and forth for purposes of settling international trade balances.

470
01:01:24.820 --> 01:01:31.820
Then the government, after bank failures, the government comes up with a deposit insurance.

471
01:01:31.820 --> 01:01:40.820
So now people know that, look, that dollar is as good as an ounce of gold.

472
01:01:40.820 --> 01:01:49.520
Finally, the governments, during the Civil War, the US goes off the gold standard.

473
01:01:49.520 --> 01:01:53.640
During the Napoleonic Wars, as I said, the British government, the Bank of England goes

474
01:01:53.640 --> 01:02:00.120
goes off the gold standard. Again, people don't like this, but they believe that they're

475
01:02:00.120 --> 01:02:05.520
going to go back to the gold standard after the emergency passes, after the war is over.

476
01:02:05.520 --> 01:02:12.800
So finally we have World War II comes along, World War I, all belligerents went off the

477
01:02:12.800 --> 01:02:17.740
gold standard, including the U.S. when it entered the war. So people are now very, very

478
01:02:17.740 --> 01:02:24.860
They're used to, in the 1920s, 1930s, they're used to money as paper money.

479
01:02:24.860 --> 01:02:29.900
They still have faith in it because it's backed by gold, because they believe that this gold

480
01:02:29.900 --> 01:02:40.460
is all in a vault somewhere in the central bank and the government's guarding it rigorously.

481
01:02:40.460 --> 01:02:42.180
So what finally happens then?

482
01:02:42.180 --> 01:02:46.340
What happens in World War II?

483
01:02:46.340 --> 01:03:16.340
Bretton goes off the gold standard in 1931, we go off in 1933, France goes off in 1936, and the war ends, people still have expectations, even Mises had expectations, that we would go back onto the gold standard, what they do is they set up a phony gold standard, a gold standard in which, as it was hammered out at Bretton Woods, by the various allied powers, Great Britain, the US, France, and so on, under this Bretton

484
01:03:16.340 --> 01:03:23.340
In the wood system, only the U.S. dollar was convertible into gold at the rate of $35 per ounce.

485
01:03:23.340 --> 01:03:26.340
That's the other point. They also devalued.

486
01:03:26.340 --> 01:03:35.340
So even though gold was defined for about 100 years, or the dollar was defined for about 100 years as one-twentieth of an ounce of gold,

487
01:03:35.340 --> 01:03:39.340
in 1933 it's devalued and made less than one-thirtieth of an ounce of gold.

488
01:03:39.340 --> 01:03:41.340
In other words, the price of gold has changed.

489
01:03:41.340 --> 01:03:50.340
So, you act as if it's the paper that's the money, and that you're changing the price of the gold, which is sort of just what backs up the money, it's not the true money itself.

490
01:03:50.340 --> 01:03:58.340
So as you devalue, people begin looking, the paper dollar contains less and less gold, let's say, or the paper pound contains less and less gold.

491
01:03:58.340 --> 01:04:10.340
So that's something else that acclimates people to thinking of paper money as the actual money, and not just as simply the receipt for gold.

492
01:04:10.340 --> 01:04:14.340
which in fact is what it was under a commodity standard.

493
01:04:14.340 --> 01:04:18.340
So the phony gold standard is set up, as Rothbard points out,

494
01:04:18.340 --> 01:04:21.340
dollars convertible into gold, but not for U.S. citizens.

495
01:04:21.340 --> 01:04:26.340
U.S. citizens aren't even allowed to own gold from 1933 to 1976,

496
01:04:26.340 --> 01:04:29.340
let alone convert their dollars into gold.

497
01:04:29.340 --> 01:04:34.340
Only foreign governmental institutions, foreign treasuries,

498
01:04:34.340 --> 01:04:38.340
or foreign central banks can convert dollars into gold.

499
01:04:38.340 --> 01:04:50.340
So by the mid-60s, the U.S. is inflating like mad because foreign governments have backed their currencies by the dollar because the dollar is as good as gold.

500
01:04:50.340 --> 01:04:59.340
The U.S. government has solemnly promised in 1946 to convert all dollars held by foreign governments into gold.

501
01:04:59.340 --> 01:05:03.340
Now that was back when the U.S. government had most of the gold in the world.

