Double-checking FRED's "reserves" list for this morning's post, I noticed that there are two items listed as "Board of Governors Total Reserves" -- one of then adjusted for changes in reserve requirements, the other not adjusted.
What's the difference?
4 comments:
You might find this chart interesting
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_EZMGVwURo3M/SdBtYrToHuI/AAAAAAAAA6k/Z_ym5xtlBRU/s1600-h/RequiredReservesMinusVaultCash-758249.PNG
from *****US Banks Operating Without Reserve Requirements*****
Your curves basically go to highlight Keen, Mitchell and the MMT people's viewpoint that bank reserves/deposits have no bearing upon their lending. Bank lending is effectively constrained by the demand for loans, and not the reserves/deposits on hand.
Hi, Clonal.
"You might find this chart interesting"
I did!
DeCarbonnel's article still sounds to me like a list of financial innovations that ought to be un-done. He seems comfortable with it, but I don't see how.
"Your curves basically go to highlight Keen, Mitchell and the MMT people's viewpoint..."
:) It is the same economy we're looking at, after all. Those who Keen, Mitchell, MMT, and I generally disagree with -- Say's law people, say -- are looking at a different economy I think, the 19th century economy. Oh, and I also think Say's law was probably valid in the 19th century.
Art -
In comments at your 6/20/10 link you say, "I did read the Mises Daily for a while... Robert Murphy is good."
No, he's not. In common with all Austrians and Libertarians, his thinking is constrained by ideology and not open to reality. I read him for a few days, then gave up.
Cheers!
JzB
:) you just won't let me be polite to those guys... Let's say he's the most readable of the Mises writers I tried to read.
I have trouble making statements like "his thinking is constrained by ideology" because I'm always afraid it might apply to me, too. I spend so much time trying to avoid it, that the people I agree with usually don't agree with me!
Post a Comment