Optimal monetary policy
Optimal monetary policy
复制标题
最优货币政策
DOI：
10.1007/s12113-003-1003-5
复制
发表时间：
2003
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
J. G. Hülsmann
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
J. G. Hülsmann
关于货币政策的主流著作通常侧重于被认为是货币政策制定者目标的目标。通货膨胀目标制、就业、国际收支平衡、货币总量的增长目标、汇率稳定、GDP或资产价格--这些以及类似的货币政策目标在当今的教科书中或多或少都有详细的讨论。当谈到达到这些目的的手段时，讨论就完全停止了，取而代之的是对公开市场政策、贴现率、准备金率等技术性问题的描述，在本文中，我们将忽略货币政策的这些技术性问题，而把重点放在最终的手段和目的上。这一程序有两个理由。一方面，通货膨胀目标制和货币总量增长率等目的不是最终目的，而是中间目的。人们的默契是，它们或多或少与最终目的的实现密切相关--减少稀缺（增加“繁荣”或“财富”）。我们的做法使我们能够回避对这种默契是否有效的讨论。我们将直接解决一个更根本的问题，即货币政策能够并确实在多大程度上影响货币使用者群体的财富。另一方面，对最终手段的关注使我们能够从比通常更普遍的角度来研究货币政策。特别是，它使我们能够将货币生产的制度框架解释为货币政策的手段之一，并比较不同的制度设置。我们的方法认为，中央银行、国际货币基金组织、世界银行和其他国家和国际货币组织不是最终的给定，而是人类意志的产物。从我们理解货币政策这个词的基本意义上说，它们是货币政策的手段。它们仅仅是达到目的的手段，而不是目的本身，可以与其他制度安排进行比较，这些制度安排应该达到减少稀缺性的最终目的。因此，我们将首先研究一个不受阻碍的市场上的货币生产。然后，我们将转向这样一个问题：与自由市场相比，由政治因素引起的货币供给变化是否适合于进一步减少稀缺性。我们将得出结论，情况并非如此。恰恰相反，这种变化实际上使局势恶化。因此，对于由政治因素引起的货币供给变化，即自由放任，唯一合乎逻辑的选择是最优货币政策。
Mainstream writings on monetary policy typically focus on the goals that are assumed to be the goals of monetary policy makers. Inflation targeting, employment, equilibration of the balance of payments, growth targets for monetary aggregates, the stabilization of exchange rates, GDP, or asset prices—these and similar goals for monetary policy are discussed in more or less detail in presentday textbooks. When it comes to the means by which these ends are to be reached, the discussion stops altogether and gives way to a description of the technicalities of open market policies, discount rates, reserve requirements, and so on. In the present article, we will neglect these technicalities of monetary policy and focus on ultimate means and ends. The rationale for this procedure is twofold. On the one hand, ends such as inflation targeting and growth rates of monetary aggregates are not ultimate, but intermediate ends. The tacit understanding is that they are more or less closely related to the attainment of the ultimate end—the reduction of scarcity (increase of “prosperity” or “wealth”). Our approach allows us to sidestep the discussion of the validity of this tacit understanding. We will directly address the more fundamental question to what extent monetary policy can and does affect the wealth of the community of money users at all. On the other hand, the focus on ultimate means allows us to study monetary policy from a far more general point of view than is usually done. In particular, it allows us to interpret the institutional framework of money production as one of the means of monetary policy, and to compare different institutional set-ups. Our approach takes it for granted that central banks, the IMF, the World Bank, and other national and international monetary organizations are not ultimate givens, but creatures of the human will. They are means of monetary policy in the fundamental sense in which we understand this word. And as mere means to an end, rather than ends in themselves, they can be compared to other institutional arrangements that are supposed to attain the same ultimate end of reducing scarcity. Accordingly, we will first study money production on an unhampered market. Then we will turn to the question whether politically induced changes in the money supply are suitable to bring about a further reduction of scarcity as compared with the free market. We will conclude that this is not the case. Quite the contrary, such changes actually aggravate the situation. Therefore the only logical alternative of politically induced changes in the money supply, namely, laissez-faire, is the optimal monetary policy.