Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/57068
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorBezemer, Dirken_US
dc.contributor.authorGardiner, Geoffreyen_US
dc.date.accessioned2010-10-20en_US
dc.date.accessioned2012-04-12T14:22:26Z-
dc.date.available2012-04-12T14:22:26Z-
dc.date.issued2010en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10419/57068-
dc.description.abstractThis paper discusses recent UK monetary policies as instances of John Kenneth Galbraith's 'innocent fraud,' including the idea that money is a thing rather than a relationship, the fallacy of composition (i.e., that what is possible for one bank is possible for all banks), and the belief that the money supply can be controlled by reserves management. The origins of the idea of quantitative easing (QE), and its defense when it was applied in Britain, are analyzed through this lens. An empirical analysis of the effect of reserves on lending is conducted; we do not find evidence that QE 'worked,' either by a direct effect on money spending, or through an equity market effect. These findings are placed in a historical context in a comparison with earlier money control experiments in the UK.en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisher|aLevy Economics Institute of Bard College |cAnnandale-on-Hudson, NYen_US
dc.relation.ispartofseries|aWorking paper, Levy Economics Institute |x622en_US
dc.subject.jelE52en_US
dc.subject.jelE58en_US
dc.subject.ddc330en_US
dc.subject.keywordquantitative easingen_US
dc.subject.keywordUK innocent fraudsen_US
dc.subject.keywordaccountingen_US
dc.titleInnocent frauds meet Goodhart's Law in monetary policyen_US
dc.typeWorking Paperen_US
dc.identifier.ppn637216253en_US
dc.rightshttp://www.econstor.eu/dspace/Nutzungsbedingungenen_US

Files in This Item:
File
Size
187.17 kB





Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.