CHAPTER

........................................................................................................................

The Keynesian and 5

monetarist views on the
importance of money

This chapter discusses the classical, Keynesian and monetarist theories regarding the
role of money in economic activity. In the classical theory, the role of money has
been relegated to the background. It is argued that monetary forces do not affect the
movements of the real variables that is, output and employment in the economy. In
the Keynesian theory it is suggested that a change in the money supply may change the
level of output via changes in interest rates. The monetarist school, headed by Milton
Friedman, contends that the classical rather than the Keynesian theory would be valid
so long as money can affect real variables in the short run, but only nominal magnitudes
in the long run. We shall first discuss the classical theory.

5.1 The classical view

.....................................................................................
The classical theory of income and employment is usually built around Says law which
states, supply creates its own demand. If this were true, the economy could never
experience either unemployment or underconsumption. Since there would be no dearth
of demand, total expenditure within an economy would always be adequate to match
total production at a full employment level, given the profit motive (for something is
needed to induce the output to be supplied).
The classical argument can be stated in a simple way. Let us assume that there is a
market for goods and services as well as for labour. Assume also a production function
which states that, given the existing technology, a given output could be produced by a
certain amount of labour, fixed capital and equipment. All prices and wages are flexible
and they respond to the forces of demand and supply.
Now, should there be unemployment, the real wage rate, W/P (that is, money wage
rate, W, divided by prices, P) would decline, as there is an excess supply of labour. A fall
in W/P will reduce the labour supply under the assumption of a normally upward-rising
supply curve of labour. But a fall in W/P will increase the demand for labour, since
the demand curve of labour slopes downwards. Hence, employment will tend to rise.

63

May, 2007 MAC/MED Page-63 0230_003346_09_cha05

64 Monetary economics in developing countries
..................................................................

Real
wage
W
SL

E
(W/P)0

(W/P)1 D
C

DL

N
Employment

Figure 5.1 Employment and the real wage

Eventually, full employment will be restored at a point like E in Figure 5.1. It can be
checked very easily from figure 5.1, where W/P is measured vertically, and employment
N is measured horizontally, that in case of an excess demand for labour (for example,
CD), the situation of over-full employment will be rectified again because the economy
will eventually move towards E, the point of full employment equilibrium, where the
demand for labour is exactly equal to the supply of labour, and resources are fully
utilized.
We can use the same analysis to explain how a disequilibrium situation will be
corrected in a goods market. If there is an excess demand for goods, prices will rise. This
will lead to a rise in supply (assuming a normal supply curve that slopes upwards) and a
fall in demand (assuming a downward-sloping demand curve). Eventually the economy
will reach equilibrium. Similarly, given an excess supply of goods, prices will fall, demand
will rise and supply will fall. The invisible hand has once again played the trick of
adjusting supply to demand. All the markets are now being cleared with flexible wages
and prices, and full employment prevails. Unemployment is, then, a phenomenon of
dynamic disequilibrium. Notice that money does not play any role in the determination
of employment and output.

5.1.1 A digression on the classical view

The above mechanism looks simple and elegant, but one of the important classical
economists remained unconvinced. His name was Thomas Malthus. He took a rather
critical view of the classical analysis. According to Malthus, although the production of
goods plus services in an economy will create income that will be equal to the value

May, 2007 MAC/MED Page-64 0230_003346_09_cha05

 Keynesian and monetarist views on money 65
..............................................................

of the output, this does not mean that total expenditure in the economy will be equal
to total production. In other words, supply may create its own income but it may not
be able to create enough expenditure. Such a shortfall in expenditure could occur when
people save a part of their income. A deficiency in demand could result, which might
lead to the accumulation of inventories and a fall in production. This could result in
unemployment. The crack in the classical wall can now be seen clearly. This idea
of under-consumption and its implications have been given considerable attention in
Keynesian economics, which will be discussed later.

