Analytical Framework for Sovereign Money? Some Insight from the 100% Money Literature

Samuel Demeulemeester

Journal of Economic Issues, 2025, vol. 59, issue 1, 166-184

Abstract: The 2007–2008 Global Financial Crisis has brought renewed interest in the 100% Money reform idea of the 1930s, the essence of which was to require 100% reserves on transaction deposits to separate money issuance from bank loans. A modern version of this idea, the Sovereign Money proposal, has been much discussed in recent years. Some heterodox economists have harshly criticized Sovereign Money advocates for lacking a clear analytical framework, as well as for disregarding “established” literature on such topics as the causality relationship between money and prices, the accommodation of business needs, financial instability, or the seigniorage privilege. The literature on 100% Money, however, appears to have been largely overlooked by both sides of the debate—even though, as this article shows, it could have brought valuable insight to the discussion. Building upon the arguments of the 100% Money writers, this article concludes that many of the criticisms addressed to the Sovereign Money proposal are either inconclusive or misplaced.

Date: 2025
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/00213624.2025.2455643 (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
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:mes:jeciss:v:59:y:2025:i:1:p:166-184

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/MJEI20

DOI: 10.1080/00213624.2025.2455643

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Journal of Economic Issues from Taylor & Francis Journals
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Longhurst ().