Monetarists versus Libertarians

Arnold Kling, an Austrian / libertarian, argues with Nick Rowe, a monetarist, on the meaning of that economic recessions occur which increases in unemployment, close factories, etc. A stimulating debate you may follow here (http://worthwhile.typepad.com/worthwhile_canadian_initi/) and(http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2010/12/a_rant_against.html#), the two  blogs of Duelists. I will summarize the core of the conflict:
For A .Kling, if there are people in unemployment it is a symptom of not knowing or unwilling (or unable) to provide what the market would buy. They are able to offer things that nobody wants. Is the typical libertarian argument, though, as a good economist, Kling acknowledged :

If You Took money out of the picture, the construction worker and the college student Would Still Be Their Unable to solve problem. When it comes to the failure of Wants to coincide, the Existence of money is part of the solution, NOT part of the problem.
Which is Not to Say That Is What printing more money solves the problem.What solves the problem is a series of entrepreneurial experiments, Many of Which fail, That ultimately create a roundabout pattern of production That Enable the construction worker to produce Indirectly Something That is of value for the college grad, and vice-versa.

That is, you may have to issue more money (although not say exactly why), but the solution is to end “business a series of experiments, many of which fail …”Does not look promising, or accurate.
going to Nick´s  monetarism, he says that when the overall market is a fall in demand is because the money-commodity market (where the good “money” is produced)  see an increase in demand for this good equal to the sum of the falls in demands in all other markets (in which we include financial assets, of course. The money is used to buy goods, services, and assets). It’s funny to be in a comment to the blog of the adversary where Nick expresses his theory as concisely as possible, and with good humor:

But if, INSTEAD, we see lower Nearly Demands for all goods, hires low everwhere, vacacancy low rates, Reduced production of everything, we _must_ Have an Excess demand for money.”

If unemployment is doubled in a year, both in USA and Spain, it can not be that these people suddenly ceased to be able to produce things desired. Of course there are changes in preferences and technology, and there are sectors that are disappearing because people-and all-change, but that does not usually happen suddenly. In the USA, in 1995-2000, there was a great technological change and millions of jobs were replaced by new ones, but that did not lead to a recession, on the contrary, resulted in a boom. When it occurs suddenly and in all lines of production, it is shameless tell people out of work (without subsidy) that is an incompetent. Especially when there are grounds for believing that which has been in the destitution is the N producing the good, the money (ie the ECB).

By the way, if we include the asset markets in our model, in Spain and in Europe there is no inflation. Focus on CPI inflation is a grossly caricature of reality. A little bit of seriousness, please.

%d bloggers like this: