DAU Library

학위논문 동서

M.Friedman經濟學體系에 있어通貨論的經濟安定化政策에 관한 硏究

도기정

부산: 東亞大學校 1995

125p; 26cm

학위논문(박사) 東亞大學校 大學院: 經濟學科, 1995

영문초록 : Milton Friedman and Monetarism are synonymous. Monetarism appears, however, in many shades and covers quite a spectrum from a harder monetarism than the Friedman variety to eclective Keynesians. If moetarism admits of some diversity, it nevertheless comes down the proposition that money is extremely important for macroeconomics, that money is more important than other thing such as fiscal policy, and in some variant, that money is virtually all that matters. A cross section of the views that Friedman has espoused constitues the core of monetarism, a set of propositions that has been called the central is that is debated these days connection with macroeconomics. He presented two papers that, summarize and synthesize his current views on the role of money in monetary theory. A Theoretical Framework for Monetary Analysis(1970) and Monetary Theory of Nominal Income(l971) as well as to the critics of them. He provides the key clements of the Monetary Theory of Nominal Income as follows; ① A unit elasticity of the demand for money with respect to real income ② A nominal market interest rate equal to the anticipated rate plus the anticipated rate of change of prices, kept at that level by speculators with firmly held anticipations ③ A difference between the anticipated real interest. and the real secular rate of growth determined outside the system ④ Full and instantaneous adjustment of the amount of money demaned to the amount supplied. Under these key elements he develops Monetary Theory of Nominal Income with a time-lag through a simple model, analyzing short-run economic fluctuations. The neo-liberalism of M.Friedman stems primarily and directly from the social philosophy of Frank H.Knight, who is a founder of Chicago School. Friedman attaches, like classical liberals, a great importance to individual freedom as ultimate goal of individuals and believes that it can not exist outside the competitive capitalism: i.e., free private enterprise exchange economy. This makes him to criticize all sorts of interventionism that put equality and welfare ahead of freedom and, as a result, restrict it. According to friedman, economic freedom under competitive capitalism enables equality and economic development to be realized through the self-interest of individuals and free market prices. On the other hand, economic freedom is the essential Requisite for political freedom. Apparently, competitive capitalism makes it possible to realize all the freedom, equity, economic development, and further, welfare as by products of economic freedom. On the contrary, a society that puts equality in the sense of the equality of outcome or welfare ahead of freedom will end up with none of all. Nevertheless, Friedman is very emphatic about the necessity of the role of government to protect individual freedom from being violated by others: establishing the 'rude of action' and judging on the basis of it: carrying out public works that privates can not do, even free market can do: protecting members of the community who can not be regarded as 'responsible' individuals. But he is afraid that the excessive actions of goverment interfere individual freedom. And this makes him to suggest that even necessary government power should be dispersed. Friedman, as a monetarist, concerns chiefly with monetarists economic analysis and focuses on the importance of specially analizing the demand for money and formulating a positive theory for the guidance of policy, originated by a lot of empirical findings. His conclusions from the evaluation of traditional quantity theory of money and keynesian liquidity preference theory is that the latter is, in itself, in the older tradition and revant only to the 'liquidity trap'. In addition, his monetary theory has no fundamental difference from the traditional quantity theory. Consequently, the theoretical aspects, although each would doubtless choose to express it differently in detail. His major findings from empirical works are as follows: First, the hypothesis that demand function for money and velocity are high stable-more stable than functions such as the consumption and investment multiplier that are offered, in Keynesian theory, as alternative key relation-that is, the relation among variables of the function, even during the hyper-inflation, is highly stable, and the results are originated from estimating by permanent magnitude, not by measured one. Second, on the other hand, the supply of money in nominal units is autonomously determined by technical conditions and political or psychological conditions. But, in reality, monetary policy-in the process that fiscal policy is performed, that is, monetary policy is not neutral. Friedman's comment on erratic and discretionary policy and assertion for a rule of policy correspond to his neo-liberalism. His emphasis on the 'rule of policy' represents his ideas that government interference on the economy should be restricted and even the necessary power should be dispersed. The rule of policy, particularly of monetary policy, promotes individual freedom that activates self-interest and accomplishes equality and welfare in the end, for it enables the stable growth of an economy. On the contrary, the discretionary policy is not only undesirable, in itself, but is obstructive to the protection of freedom, for it restrains all the functions of free market prices and the efficient allocation of resources. Finally, there are some policy suggestions in the following: First, since it is found that there is little causality running from the supply of money stock to nominal and nominal GNP, and prices level, the theoretical background of policy suggested by monetarists is logically in question. Second, it is very hard to find exogeneity of M2, empirically. It is related to the trend of a swift change in financial system and consequent development of financial goods among which we cannot tell one from the other in terms of liquidity itself. Therefore the main indicator of monetaiy policy need to be reexamined provided that there are many financial assets introduced, some of which are new and the others the same but different in liquidity. Finally, interest rate would be a good intermediate indicator for monetary policy when we have no inflation expectation and stable market interest rate with establishment of long-term financial markets in the long-run.

바로가기