5.1.2 Classical savings, investments and interest rate

It should be pointed out that the classicist were well aware of the possibility of saving.
Classical economists argued that saving is generally invested, as a result of the interest
rate mechanism. Let S stand for saving, I stand for investment and r denote the
interest rate (which can be a proxy for a range of interest rates). More formally, we
can write:

S = Sr (5.1)

I = Ir (5.2)

S=I (5.3)

By Equation (5.1) we have S as a function of r. If r rises, S rises, as people are induced

to save more. According to Equation (5.2), I is a function of r. But this relationship is
inverse. Therefore, as r rises, I falls, since the cost of borrowing rises. These relationships
are shown in Figure 5.2, where r is measured on the vertical axis and S and I are measured
on the horizontal axis. The equilibrium r is r0 , where S0 = I0 . Notice that the equilibrium
is stable, because if there is any excess saving (for example, GF) at r1  r will fall and this
will lead to a fall in S and a rise in I; eventually, the equilibrium will be reached at E.
It should be mentioned here that the propensity to invest depends on the investors
evaluation of the rate of return at the margin and r. If r is low, then the projects that
were marginal before may now be undertaken, as the rate of return is greater than r.
Following the Malthusian lesson, if people decide to save more, the savings curve will
shift to the right, as indicated by the movement of SS to S1 S1 . Obviously, to the chagrin
of Malthus, the end of the world has not been reached as the new equilibrium is restored
at a lower r that is, r2 .
In the above analysis, money does not play any role in the determination of output
and employment. In fact, output and employment are determined by labour, capital,
saving behaviour and existing technology. The interest rate is given by saving habits and
capital productivity. The classicists thus argued that the sole function of money was to
determine the general level of prices at which goods and services would be exchanged.
Money is a veil, and this has been demonstrated most clearly in the quantity theory
of money.

May, 2007 MAC/MED Page-65 0230_003346_09_cha05

66 Monetary economics in developing countries
..................................................................

S
r
I
S1

G F
r1
Rate of interest

r0 E

r2

I
S1

S0 = I0 S, I
Savings and investment

Figure 5.2 Savings, investment and the interest rate

5.1.3 The classical quantity theory of money

The classical quantity theory of money is best illustrated with the help of Irving Fishers
(1911) equation of exchange. Let M indicate the average stock of money over a period,
V its velocity, P the price level, and Q the real income or output of that period. Then
we have

MV = PQ (5.4)

Equation (5.4) is basically an identity, which simply states that when the money stock
is multiplied by V or the number of times money is used to buy final output, we obtain
total expenditure, which must be equal to the product of P and Q or the value of
output bought. In the original writing, T (that is, total transactions) and not Q was used.
Here Q has replaced T because there are some transactions that are not included in the
estimation of GNP.
Assume now that V is relatively fixed, because payments patterns and habits can be
regarded as relatively constant. Q also is fixed. We then obtain a direct relationship
between M and P, since

PQ
M= (5.5)
V

May, 2007 MAC/MED Page-66 0230_003346_09_cha05

 Keynesian and monetarist views on money 67
..............................................................

or

MV
P= (5.6)
Q

If the money supply is doubled, the price level will be doubled; equally, if M is halved,
P will also be halved. Nothing else in the world changes. Money is just a veil, its sole
purpose being to determine the general price level at which transactions of goods will
take place. Money burns holes in the pockets of individuals. The classical economists
assume that individuals are rational and wish to maximize utility. Money, per se, fails
to maximize utility. It is only as a medium of exchange that money enables people to
acquire goods and services. Therefore, a rational individual should not demand money
for its own sake. That is why the idea of a demand for money has been neglected in
classical quantity theory. However, the Cambridge economists viewed the matter rather
differently.