502
01:05:03.340 --> 01:05:11.540
World, we had a stockpile of gold of over $25 billion worth at the rate of $35 per ounce.

503
01:05:11.540 --> 01:05:17.800
There was something like maybe $12 billion held by foreign governments, so the foreign

504
01:05:17.800 --> 01:05:22.580
dollars were more than 100% backed up by gold, so everyone trusted that the U.S. government

505
01:05:22.580 --> 01:05:23.580
could pay off.

506
01:05:23.580 --> 01:05:30.340
But in the 1960s, as President Johnson promises us, guns and butter, that is that we're going

507
01:05:30.340 --> 01:05:33.340
We're going to fight the Vietnam War and increase spending on the Vietnam War.

508
01:05:33.340 --> 01:05:35.340
We're also going to fight the war on poverty.

509
01:05:35.340 --> 01:05:37.340
We're going to increase the welfare state.

510
01:05:37.340 --> 01:05:40.340
And we're not going to raise taxes.

511
01:05:40.340 --> 01:05:43.340
We're not going to prevent people from purchasing consumer goods.

512
01:05:43.340 --> 01:05:45.340
Well, how does he pay for all this?

513
01:05:45.340 --> 01:05:47.340
He prints new money, and he prints tremendous amounts of money.

514
01:05:47.340 --> 01:05:50.340
So tremendous amounts of money are printed during the 1960s.

515
01:05:50.340 --> 01:05:54.340
Eventually, our gold stock falls to $12 billion.

516
01:05:54.340 --> 01:05:57.340
Foreign dollar holdings go up to $80 billion.

517
01:05:57.340 --> 01:05:59.340
The French start to get nervous.

518
01:05:59.340 --> 01:06:06.340
Germany is basically an occupied country though, there's still American troops there, so they can't make too much noise.

519
01:06:06.340 --> 01:06:15.340
The French pull out of NATO, they form their own nuclear force, independent of NATO, so that the U.S. can't blackmail them,

520
01:06:15.340 --> 01:06:23.340
because the U.S. was saying, well, we'll pay your dollar liabilities in gold, but we're going to have to remove our nuclear umbrella.

521
01:06:23.340 --> 01:06:35.340
It was Mises' follower and friend Jacques Rouef who pushed the goal to force the US to convert dollars into gold, which was a great thing.

522
01:06:35.340 --> 01:06:45.340
The US really couldn't do it. In 1968, there's still free gold markets in London and Zurich. The price of gold is shooting up above $35.

523
01:06:45.340 --> 01:06:52.340
So how do you keep the price of gold back down to $35? The US has to continually pour gold into these foreign markets.

524
01:06:52.340 --> 01:07:02.340
In these foreign markets you have a run on gold, so now our stock falls to nine billion dollars,

525
01:07:02.340 --> 01:07:11.340
and there's a run on gold, so in 1968 they stopped the run by saying gold will only be traded between central banks.

526
01:07:11.340 --> 01:07:16.340
From now on we're not going to worry about the free gold market, which means that then the price of gold,

527
01:07:16.340 --> 01:07:20.340
there's two prices of gold, the price of gold goes up because of the inflation of the dollar.

528
01:07:20.340 --> 01:07:30.340
1971, foreign governments want their gold back so there is such a run on gold that U.S. gold stock would have completely run out within two weeks.

529
01:07:30.340 --> 01:07:38.340
President Nixon then reneges on the solemn pledge to continue to convert dollars into gold in 1971.

530
01:07:38.340 --> 01:07:45.340
He closes the gold window, as it is said. At that point, as Rothbard points out, the last link to gold is broken.

531
01:07:45.340 --> 01:07:53.340
The last tiny link to gold is broken, and you have fiat money.

532
01:07:53.340 --> 01:08:04.340
Because Rothbard was such a good historian, he was able to come up with an historical logical explanation of fiat money.

533
01:08:04.340 --> 01:08:09.340
Fiat money has to develop from commodity money.

534
01:08:09.340 --> 01:08:22.340
If you want to use Hicks' sarcastic reference to Mises regression theorem, that the dollar or the pound is the ghost of gold, well, in some sense it is.

535
01:08:22.340 --> 01:08:32.340
And Rothbard rigorously has shown how you can get to fiat money from commodity money. This is a great accomplishment of his.

