This widely acclaimed book argues that money is not the product of a simple deposit multiplier process. The impressive analysis includes discussions of the origins and nature of money and of the evolution of monetary institutions and theory. Unlike other recent works on 'endogenous money', this book incorporates liquidity preference theory within the analysis by carefully distinguishing money from liquidity and by showing how money, but not liquidity, is created on demand. This naturally leads to a role for liquidity preference in the determination of interest rates. Extensions then link money to financial instability, the expenditure multiplier, credit, saving, investment, development, deficits and growth. This controversial and provocative book will be essential reading for all economists and researchers concerned with monetary and macroeconomics. It will have particular appeal to post Keynesian economists.

In 1913 and 1914, A. Mitchell Innes published a pair of articles that stand as two of the best pieces written in the twentieth century on the nature of money. Only recently rediscovered, these articles are reprinted and analyzed here for the first time.

In this revisionist history of the development of the modern monetary system, Desan argues that money effectively creates economic activity rather than emerging from it. Her account demonstrates that money's design has been a project central to governance and formative to markets.

This second edition explores how money 'works' in the modern economy and synthesises the key principles of Modern Money Theory, exploring macro accounting, currency regimes and exchange rates in both the USA and developing nations.

This book offers a fresh and uniquely sociological perspective on money and credit. As basic economic institutions, money and credit are easy to overlook when they work well. When they malfunction, as they did in the new millennium’s global financial crisis, their importance becomes obvious and demands further investigation. Bruce Carruthers and Laura Ariovich examine the social dimensions of money and credit at both the individual and corporate levels, from the development of personal credit and a consumer society, to the role of government in the creation of money. In clear prose, they illustrate how the overall future of the economy is governed by the financial system and the flow of capital into, and out of, firms operating in particular industrial sectors, as well as the social meanings money itself acquires and the ways people distinguish between “dirty” and “clean” money. This accessible and engaging book will be essential reading for upper-level students of economic sociology, and those interested in how the bills, coins and plastic in our pockets shape the world we live in.

This book provides a comprehensive re-working of the basic principles of monetary macroeconomics in an alternative monetary model (AMM) of economic growth, the business cycle, inflation and income distribution. These principles differ considerably from those advanced in the standard macroeconomics literature and in textbooks. However, the latter have been demonstrably unsuccessful in the promotion of usable macroeconomic policy advice for the past several years, actually decades. A different approach is needed. In particular, the new approach takes seriously the vital role of credit creation and endogenous money in capitalism. It does not imagine that all of the difficult questions of economic policy-making may be resolved within a paradigm that conceptualizes economic activity as merely a question of barter exchange. The result is a blueprint for a set of growth-friendly macroeconomic policies which will promote full employment, financial stability and higher real wages – essentially for the benefit of the long-suffering middle and working classes rather for the chamber of commerce and financial interests.

Why society needs to reclaim the power to create money At the heart of capitalism lies the ability of private banks to create money at the stroke of a key. Why have we ignored this unique privilege for so long – and at what cost? Aaron Sahr attributes the lack of attention paid to money creation to the core of popular theories of capitalism, which equate economic power with capital ownership. This conceptual framework obscures the real drivers of capitalist dynamics as well as the causes of increasing inequality. By exploring the transformation of banking over the last half century, Sahr shows how the creation of money has driven the rise of finance as well as splitting incomes from wealth. As a result, the real economy of ordinary people has become a debt supplier to a monetary system whose returns accumulate at the top. It is not simply the markets but money itself that transfers wealth from the masses to a minority. Increasing financial inequality can therefore only be remedied by addressing predistribution – the modalities of money creation – as well as the distributive effects of the markets. By mapping this hidden regime of ‘keystroke capitalism’, Sahr makes an essential contribution to our understanding of economic inequality and capitalist dynamics.

During the nineteenth century, Yucat&án moved effectively from its colonial past into modernity, transforming from a cattle-ranching and subsistence-farming economy to a booming export-oriented agricultural economy. Yucat&án and its economy grew in response to increasing demand from the United States for henequen, the local cordage fiber. This henequen boom has often been seen as another regional and historical example of overdependence on foreign markets and extortionary local elites. In The Making of a Market, Juliette Levy argues instead that local social and economic dynamics are the root of the region&’s development. She shows how credit markets contributed to the boom before banks (and bank crises) existed and how people borrowed before the creation of institutions designed specifically to lend. As the intermediaries in this lending process, notaries became unwitting catalysts of Yucat&án&’s capitalist transformation. By focusing attention on the notaries&’ role in structuring the mortgage market rather than on formal institutions such as banks, this study challenges the easy compartmentalization of local and global relationships and of economic and social relationships.