5.1.4 The Cambridge demand for money: the cash balance approach
According to the Cambridge school, it is necessary to pay attention to the fraction of
income that could be held in cash. But Equation (5.4) can now be written as a behavioural
equation, given a stable velocity and fixed Q (see later):

M = kPQ (5.7)

where k is the fraction of income that is held in cash. Notice that

1
k= (5.8)
V

and formulated in this way, the difference between Equations (5.4) and (5.7) is insig-
nificant. Nevertheless, Equation (5.8) can now be regarded as the one that shows the
demand for money that enables people to carry out transactions.
It is necessary to point out here that Equation (5.4) is an identity that can be trans-
formed into a causal mechanism. A direct relationship can be established between M and
P if Q is fixed and V remains stable, since the demand for money is dictated by habits that
are unlikely to change much. It naturally follows that M and P will be directly related. If
M rises for some reason (let us say, by the actions taken by the central bank), people will
accumulate excess cash balances; this will lead to more spending and can only result in
a rise in prices, as output (or Q) cannot be raised beyond the level of full employment.
Analytically, the effect of changes of money supply on prices will be identical, no matter
whether one follows the basic equation of Fisher or the Cambridge demand-for-money
theory. According to the Cambridge theory, in the equilibrium situation the demand for
money must be equal to the supply of money. If M rises there would be more money
than people would wish to hold. In other words, ceteris paribus, the demand for money
will be less than the money supply. This will raise the level of expenditure and prices, as

May, 2007 MAC/MED Page-67 0230_003346_09_cha05

68 Monetary economics in developing countries
..................................................................

output cannot change. Additional expenditure will come to an end when people wish
to hold rather than spend money that is, when the demand for money is equal to the
supply of money. Notice that, while money income changes, real income remains the
same. The Cambridge version of quantity theory thus underlines the real (M/P) rather
than nominal money holdings of the people.
If classical quantity theory is viewed as a long-run analysis, it is not difficult to under-
stand the assumptions regarding fixed Q and a stable V . But Keynes was not convinced
by the classical analysis. In any case, it might be quite interesting to look at the short-run
behaviour of the economy because in the long-run we are all dead.

5.2 The Keynesian theory

.....................................................................................
Keynes argued that the classical mechanism might fail to guarantee full employment
equilibrium, for several reasons. For one thing, wages and prices might not be flexible;
for another, income, rather than the interest rate, might determine savings and if the
(speculative) demand for money (which Keynes called the liquidity preference schedule)
is infinitely elastic with respect to changes in the interest rate (that is, the liquidity
trap), then no extra investment would be forthcoming from a further rise in savings,
and the economy would eventually reach an unemployment equilibrium. To understand
these points, we have to discuss several parts of the Keynesian theory.

5.2.1 The Keynesian building blocks

One of the most important points to be borne in mind is that although, ex post savings
and investment are equal to one another, in the equilibrium planned saving must be equal
to planned investment. But suppose planned saving is greater than planned investment.
In a classical world, this should not pose much of a problem, because such a phenomenon
would lead to an increase in inventory accumulation and prices would continue to
fall. Supply would fall because production in plans would be cut back; with a fall in
production the equality between demand for and supply of goods would be restored.
A fall in production would lead to a fall in employment and wages. But such a fall
in wages would maintain the equality between demand for and supply of labour in the
labour market. The interest rate would also fall, as saving exceeded investment. But such
a fall would reduce the desire to save and increase the desire to invest until the savings
and investment plans are brought to equality.
Keynes pointed out that these results are unlikely to occur in practice. First, wages
could be inflexible downwards. So whenever savings exceed investment, production
plans are cut back and unemployment follows. It is very difficult to restore full employ-
ment by reducing the level of wages, because of trade union resistance. Second, the
interest rate may not determine the equilibrium level of savings and investment.
The process of interest-rate determination was regarded by Keynes as a monetary
phenomenon. The rate of interest is determined in the money market, where the demand

May, 2007 MAC/MED Page-68 0230_003346_09_cha05

 Keynesian and monetarist views on money 69
..............................................................

for money is equal to the supply of money and the equilibrium between saving S and
investment I determines the level of income Y. Hence output will continue to fall
as long as planned saving exceeds planned investment. Eventually the equilibrium is
restored where S = I. In the Keynesian analysis, the theory of the consumption function
plays an important role. Keynes contended that, at the macro level, expenditure E
determines income Y. Total expenditure is the sum of consumption expenditure C
and investment expenditure I, that is

Y = C+1 (5.9)

Consumption depends on income, that is,

C = a + bY (5.10)

where b = C/Y or marginal propensity to consume, or the slope of the consumption

function. Keynes argued that 0 < b < 1. The term a in Equation (5.9) denotes the fixed
level of consumption that is independent of Y. This is often known as autonomous
consumption. The process of income generation can then be described as follows:

Y = C+I (5.11)

Y = C + I (5.12)

Dividing by Y:

Y/Y = C/Y + I/Y (5.13)

C
or 1 = I/Y (5.14)
Y
Y 1
= (5.15)
I 1 C/Y
Y 1 1 1
or = or or
I 1 MPC 1b MPS

where MPS = marginal propensity to save.