536
01:08:32.340 --> 01:08:45.340
Another great accomplishment of his was that his definition of the money supply, he found an article by a Chinese economist written in the early 1930s and neglected.

537
01:08:45.340 --> 01:08:51.340
The name of the author was Lin Lin and I can't remember the exact title of the article.

538
01:08:51.340 --> 01:09:19.340
But that sparked in Rothbard the thought that the medium of exchange can be defined as anything that people will routinely and universally accept as a final means of payment or anything that is immediately interchangeable into the medium of exchange, that is dollars, at par, on demand.

539
01:09:19.340 --> 01:09:31.340
Anything that's redeemable in cash instantaneously and at par.

540
01:09:31.340 --> 01:09:34.340
Now, that's certainly true of checking accounts.

541
01:09:34.340 --> 01:09:44.340
You can instantaneously redeem your checking account deposits by writing a check to a third party or by going down yourself and cashing a check and withdrawing the money from your checking account.

542
01:09:44.340 --> 01:09:49.340
But Rothbard pointed out, and this is Lin's point, the same was true of savings accounts.

543
01:09:49.340 --> 01:09:56.340
You could immediately transfer them into, especially with ATM machines today, savings accounts can be transferred into checking accounts.

544
01:09:56.340 --> 01:10:02.340
Or you can immediately withdraw the money, especially with ATM machines, you don't even have to walk to the bank from your savings account.

545
01:10:02.340 --> 01:10:12.340
So Rothbard says that savings accounts are functionally identical with checking accounts

546
01:10:12.340 --> 01:10:17.260
and are in fact immediately interchangeable with checking accounts or to cash on demand

547
01:10:17.260 --> 01:10:23.380
at par, at par meaning that for every dollar that you have on the books in your checking

548
01:10:23.380 --> 01:10:27.020
account you can get a full dollar out.

549
01:10:27.020 --> 01:10:35.820
So Rothbard, in his book, first develops this definition of the money supply in America's

550
01:10:35.820 --> 01:10:47.520
Great Depression, then writes an article in 1976 defending it on the Austrian definition

551
01:10:47.520 --> 01:10:51.220
of the money supply.

552
01:10:51.220 --> 01:10:54.780
So Rothbard then actually goes further and he points out not only are savings accounts

553
01:10:54.780 --> 01:11:03.220
And that's immediately, instantaneously redeemable in dollars, in readily spendable dollars.

554
01:11:03.220 --> 01:11:04.220
But so are savings bonds.

555
01:11:04.220 --> 01:11:10.700
You know those bonds you were given when you were younger that were issued by the Treasury?

556
01:11:10.700 --> 01:11:11.900
The government savings bonds?

557
01:11:11.900 --> 01:11:15.580
Well basically they're claims, immediately redeemable claims against the Treasury.

558
01:11:15.580 --> 01:11:20.340
After six months, even though they have a nine year maturity, after six months you can

559
01:11:20.340 --> 01:11:27.840
and redeem them without losing any interest, with interest, at any bank or at the treasury.

560
01:11:27.840 --> 01:11:31.740
So even though their formal maturity was nine years or seven years, I don't remember what

561
01:11:31.740 --> 01:11:37.420
it was, you pay $50 and you got a $25 bond, you got the accrued interest, redeeming them

562
01:11:37.420 --> 01:11:38.420
before maturity.

563
01:11:38.420 --> 01:11:42.940
So the stock of savings bonds was included.

564
01:11:42.940 --> 01:11:48.580
He also included two items that used to be in the money supply but were dropped out after

565
01:11:48.580 --> 01:11:59.580
The World War II for some reason. Government deposits, in other words, government deposits that governments held at commercial banks and that the U.S. government held at commercial banks and at the Fed.

566
01:11:59.580 --> 01:12:10.580
Now they're not included in the money supply. But Rothbard pointed out that they're no different than any other demand deposit. They can be spent at any time by the government. So that was included.

567
01:12:10.580 --> 01:12:18.580
And he included, which again was dropped out, foreign government deposits held at U.S. banks.

568
01:12:18.580 --> 01:12:21.580
All deposits held by foreign governments and foreign central banks at U.S. banks.

569
01:12:21.580 --> 01:12:28.580
So he took Mises' definition of money to its logical conclusion.

570
01:12:28.580 --> 01:12:33.580
The money supply consists of the general medium of exchange.

571
01:12:33.580 --> 01:12:46.580
And the general medium of exchange is any asset that can be readily spent or that is immediately redeemable at par into an asset that can be readily spent.

572
01:12:46.580 --> 01:12:53.580
So this was a great advance in theory of the money supply.

573
01:12:53.580 --> 01:13:04.660
Well, there's a few other things that he added to monetary theory.

574
01:13:04.660 --> 01:13:09.020
His theory of the demand for money, I just might mention that last, what Rothbard did

575
01:13:09.020 --> 01:13:14.700
was to show that there was really two components to the demand for money.

576
01:13:14.700 --> 01:13:22.660
And he took the following, he said, look, the overall demand for money is equal to what

577
01:13:22.660 --> 01:13:27.660
We call the exchange demand for money plus the reservation demand for money.

578
01:13:27.660 --> 01:13:33.660
Okay, so there's two ways of demanding money according to Rothbard.

579
01:13:33.660 --> 01:13:37.660
The first is the exchange demand for money.

580
01:13:37.660 --> 01:13:42.660
Anytime you sell anything, you are demanding money.

581
01:13:42.660 --> 01:13:47.660
So when you go to work, you are selling your labor services in exchange for money.

582
01:13:47.660 --> 01:13:52.660
That's a representation, or that's an instance of the exchange demand for money.

583
01:13:52.660 --> 01:14:00.660
So, we're always looking, when you talk about the market for money, we're looking at it from, we're reversing things.

584
01:14:00.660 --> 01:14:05.660
You are buying money. When you buy apples, you demand apples.

585
01:14:05.660 --> 01:14:12.660
Going out and purchasing apples or steak or something is a reflection of your demand for that thing.

586
01:14:12.660 --> 01:14:22.660
The same thing is true with buying money. When you work or if you sell your used car to someone, you are selling something in exchange for money, you are demanding money. That's the exchange demand.

587
01:14:22.660 --> 01:14:28.660
The main part of the exchange demand for money comes from the supply of goods and services every year in the U.S. economy.

588
01:14:28.660 --> 01:14:39.660
So, as the economy becomes more productive, as we have so-called economic growth, if you want to use that biological metaphor, which is really not a good metaphor,

589
01:14:39.660 --> 01:14:43.660
You have an increase in the exchange demand for money.

590
01:14:43.660 --> 01:14:49.660
As population increases and more people go to work as a laborer, the demand for money is increasing.

591
01:14:49.660 --> 01:14:51.660
People demand more money.

592
01:14:51.660 --> 01:14:57.660
Now, this is also called the pre-income demand for money.

593
01:14:57.660 --> 01:15:04.660
So, what happens is that when your demand is exercised through going to work,

594
01:15:04.660 --> 01:15:13.660
Now you've gotten your paycheck. Do you hold all that money? Do you keep it and just keep piling it up? No.

595
01:15:13.660 --> 01:15:21.660
You take some of it and you spend it on goods and services, depending on the marginal utility of money versus other goods and services.

596
01:15:21.660 --> 01:15:30.660
But you do hold some in your checking accounts. You don't spend all the money that you get when you exchange other goods and services for it.

597
01:15:30.660 --> 01:15:34.660
So you don't immediately spend all your money, you hold some.

598
01:15:34.660 --> 01:15:41.660
Right now, all of us are exercising a reservation demand for money.

599
01:15:41.660 --> 01:15:45.660
Right now, by not rushing out and purchasing various items,

600
01:15:45.660 --> 01:15:51.660
we are holding in our wallets and our checking accounts a certain sum of money, each one of us.

601
01:15:51.660 --> 01:15:55.660
That constitutes a reservation demand for money.

602
01:15:55.660 --> 01:16:17.660
During any period of time, the demand for money consists of, and for the fellows here, I'm going to give a presentation presenting a paper I'm working on, going further into detail about this, but the demand for money during any, let's say, week refers to the following.

603
01:16:17.660 --> 01:16:22.660
The amount of money that people receive for selling things,

604
01:16:22.660 --> 01:16:25.660
which is simply the amount of money that's spent on goods and services,

605
01:16:25.660 --> 01:16:27.660
but we're looking at it from the other side,

606
01:16:27.660 --> 01:16:35.660
plus the amount of money that is held off the market by people in their pockets.

