首页> 外文期刊>JPKE:journal of post keynesian economics >A note on 'Rethinking liquidity creation: Banks, shadow banks and the elasticity of finance'
【24h】

A note on 'Rethinking liquidity creation: Banks, shadow banks and the elasticity of finance'

机译:关于“重新思考流动性创造:银行,影子银行和金融弹性”的注释

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

In an article published in vol. 40, issue 3 of the Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, we challenged the post Keynesian view that nonbank financial institutions (NBFIs) are intermediaries between savers and borrowers. We argued that the "intermediary" framework is not an appropriate description of what financial institutions do. Instead, we proposed to broaden the endogenous money theory by incorporating non-bank financial institutions into it using the hierarchy of money. Our article generated a response by Bouguelli in which they argue that the traditional post Keynesian framework, with its clear-cut distinction between banks and NBFIs is better suited for understanding the different roles of these institutions and their "symbiotic relationship." In this rejoinder, we respond to the critique of Bouguelli and clarify our position. We demonstrate that banks and nonbanks are similar in how they issue liabilities to finance positions in assets and settle on a netted basis using the liabilities of another entity higher up in the hierarchy. Moreover, we argue that NBFIs' reliance on banks is better captured by the framework of leveraging rather than that of intermediation.
机译:在第一卷发表的文章中。第40期,《后凯恩斯主义经济学期刊》,我们对凯恩斯主义后的观点提出质疑,即非银行金融机构(NBFI)是储蓄者与借款者之间的中介。我们认为“中介”框架不适用于描述金融机构的行为。相反,我们建议通过使用货币层次结构将非银行金融机构纳入内生货币理论来扩大内生货币理论。我们的文章引起了Bouguelli的回应,他们认为,传统的后凯恩斯主义框架及其在银行和NBFI之间的明显区别,更适合于理解这些机构的不同角色及其“共生关系”。再次加入,我们回应对布格里利的批评,并阐明我们的立场。我们证明,银行和非银行在发行负债以为资产中的头寸提供融资以及使用层次结构中更高层次上的另一个实体的负债以净额结算的方式上相似。此外,我们认为,非金融机构对银行的依赖可以通过杠杆框架而非中介框架更好地体现出来。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号