Thus

1
Y = I (5.16)
1b

Equation (5.15) defines the multiplier m, which is the inverse of the marginal
propensity to save. Clearly, the value of m will be positively related to the value of b or
MPC, and inversely to the MPS. It is now easy to see why savings constitute a leakage
in the stream of income generation. The whole process is summarized in Figures 5.3(a)
and (b).

May, 2007 MAC/MED Page-69 0230_003346_09_cha05

70 Monetary economics in developing countries
..................................................................

In Figure 5.3(a) the equilibrium between S and I now determines the level of Y, rather
than the interest rate. Saving in the Keynesian theory is assumed to vary directly with
income. That is why we have SY. Investment (or I) is assumed to be autonomous. In
Figure 5.3(b) it has been shown that total expenditure or E= C + I determines Y0 .
Unlike in classical theory, there is no reason to assume within the Keynesian analysis
that equilibrium Y will also be a full employment level of income. The investment
function could be unstable as it depends on investors expectations regarding future
demand (or planned savings). If investment prospects are gloomy, then I may fall and
this will reduce equilibrium Y to a less than full employment level. This is shown in the
movement of II to I1 I1 and a fall in income from Y0 to Y1 in Figures 5.3(a) and (b). To
restore full employment, it might be necessary to stimulate expenditure by using fiscal
policies for example, an increase in government expenditure G or a cut in taxes, or
both, to stimulate demand. These are usually regarded as the Keynesian remedies to
cure recession or depression.
The above analysis, which has been labelled Keynes without money, suggests that
money does not play any role in determining output and employment. This is not
quite so in the full Keynesian model of a situation of unemployment. According to

(a)
S, I S (Y)

I I

I1 I1

0
Y1 Y0

(b)
C+I=E

C + I1

I I

45
0 Y1 Y0 Y
SCD

Figure 5.3 (a) Savings and investment; (b) Aggregate expenditure

May, 2007 MAC/MED Page-70 0230_003346_09_cha05

 Keynesian and monetarist views on money 71
..............................................................

Price line
P2
P1

Output and prices

Qf
Q

Q2
Q1

0 M1 M2 Mf M3 M4
Money supply

Figure 5.4 The money supply, output and prices

Keynes, an increase in money supply would increase the cash balances held by economic
agents. People would then be confronted with the following three choices: (i) to keep
money idle; (ii) to buy plant and machinery; or (iii) to buy bonds. The first alternative is
unacceptable, given the principle of utility maximization, and most people are not likely
to follow the second option. They are, according to Keynes, most likely to buy bonds
with excess cash balances. This will raise the bond prices and drive down the interest
rate. A fall in the interest rate will stimulate the level of investment and an increase
in investment will raise the level of income via the workings of the multiplier. Thus
an increase in money supply could increase the level of output, particularly at a less
than full-employment level, without affecting prices. There could be secondary effects
on prices but these are more likely to be important when the economy moves closer to
the zone of full employment. Any increase in money supply beyond the level of full
employment will raise the price level in the classical fashion. This is shown in Figure 5.4.
Output Q is measured on the vertical axis and money supply M is measured on the
horizontal axis. Full employment output is given by Mf Qf on an output growth curve
0Q and Mf Qf is consistent with a full employment money supply of 0Mf . Before Mf
any increase in money supply, for example, 0M1 to 0M2 raises production from M1 Q1 to
M2 Q2 . Beyond full employment, a rise in money supply from 0M3 to 0M4 simply bids up
the prices to P1 and P2 as has been indicated by the price line.
The interest rate is, however, determined in the money market, and this will be
discussed next.