607
01:16:35.660 --> 01:16:40.660
So, for example, if there's $1,000, if we're a small community,

608
01:16:40.660 --> 01:16:44.660
and in total, let's say we have in total $10,000,

609
01:16:44.660 --> 01:16:55.660
And we purchase at market clearing prices $7,000 worth of goods and services, including labor services.

610
01:16:55.660 --> 01:17:04.660
So people sell $7,000 worth of goods. They have exercised an exchange amount for money and receive $7,000.

611
01:17:04.660 --> 01:17:11.660
But if $7,000 was spent, the other $3,000 was held in people's cash balances. Why would people do that?

612
01:17:11.660 --> 01:17:20.660
for spending in the future, for medical emergencies, for opportunities for good sales or investments that they may find.

613
01:17:20.660 --> 01:17:27.660
So there's both an exchange demand and a reservation demand for money. That's an important Rothbardian innovation.

614
01:17:27.660 --> 01:17:38.660
And one thing that it leads to, by the way, is to realize that the natural tendency of prices in the free market economy is to fall.

615
01:17:38.660 --> 01:17:54.660
Because in a free market economy where you have a commodity money, which tends to be naturally scarce and therefore to increase at a very slow rate over time, where you have capital accumulation, the exchange demand for money increases tremendously.

616
01:17:54.660 --> 01:18:09.660
So, if the supply of gold is fixed or increasing very slowly, and the demand for money is increasing because of the increase in supplies of goods and services, you're going to get a naturally falling price level, which is what we had during World War II.

617
01:18:09.660 --> 01:18:19.660
I'm sorry. It was what we had during the 19th century. Prices in 1896 were as low as they were in 1812, or maybe even a little bit lower.

618
01:18:19.660 --> 01:18:26.660
The Great Inflation

619
01:18:49.660 --> 01:18:57.660
The tendency is, as we see in those high-tech industries in which we've had tremendous technological improvement, for prices to fall.

620
01:18:57.660 --> 01:19:05.660
Despite the fact that the Fed has been inflating like mad during the late 1980s and 1990s in terms of increasing the money supply,

621
01:19:05.660 --> 01:19:13.660
the prices of computers have come down tremendously because technological progress and capital investment in the computer industry

622
01:19:13.660 --> 01:19:22.660
has been so great that the exchange demand for money on the part of people in that industry has increased more than the supply of money.

623
01:19:22.660 --> 01:19:40.660
And if you think about it, if you go back to 19, right before World War II, a model T Ford cost you about $350.

624
01:19:40.660 --> 01:19:48.660
Men's suits were something like $20. An ounce of gold was $20.

625
01:19:48.660 --> 01:19:57.660
Well, if you look at things today, in terms of paper money, a middle class automobile is $20,000, let's say.

626
01:19:57.660 --> 01:20:03.660
A good men's suit or a decent man's suit is between $300 and $400.

627
01:20:03.660 --> 01:20:10.660
Basically, what's happened? A man's suit is still one ounce of gold, at the current price of gold.

628
01:20:10.660 --> 01:20:17.660
So, paper money has depreciated. So, what would have happened is that we would have had to form all prices.

629
01:20:17.660 --> 01:20:30.660
If the money supply stood at something like $25 billion right before the Fed came into existence in 1914, I think it was $25 billion.

630
01:20:30.660 --> 01:20:43.660
M1, which is a narrow definition, but let's just take M1. M1 is $1 trillion. So the government has increased the money supply many, many times over.

631
01:20:43.660 --> 01:20:55.660
And that's what has prevented a fall in prices. We would have had extremely low prices in dollars if the Fed hadn't come into existence and inflated the money supply.

632
01:20:55.660 --> 01:21:12.660
At the end of World War II, we were using cigarettes for money, and I remember it cost me three cigarettes to have my laundry done.

633
01:21:12.660 --> 01:21:19.660
Was this... I know in POW camps, in German POW camps, American soldiers used cigarettes.

634
01:21:19.660 --> 01:21:21.660
Are you speaking about that or are you speaking about...

635
01:21:21.660 --> 01:21:22.660
No, no.

