La nature de la monnaie

François Rachline

Revue Économique, 1982, vol. 33, issue 3, 446-475

Abstract: [fre] Cet article a pour but de montrer qu'on peut opposer deux grands types de conceptions de la monnaie. La première approche désigne la monnaie comme un bien semblable à tous les autres biens, de nature acquisitive : elle renvoie aux courants classique, marxiste et néo-classique ; la seconde l'appréhende comme un bien radicalement différent de tous les autres biens, de nature circulatoire : c'est la thèse contemporaine de Bernard Schmitt.. L'évolution de la pensée monétaire à partir de A. Marshall et G. Pigou a certes insisté sur la singularité de la monnaie, mais la remise en cause de la théorie quantitative, du postulat d'homogénéité et de la loi de Walras a surtout reposé sur les fonctions et le rôle spécifique de la monnaie dans les échanges et les motivations, non sur sa nature.. L'analyse contemporaine rompt avec cette démarche, en s'interrogeant sur la nature de la monnaie pour réaliser son intégration, malgré les questions délicates auxquelles elle se heurte encore. [eng] The nature of money . François Rachline. The abject of this article is to show that two main monetary theories can be contrasted. The first theory defines money as an asset similar to any other asset, and of the « acquisitive » type — it refers to Classical, Neo-Classical and Marxist trends. The second theory regards money an an usset radically different from any other asset, and of the circulating type — this recent thesis has been worked out by B. Schmitt.. The evolution of monetary theories since the works of A. Marshall and C. Pigou has admittedly emphasized the specificity of money, but the questioning of the quantitative theory, of the postulate of homogeneity and of the law of Walras mostly dealt with the functions and the specific role of money in exchanges and in motivation, but not with the nature of money.. Contemporary analysis breaks away from this method and questions the nature of money in order to achieve its integration, although it still has to solve a few difficult points.

Date: 1982
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (5)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.persee.fr/doc/reco_0035-2764_1982_num_33_3_408665 (text/html)
Data and metadata provided by Persée are licensed under a Creative Commons "Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0" License http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/

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:prs:reveco:reco_0035-2764_1982_num_33_3_408665

Access Statistics for this article

Revue Économique is currently edited by Presses de Sciences-Po

More articles in Revue Économique from Programme National Persée
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Equipe PERSEE ().