5.3 Money and the interest rate

.....................................................................................
In the Keynesian model, the rate of interest r is determined by the demand for money
Md  and supply of money Ms . Money supply is usually treated as fixed in the short

May, 2007 MAC/MED Page-71 0230_003346_09_cha05

72 Monetary economics in developing countries
..................................................................

run, and as such Ms is invariant to changes in r. This is shown by S1 S1 in Figure 5.5. The
demand for money (or Md ) consists of three parts: (a) transaction demand for money;
that is, M1 ; (b) precautionary demand for money, that is, Mp ; and (c) speculative demand
for money, that is, Msp . Thus we have

Md = Mt + Mp + Msp (5.17)

The demand for money for day-to-day transaction purposes usually depends on
the level of income, or Y. The precautionary demand for money also depends on Y,
and it stems from the necessity to hold cash balances for rainy days. The specu-
lative demand for money is the real Keynesian invention. If money could be regarded
as a financial asset in the portfolio, then such an asset could be held in the port-
folio along with other assets. Keynes lumped these other assets together and called
them bonds. People may wish to hold bonds rather than liquid money because
interest is paid to the bondholders. Bond prices could change, and thus bond-holding
involves some risks. Also, different rates of interest are paid on different bonds. The
average of such interest rates may be regarded as the interest on bonds. Keynes
argued that the demand for money or liquidity preference is an inverse function of r
(see Figure 5.5).

Msp = fr (5.18)

Let r be measured on the vertical axis and Md and Ms be measured on the horizontal
axis, as shown in Figure (5.6). It is shown by the line KN that Mt + Mp remain completely
inelastic with respect to changes in r. Msp is inversely related to changes in r. The reason

r S1
Rate of interest

r0

Msp

0 Mt + Mp S1 Md, Ms
Demand and supply of money

Figure 5.5 Money demand and supply in the Keynesian framework (1)

May, 2007 MAC/MED Page-72 0230_003346_09_cha05

 Keynesian and monetarist views on money 73
..............................................................

r N Ms Ms1 Ms2

r2
Rate of interest

r0 Msp1

r1
Msp

0 M t + Mp K Mp Ms Ms1 Ms2 Md, Ms

Money demand and supply

Figure 5.6 Money demand and supply in the Keynesian framework (2)

is simple. When r is low, people expect it to rise in the near future. Since the bond price
and r are inversely related, people would like to avoid the capital loss that accompanies
a rise in r. Hence, they would wish to hold more money. The reverse happens when r is
high. People part company with their liquid money and hold bonds, as they speculate
that r will fall and bond prices will rise. Hence, r can be regarded as a price paid for
parting with liquidity. In terms of the portfolio analysis of Tobin (1958), we can say
that, since people are not risk-lovers, therefore a higher r must be paid to seduce them
into holding a greater proportion of bonds in their wealth portfolios. The equilibrium
r is determined at r0 where Md = Ms . The interest rate could change with a change in Md
or Ms , or both. Thus, if the money supply increases from Md to Ms1  r falls from r0 to r1 .
Notice that if Ms increases further (with no change in Md , of course) r does not fall any
further. This is precisely what happens when the money supply rises from Ms1 to Ms2 as
the economy is caught in the liquidity trap. As r ceases to fall, there would not be any
effect on investment and income. The Keynesian liquidity trap, then, clearly shows the
limitation of monetary policy in curing recessions. The liquidity trap could operate at a
very low r when the demand for money is infinitely elastic, since everyone expects a rise
in r and a consequent fall in bond prices. Therefore, no one wants to hold bonds. It also
follows that the efficacy of monetary policy would decline when the demand for money
was more elastic. It is also implied that if the investment function is interest-elastic, there
would be a stronger impact on output or income. Obviously, the strength of monetary
policy will diminish considerably if the investment function is interest-inelastic. In
Figure 5.6, it has also been shown that if the Msp rises, the liquidity preference schedule
shifts to the right Msp Msp1 . Assuming that Ms is the supply of money, r rises to a new
equilibrium, r2 .