636
01:21:22.660 --> 01:21:23.660
Actually in the Army or...

637
01:21:23.660 --> 01:21:24.660
In the Army.

638
01:21:24.660 --> 01:21:25.660
In the Army, yeah.

639
01:21:25.660 --> 01:21:26.660
When the war ended...

640
01:21:26.660 --> 01:21:27.660
Right, right.

641
01:21:27.660 --> 01:21:28.660
I bought my laundry.

642
01:21:28.660 --> 01:21:38.660
Right, I mean cigarettes were something that everyone routinely accepted, most people used, and therefore they became...

643
01:21:38.660 --> 01:22:08.660
There's a famous article by an economist who was a German POW who came out in 1946 in which he showed how cigarettes grew up as the commodity money in these camps because care packages were sent every month and cigarettes were part of these care packages and most soldiers, in every World War II movie everybody's smoking of course, so most soldiers were smoking and so what people did then was since the care packages were standard yet people's preferences differ

644
01:22:08.660 --> 01:22:19.660
What people did was, in exchanging for goods that they preferred more and giving away goods that they preferred less, they would exchange the goods that they didn't want for the cigarettes and they'd go and find the goods that they did want.

645
01:22:19.660 --> 01:22:31.660
And they used to post prices at the end of each barracks. Not only that, as people smoked the cigarettes, towards the end of the month, there was deflation.

646
01:22:31.660 --> 01:22:37.660
And when a new care package came in, the prices all jumped up.

647
01:22:37.660 --> 01:22:43.660
I was given a carton of cigarettes every month. I didn't smoke.

648
01:22:43.660 --> 01:22:47.660
So you traded? Right, right. Yes?

649
01:22:47.660 --> 01:22:53.660
I noticed the media always refers to rising prices as increasing inflation.

650
01:22:53.660 --> 01:23:04.660
I'm confused by that because I always thought there was a distinction between rising prices and rising inflation.

651
01:23:23.660 --> 01:23:32.260
That is, it's calculated, let's say every quarter they tell us what the consumer price index is, or maybe it's every month.

652
01:23:32.260 --> 01:23:40.760
In any case, an increase in inflation means that prices are rising at a more rapid rate, or should mean that, okay?

653
01:23:40.760 --> 01:23:54.760
Well, doesn't that mean that the money supply is increasing? It has nothing to do with prices, because, I think, on Senhold, I heard him say one time, that rising prices cause inflation like wet streets cause rain.

654
01:24:10.760 --> 01:24:14.260
of Mercury in a thermometer that you use to take your temperature.

655
01:24:14.260 --> 01:24:16.760
So, I guess your question then is different.

656
01:24:16.760 --> 01:24:21.760
What you want to do is you want to go back to the earlier definition of inflation

657
01:24:21.760 --> 01:24:23.260
as a change in the money supply.

658
01:24:23.260 --> 01:24:26.260
But remember, definitions are arbitrary in science

659
01:24:26.260 --> 01:24:31.260
and we define things in a way so that they are expedient.

660
01:24:31.260 --> 01:24:36.760
And so they allow us to clearly get our concepts across to one another

661
01:24:36.760 --> 01:24:38.260
as economists and to the public.

662
01:24:38.260 --> 01:24:40.260
And you are absolutely right.

663
01:24:40.260 --> 01:24:45.260
Defining inflation as rising prices hides a lot of things.

664
01:24:45.260 --> 01:24:50.860
So in the 1990s, it looked like we had very, very little inflation because prices weren't rising much.

665
01:24:50.860 --> 01:25:00.260
So no one expected the bubble and the recession that we got in 2000-2001

666
01:25:00.260 --> 01:25:03.560
because there wasn't much consumer price inflation.

667
01:25:03.560 --> 01:25:06.660
But in fact, if you look at the money supply figures, as Austrians did,

668
01:25:06.660 --> 01:25:25.660
You saw that, in fact, there was no money being injected into the economy and it was affecting certain sectors of the economy, not the CPI, which everyone looks at, but it was affecting the housing market, it was affecting the financial markets, the financial market bubble burst, bringing in its train a recession.

669
01:25:25.660 --> 01:25:31.660
So the Austrians were predicting some sort of a recession in the 1990s, because they were looking at the money supply.

