French Circuit Theory

Gnos, Claude

doi:10.4337/9781847202802.00011

Cited by 12 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Orthodox/mainstream and heterodox (Post Keynesian, Circuitist) theories of money is another case in point in this regard [see, Gnos (2006) and Realfonzo (2006) for description of circuit theories of money and Davidson (2006) for its Post-Keynesian version]. Orthodox theorists depict the market economy as fundamentally a barter exchange system where money enters into the system exogenously as a facilitating numeraire.…”

Section: Differences Over Assumptions Regarding the Nature And Workinmentioning

confidence: 99%

Can Econometrics Rescue “The Economics”?

Siddique¹

2021

NJSSH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Economists disagree; this is a matter of fact. Economics has an empirical methodology to verify whatever theories economists from different schools of thought advance in order to explain the economic phenomenon. This empirical methodology lends economists the confidence that most of the differences among them can be reconciled overtime by employing this methodology. If not today, future development either in economic theorization or estimation techniques may help them settle their internal conflicts. This paper argues that disagreements among economists are deeper than they are usually conceived of. These disagreements are spread over the entire spectrum of scientific theorization, i.e., explanation, prediction and control aspects of economics. Economists disagree neither because their understanding about economic functioning is imperfect nor because their econometric tool-kit of verifying their theories is limited; instead several deeply rooted reasons leave them divided on matters of economic theory and policy. It is argued that disagreements among economists are so deep that they become almost irreconcilable. Economics will continue as a rhetoric activity where different economists make use of authorities, stories, logic and metaphor to persuade each other.

show abstract

Section: Differences Over Assumptions Regarding the Nature And Workinmentioning

confidence: 99%

Can Econometrics Rescue “The Economics”?

Siddique¹

2021

NJSSH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…That money represents credit‐debt relations speaks to its close relationship to the very category of debt. Credit‐debt relationships pre‐exist money in human history, and money partakes of this broader form of social relation (Graziani, Aréna, and Savadori ; Wray ; Gnos ; and Realfonzo ). Money appears when these debt relations are formalized and standardized by the regulating power in a region.…”

Section: Debts To Power Power's Debtmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sovereign Debt

Singh¹

2018

Journal of Religious Ethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This essay examines the concept of sovereign debt in both political‐economic and theological registers. Elaborating the dynamics of monetary economy, I demonstrate how postures of indebtedness characterize the relationship between sovereign power and the governed. While taxation signals the debt of obedience and fealty owed to sovereignty, the monetary circuit reveals that sovereign power exists in a state of indebtedness to the governed. The morally valenced proximity between debt and guilt helps to perpetuate such relations. Tracing these resonances and resemblances in the theological realm, I consider the centrality of debt as a structuring principle in key soteriological traditions within Christian thought. Not only does God appear to uphold debt logic, but God, I claim, becomes identified with debt and marked as a debtor. The divine sovereign as debtor and as enforcing debt provides cues for earthly sovereigns and legitimates cultures of debt. In light of the theopolitical legacy in the West, the mutual influence between theology and the political realm, refiguring this set of influential theological concepts may prove helpful in decentering debt as a governing principle in modern life.

show abstract

“…Si gasta sus ganancias, esto genera un proceso multiplicador del ingreso adicional por medio del cual se generan más ahorros (fase 2). Estos se canalizan al departamento financiero del banco o al intermediario financiero no bancario (el banquero de inversión) que puede pagar el préstamo de corto plazo 28 . Más adelante volveremos al "proceso del doble multiplicador", después de dar un ejemplo que puede ayudar a aclararlo al lector.…”

Section: Salvedadesunclassified

La financiación inicial y final en el circuito monetario y la teoría de la demanda efectiva

Cesaratto

2016

ecoins

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Un aspecto notable de la teoría heterodoxa moderna es la separación entre los modelos de crecimiento basados en la demanda y las teorías del dinero endógeno. Este artículo sugiere una posible integración entre la teoría keynesiana del multiplicador (y el supermultiplicador) y las teorías del dinero endógeno y la financiación de Keynes. Centrándose en la versión de la teoría del circuito monetario (TCM) de Graziani, es una contribución para reconciliar la preocupación de la tcm por la financiación inicial de la producción y la preocupación de las teorías del crecimiento heterodoxas orientadas a la demanda por el financiamiento final de la demanda autónoma.

show abstract

French Circuit Theory

Cited by 12 publications

References 0 publications

Can Econometrics Rescue “The Economics”?

Can Econometrics Rescue “The Economics”?

Sovereign Debt

La financiación inicial y final en el circuito monetario y la teoría de la demanda efectiva

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About