May, 2007 MAC/MED Page-73 0230_003346_09_cha05

74 Monetary economics in developing countries
..................................................................

A general equilibrium approach: the Hicksian

5.4
ISLM curves
.....................................................................................
Although Keynes claimed that the interest rate is a purely monetary phenomenon, it
has been argued by Hicks that a truly general theory of interest rate determination
should be stated in a framework of a general equilibrium analysis (Hicks, 1937). In a
more general version of the determinants of the demand for money, we should include
both income Y and the rate of interest. Thus we have

Md = fr Y (5.19)

This could also be stated as

Md = kY + fr (5.20)

Also, r can be determined by demand for and supply of loanable funds. The demand for
loanable funds is given by investment and the supply of loanable fund is given mainly
by savings plus dis-hoardings. Following Hicks, we can then write:

Md = fr Y (5.21)

S = Sr Y (5.22)

I = Ir Y (5.23)

Hicks argued that it is important to look at the basic relationships between r and Y via
changes in savings and the demand for money. If Y rises, S will rise and, following the
classical theory, r will fall. This is shown in Figure 5.7. When Y rises from Y0 to Y1  S
rises from S0 to S1 and the S curve shifts to the right. The interest rate r falls from r0 to r1 .
If Y rises further, say from Y1 to Y2  S also rises further, that is from S1 to S2 , as shown in
the further shift of the S curve to the right. The equilibrium r thus falls to r2 . If we then
join all the points of equilibrium between S and I, we obtain an IS curve which depicts
an inverse relationship between r and Y. It is clear that every point on the IS curve is a
point of equilibrium between I and S. This is shown in Figure 5.7.
In the money market, following Keynes, let us assume that the equilibrium interest
rate, r0 , is determined where Md = Ms , as shown in Figure 5.8. Let us think that this Md
is given by income Y0 (say, 100 billion rupees). If Y rises from Y0 to Y1  Md0 also rises,
and this is shown by the shift of the Md curve from Md0 to Md1 . The equilibrium r now
rises from r0 (say, 4 per cent) to r1 (say 5 per cent). If Y rises further, to Y2 (Y2 = 300
billion rupees), Md1 shifts upwards to Md2 and equilibrium r rises from r1 to r2 (that is,
say, from 5 per cent to 6 per cent). If we now join all the points of equilibrium between
Md and Ms with a rise in income, we trace out an upward-sloping curve, which has been
called LM. Once again, the LM curve depicts the relationship between r and Y when the
money market is in equilibrium (that is, Md = Ms ). If we now combine the two curves

May, 2007 MAC/MED Page-74 0230_003346_09_cha05

 Keynesian and monetarist views on money 75
..............................................................

r S0Y0

S1Y1

Rate of interest S2Y2

r0
r1
r2

S, I
Savings and investment

Figure 5.7 Savings, investment and the interest rate (Hicksian framework)

Ms
r

r2(6%)
Rate of interest

Md 2Y2(Y2 = Rs 300 bn)

r1(5%)

Md 1Y1(Y1 = Rs 200 bn)

r0(4%)

Md 0Y0(Rs 100 bn)

0
Ms Md, Ms
Money demand and supply

Figure 5.8 Money demand, supply and the interest rate (numerical example)

together, as in Figure 5.9, we obtain the equilibrium rate of interest, r (say, 5 per cent).
It can be checked easily that the equilibrium r is stable.
In simple terms, a general equilibrium theory of interest rate determination should
include the following factors:

May, 2007 MAC/MED Page-75 0230_003346_09_cha05

76 Monetary economics in developing countries
..................................................................

r l
M

6%
Rate of interest

r (5%) E

4%

L
S

0
Y0(100 bn) Y1(100 bn) Y2(100 bn)
Y(Rs)
Output

Figure 5.9 Output and the interest rate (numerical example)

 savings;
 investment demand;
 the liquidity preference; and
 the quantity of money.