670
01:25:31.660 --> 01:25:41.660
And it would be better, and George Reisman argues this, and I agree with him, it would be better if we went back to defining inflation as changes in the money supply.

671
01:25:41.660 --> 01:25:47.660
Because changes in the money supply have many different effects beyond just a rise in consumer prices.

672
01:25:47.660 --> 01:25:54.660
It pushes down interest rates, it pushes up asset prices, it pushes up housing prices, it redistributes income and so on.

673
01:25:54.660 --> 01:26:12.660
If you go and find an old Webster's Dictionary, maybe 40 years ago, the definition of inflation in it is an increase in the amount of money.

674
01:26:24.660 --> 01:26:29.160
It doesn't refer to something moving up and down, that's different.

675
01:26:29.160 --> 01:26:31.980
And prices simply move up or down.

676
01:26:31.980 --> 01:26:34.100
The money supply is a volume that increases.

677
01:26:34.100 --> 01:26:43.820
So in some etymological sense, it's more intuitive to think of inflation as a change in the money

678
01:26:43.820 --> 01:26:44.820
supply.

679
01:26:44.820 --> 01:26:45.820
Yes, Dan?

680
01:26:45.820 --> 01:27:14.820
Can you talk about the relationship between the commodity value of money, necessarily, that stems from gold's usage and demand in itself, and then the desire for people to have a low transaction cost of currency and exchange, especially with internet commerce right now, and international commerce, and the ease and speed and velocity of money.

681
01:27:14.820 --> 01:27:32.820
People use predominantly digital credit in their bank accounts, rather than necessarily cash, or for security purposes, given a gold standard system and an accumulation of gold being used in reserves necessarily.

682
01:27:32.820 --> 01:27:43.820
But if you rarely see the redemption taking place, how does that affect necessarily with the relationship of a separate market for people who use the gold?

683
01:27:44.820 --> 01:27:57.820
There will still be a need for cash transactions, for physical cash transactions, and Mises always stressed that we should have gold coins in circulation.

684
01:27:57.820 --> 01:28:11.820
But one of the problems is, and we'll talk about this on Friday, gold is so valuable now that it would be extremely hard to have gold coins for small transactions.

685
01:28:11.820 --> 01:28:21.820
And so Guido Hussmann has argued that a silver standard also would be reinstated and may be the primary cash in the system.

686
01:28:21.820 --> 01:28:40.820
Certainly, though, any transaction over the internet and so on using claims against gold dollars, let's say, would still be based on a commodity.

687
01:28:40.820 --> 01:28:46.820
No one's going to accept something that has no pre-existing purchasing power.

688
01:28:46.820 --> 01:28:50.820
And that's why it's difficult to simply, for example, some people say,

689
01:28:50.820 --> 01:28:54.820
well, let's just allow people to make contracts in gold,

690
01:28:54.820 --> 01:28:59.820
and then when the government inflates the money supply, people will shift to gold

691
01:28:59.820 --> 01:29:02.820
because its purchasing power is more stable and use that as a money.

692
01:29:02.820 --> 01:29:09.820
But all of us think in terms of dollars, and all of us do our calculations in terms of dollars.

693
01:29:09.820 --> 01:29:15.820
So the inflation would have to almost be a hyperinflation and destroy the dollar itself, if we don't want,

694
01:29:15.820 --> 01:29:20.820
before I think Americans would go back spontaneously to a gold standard.

695
01:29:20.820 --> 01:29:24.820
That's why Rothbard has always, and we'll talk about this on Friday too,

696
01:29:24.820 --> 01:29:30.820
has always emphasized that it's important that we at least initially relink the dollar to gold.

697
01:29:30.820 --> 01:29:36.820
Give the American people the gold that was stolen from them in 1933 and put in Fort Knox.

698
01:29:36.820 --> 01:29:40.460
actually most of it's in the New York Federal Reserve Bank now but anyway give

699
01:29:40.460 --> 01:29:45.220
get gold back in circulation then if if silver you know we need silver to

700
01:29:45.220 --> 01:29:50.580
supplement it it will be remonetized by the market okay I have to stop here but

701
01:29:50.580 --> 01:29:54.260
that's a very interesting point we're going to talk more about on Friday okay

702
01:29:54.260 --> 01:29:56.500
thanks