Research Database

This paper argues that versions of Samuelson/Cass-Yaari overlapping-generations consumption-loans models ought to be taken seriously as models of fiat money. The case is made by summarizing and interpreting what these models have to say about fiat money and by arguing that these properties are robust in the sense that they can be expected to hold in any model of fiat money. Two of the properties establish the connection between, on the one hand, the existence of equilibria in which value is attached to a fixed stock of fiat money and, on the other hand, the optimality of such equilibria and the nonoptimality of nonfiat-money equilibria. Other properties describe aspects of the tenuousness of monetary equilibria in such models: The nonuniqueness of such equilibria in the sense that there always exists a nonfiat-money equilibrium and the dependence of the existence of the monetary equilibrium on the physical characteristics of other potential assets and on other institutional features like the tax-transfer scheme in effect. Rather than being defects of these models, it is argued that this tenuousness is helpful in interpreting various monetary systems and, in any case, is unavoidable; it will turn up in any good model of fiat money. Still other properties summarize what these models imply about the connection—or, better, lack of such— between fiat money and private borrowing and lending (financial intermediation) and what they imply about country-specific monies.

This paper briefly recounts several of the key financial developments of 1974, describes the contingency planning exercise developed by the Minneapolis Federal Reserve Bank to encourage planning by large member banks, and then discusses some of the comments received in a trial run. The Appendix contains a copy of the exercise together with an illustrative example.

This paper puts forward a method of policy simulation with an existing macroeconometric model under the maintained assumption that individuals form their expectations rationally. This new simulation technique grows out of Lucas' criticism that standard econometric policy evaluation permits policy rules to change but doesn't allow expectations mechanisms to respond as economic theory predicts they will. This technique is applied to versions of the St. Louis Federal Reserve model and the FRB-MIT-Penn model to simulate the effects of different constant money growth policies. I shall briefly summarize the current practice of policy evaluation and the Lucas critique in the first section. The second section includes an explanation of the method I propose. The third section includes the two illustrative applications. In the conclusion, I cannot resist the temptation to offer some opinions about the use and usefulness of econometric models.