Gresham's law or Gresham's fallacy?

Arthur J. Rolnick and Warren Weber

Quarterly Review, 1986, vol. 10, issue Win, 17-24

Abstract: In this article, the authors argue the answer to their title depends on whether a qualifier is added to the standard version of the law that \\"bad money drives out good.\\" By examining several historical episodes, they find instances where bad money (valued more at the mint than in the market) failed to drive out good money (valued less at the mint than in the market). Rolnick and Weber next explain why the common qualifier to this law, which requires the mint to fix the rate of exchange at face value, does not reinstate the law. The common qualifier fails to give plausible reasons for how the mint price of money can coexist with a different market price. They then propose a new qualifier to Gresham's Law and argue its validity: bad money drives out good only when there are significant costs to using the good money at a premium.

Keywords: Money; Gresham's law (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 1986
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (41)

Downloads: (external link)
http://minneapolisfed.org/research/qr/qr1012.pdf (application/pdf)
http://minneapolisfed.org/research/qr/qr1012.html (text/html)

Related works:
Journal Article: Gresham's Law or Gresham's Fallacy? (1986)
Working Paper: Gresham's law or Gresham's fallacy? (1983)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:fip:fedmqr:y:1986:i:win:p:17-24:n:v.10no.1

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Quarterly Review from Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Kate Hansel ().