EconPapers    
Economics at your fingertips  
 

An Evaluation of Friedman's Monetary Instability Hypothesis

Joshua Hendrickson

Southern Economic Journal, 2017, vol. 83, issue 3, 744-755

Abstract: In this article, I examine what I call Milton Friedman's Monetary Instability Hypothesis. Drawing on Friedman's work, I argue that there are two main components to this view. The first component is the idea that deviations between the public's demand for money and the supply of money are an important source of economic fluctuations. The second component of this view is that these deviations are primarily caused by fluctuations in the supply of money rather than the demand for money. Each of these components can be tested independently. To do so, I estimate an otherwise standard New Keynesian model, amended to include a money demand function consistent with Friedman's work and a money growth rule, for a period from 1875 to 1963. This structural model allows me to separately identify shocks to the money supply and shocks to money demand. I then use variance decompositions to assess the relative importance of shocks to the supply and demand for money. I find that shocks to the monetary base can account for up to 28% of the fluctuations in output whereas money demand shocks can account for less than 1% of such fluctuations. This provides support for Friedman's view.

Date: 2017
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (3)

Downloads: (external link)
https://doi.org/10.1002/soej.12177

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:wly:soecon:v:83:y:2017:i:3:p:744-755

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Southern Economic Journal from John Wiley & Sons
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Wiley Content Delivery ().

 
Page updated 2025-03-31
Handle: RePEc:wly:soecon:v:83:y:2017:i:3:p:744-755