Walras' Law says that a general glut (excess supply) of newly-produced goods (and services) has to be matched by an excess demand for some other good. But it could be matched by an excess demand of anything that is not a newly-produced good. It could be an excess demand for money. Or it could be an excess demand for: bonds; land; old masters; used furniture; unobtainium; whatever.
Daniel Kuehn calls this the "Whack-a-mole" theory of general gluts. The excess demand that matches the excess supply of newly-produced goods could pop up anywhere.
Monetary Disequilibrium Theory says that a general glut of newly-produced goods can only be matched by an excess demand for money. There's only one mole to whack. Money is special. A general glut is always and everywhere a monetary phenomenon.
In a monetary exchange economy, Walras' Law is wrong; Monetary Disequilibrium Theory is right. We live in a monetary exchange economy. Walras' Law is the worst fallacy currently taught in economics as gospel truth.
Why is Walras' Law wrong? Why is money special? That's what this post is about.
Continue reading "Walras' Law vs Monetary Disequilibrium Theory" »
Recent Comments