5.5 Monetary and scal policy

.....................................................................................
The IS and LM curves are powerful analytical tools to describe the workings of monetary
and fiscal policies. In Figure 5.10, we discuss some theoretical situations.
The equilibrium interest rate is given by r as before, where the IS curve intersects the
LM curve. If the monetary policy is expansionary, the LM curve shifts to the right to
L1 M1 and this leads to a fall of r to r1 . Income rises from Y0 to Y1 . Recall our previous
comment on the interest inelasticity of the investment function. Given such interest
inelasticity of investment (that is, I1 S1 rather than I2 S2 ) the effect on income generation
would be much less (check that Y0 Y2 < Y0 Y3 ; check also that given an interest inelastic
demand for money schedule (that is, a steeper LM curve), an expansionary monetary
policy will have a greater impact on Y with an interest elastic IS curve).
The effect of fiscal policy can also easily be shown with the help of IS and LM schedules.
In Figure 5.11, an expansionary fiscal policy (for example, an expansion of government
expenditure), shifts the IS curve to the right to I1 S1 and income rises from Y0 to Y1 while r
rises from r0 to r1 . If the LM curve is more interest inelastic (that is, L1 M1 rather than LM),
the increase in Y would be smaller (that is, Y0 Y2 < Y0 Y1 . The reason is simple. An interest
inelastic LM curve would require a larger rise in r to make the demand for money equal to

May, 2007 MAC/MED Page-76 0230_003346_09_cha05

 Keynesian and monetarist views on money 77
..............................................................

l1
r
M
l

Rate of interest l2 M1

r 1 S2

S
L1 S1

Y0 Y2 Y1 Y3 Y
Income

Figure 5.10 Monetary and scal policies (1)

l1
r

l M1
M
Rate of interest

r1

r0

S1
L

L1 S

Y0 Y2 Y1 Y
Income

Figure 5.11 Monetary and scal policies (2)

money supply. Such a large rise in r would reduce significantly the level of private invest-
ment, which would lead to a small increase in Y. This impact is now called the crowding
out effect. When the LM schedule is completely inelastic, fiscal policy has no effect on Y.
The shift of the IS curve to the right on a vertical LM curve simply raises the r.

5.6 The monetarists case

.....................................................................................
The monetarists case is advocated strongly by a number of economists, the most promi-
nent of whom is Milton Friedman. Friedman has stated a modern quantity theory which

May, 2007 MAC/MED Page-77 0230_003346_09_cha05

78 Monetary economics in developing countries
..................................................................

has its roots in the ancient quantity theory but is broader than its predecessor. Stated
in a very simple way, the modern quantity theory states that a change in money supply
will change the price level as long as the demand for money is stable; such a change
also effects the real value of national income and economic activity, but in the short run
only. For Friedman, the stability in the demand for money is just a behavioural fact,
proven by empirical evidence. As long as the demand for money is stable it is possible
to predict the effects of changes of money supply on total expenditure and income. The
monetarists argue that, if the economy operates at a less than full-employment level,
then an increase in money supply will lead to a rise in output and employment because
of a rise in expenditure, but only in the short run. After a time, the economy will return
to a less than full-employment situation which must be caused by other, real factors.
The monetarists believe that changes in money supply cannot affect the real variables
in the long run. At near full-employment point or beyond it, an increase in money
supply will raise prices. Before full employment, Y rises with a rise in money supply and
expenditure. The rise in Y will, then, crucially depend on the ratio of income to money
supply; that is, Y/M, or velocity. With an increase in spending during a recession, Y
will continue to rise until it has reached a limit where it stands in its previous ratio to
M, because at that point output can no longer be increased. People will now raise their
demand for money rather than spend it, and the supply of and demand for money would
once again be equal to one another. These arguments are illustrated in Figure 5.12. Let
us assume that Y is measured vertically, and demand for Md  and supply of money Ms 

Ms Ms1 Md = kY
Y

Y2

Y0

Y1

Md = Ms Ms1 Md , Ms
Demand for / supply of money

Figure 5.12 The transactions demand for money

May, 2007 MAC/MED Page-78 0230_003346_09_cha05

 Keynesian and monetarist views on money 79
..............................................................

are measured horizontally. Assume that money supply is fixed (and therefore that the
Ms line is completely inelastic with respect to changes in Y). The Md varies with income,
but this relationship is proportional since Md = kY (people always hold a given fraction,
k, of their income). The monetarists thus emphasize the transactions demand for money.
The equilibrium Y is given by Y0 where Md = Ms . If Md < Ms as at Y1 , total expenditure
rises and Y rises from Y1 to Y0 .
If M rises, the Ms curve shifts to the right to Ms1 and Y rises to Y2 because Ms > Md
and spending rises until Ms = Md at a higher level of income (that is, Y2 ). In contra-
distinction to the Keynesian analysis, note that nothing is known about changes in r
when Ms changes. It is also assumed that the demand for money remains stable; in other
words, 1/k is fixed. Given the stability in the velocity, the central bank can control the
volume of spending by controlling the money supply. The stabilization policy should
then concentrate only on monetary policy; that is, controlling the volume of the money
supply.
The central issue that one faces in the above analysis is whether the demand for money
is stable or not. It is, however, possible to be a Keynesian and still accept that there is
stability in the demand for money. The recent debate between the monetarists and the
Keynesians centres round the question of changing aggregate demand by monetary or
fiscal policies. The so-called Keynesians point out that only fiscal policies can change
the level of income by changing aggregate demand, whereas the monetarists argue that
aggregate demand can be changed only by monetary policies. It is not certain whether
Keynes himself in fact held such views. Nevertheless, it seems that the monetarists case
rests on the working of a vertical or near-vertical LM curve. This implies that the demand
for money is very inelastic to changes in the interest rate. Similarly, the Keynesian case
rests on the working of a vertical or near-vertical IS schedule with a normal LM curve.
This implies a very low elasticity of the investment function with respect to changes in
the interest rate. We now turn to the empirical evidence, which will largely determine
the validity of one theory or the other.

5.7 Special characteristics of developing countries

.....................................................................................
It is important to note that in developing countries, a substantial proportion of consump-
tion and income originate through non-monetary transactions. This is mainly because
economics of developing countries are usually characterized by dualism. This is why we
observe the coexistence of organized and unorganized markets side by side. Although the
organized market could be fairly competitive, modern and sophisticated, the unorgan-
ized market is marked by the characteristics of barter trade where goods are exchanged
for other goods. In other words, we have two different markets in developing coun-
tries: (i) monetized; and (ii) non-monetized. With economic growth, it is reasonable
to suppose that the proportion of non-monetized transactions will decline. Hence, one
would expect a rise in the transaction demand for money because of the increase in
economic growth and a rise in the degree of monetization. It may be argued that for

May, 2007 MAC/MED Page-79 0230_003346_09_cha05

80 Monetary economics in developing countries
..................................................................

developing countries, the relevant concept of income in monetary analysis is a monet-

ized component of income and not total national income. However, this point has been
neglected in many empirical studies on the demand for money in developing countries
because of the paucity of data. Bhattacharya (1974) showed how the estimated demand
for money function with monetized income data has been different from that estim-
ated with national income data. Clearly, estimates of non-marketed output are beset
with great difficulties, but none the less are normally included in estimates of GNP for
developing economies.
The other important feature of the money market of developing countries is what
Myint called the financial dualism (Myint, 1971). This implies the coexistence of hetero-
geneous interest rates in the organized and unorganized money markets. The former
market is quite sophisticated, and one expects the speculative demand for money to vary
with interest rates. In the latter, that is, the unorganized market (usually dominated by
the shopkeepers, moneylenders, landlords, merchants or a combination of some of these
which may ultimately create a monopoly situation), the interest rates are expected to
change with the risks and returns on real assets. Under such circumstances, the supply
of money may not affect the rates of interest significantly. Hence the Keynesian theory
may not be very applicable to developing countries. There is some evidence to suggest
that there are some links between the organized and unorganized money markets, but
until now, the evidence suggests that these links are weak.

May, 2007 MAC/MED Page-80 0230_003346_09_cha05