(名刺を配った) 親が、 (子供たちが集めた) 名刺について、 金利を付けると

(名刺を配った) 親が、 (子供たちが集めた) 名刺について、 金利を付けると

申し出る。 子供たちは取引のために一定の名刺は手元に持ちたいと願うだろう

が、それ以上に保有している名刺については親に預ける(+金利を稼ぐ)とい

う選択をするだろう。 このとき、 親は子供から名刺を借りなおしている

(borrow back) ということもできる。 政府が名刺を借りる理由は、名刺の所有

者に対して金利を与えることで、最低金利を支えることだ。 親は、 貯蓄を推奨

するために、より高い金利を支払うと決定するかもしれない。 逆に、低い金利

は貯蓄を促さないだろう。いずれにせよ、 親に貸し出される名刺の数は、親が

支出したけれどもまだ納税されていない名刺の数と等しくなる。 親は支出を賄

うために借りているわけではなく、 貯蓄分の名刺に金利を払うことは、(名刺の

数で測ることができる) 子供の資産を減らす行為ではない。米国では、FOMC

の12のメンバーが翌日物の短期金利を決定している。 議会が支出する、徴税す

る、「借りる(まだ課税されていない支出分に対して利子を払う)」ことを決め

ることができる一方で、 FOMCは (金利を設定することで) 通貨の価値を決め

ることができるのだ。

Soft Currency Economics - Warren Mosler -

Fiat Money

Historically, there have been three categories of money: commodity, credit, and fiat. Commodity money consists of some durable material of intrinsic value, typically gold or silver coin, which has some value other than as a medium of exchange. Gold and silver have industrial uses as well as an esthetic value as jewelry. Credit money refers to the liability of some individual or firm, usually a checkable bank deposit.

Fiat money is a tax credit not backed by any tangible asset.

In 1971 the Nixon administration abandoned the gold standard and adopted a fiat monetary system, substantially altering what looked like the same currency. Under a fiat monetary system, money is an accepted medium of exchange only because the government requires it for tax payments. Government fiat money necessarily means that federal spending need not be based on revenue. The federal government has no more money at its disposal when the federal budget is in surplus, than when the budget is in deficit. Total federal expense is whatever the federal government chooses it to be. There is no inherent financial limit. The amount of federal spending, taxing and borrowing influence inflation, interest rates, capital formation, and other real economic phenomena, but the amount of money available to the federal government is independent of tax revenues and independent of federal debt. Consequently, the concept of a federal trust fund under a fiat monetary system is an anachronism. The government is no more able to spend money when there is a trust fund than when no such fund exists. The only financial constraints, under a fiat monetary system, are self-imposed.

　The concept of fiat money can be illuminated by a simple model: Assume a world of a parent and several children. One day the parent announces that the children may earn business cards by completing various household chores. At this point the children won't care a bit about accumulating their parent's business cards because the cards are virtually worthless. But when the parent also announces that any child who wants to eat and live in the house must pay the parent, say, 200 business cards each month, the cards are instantly given value and chores begin to get done. Value has been given to the business cards by requiring them to be used to fulfill a tax obligation. Taxes function to create the demand for federal expenditures of fiat money, not to raise revenue per se. In fact, a tax will create a demand for at LEAST that amount of federal spending. A balanced budget is, from inception, the MINIMUM that can be spent, without a continuous deflation. The children will likely desire to earn a few more cards than they need for the immediate tax bill, so the parent can expect to run a deficit as a matter of course.

　To illustrate the nature of federal debt under a fiat monetary system, the model of family currency can be taken a step further. Suppose the parent offers to pay overnight interest on the outstanding business cards (payable in more business cards). The children might want to hold on to some cards to use among themselves for convenience. Extra cards not needed overnight for inter-sibling transactions would probably be deposited with the parent. That is, the parent would have borrowed back some of the business cards from the children. The business card deposits are the national debt that the parent owes.

　The reason for the borrowing is to support a minimum overnight lending rate by giving the holders of the business cards a place to earn interest. The parent might decide to pay (support) a high rate of interest to encourage saving. Conversely, a low rate may discourage saving. In any case, the amount of cards lent to the parent each night will generally equal the number of cards the parent has spent, but not taxed - the parent's deficit. Notice that the parent is not borrowing to fund expenditures, and that offering to pay interest (funding the deficit) does not reduce the wealth (measured by the number of cards) of each child.

　In the U. S., the 12 members of the Federal Open Market Committee decide on the overnight interest rate. That, along with what Congress decides to spend, tax, and borrow (that is, pay interest on the untaxed spending), determines the value of the money and, in general, regulates the economy.

　Federal borrowing and taxation were once part of the process of managing the Treasury's gold reserves. Unfortunately, discussions about monetary economics and the U. S. banking system still rely on many of the relationships observed and understood during the time when the U. S. monetary regime operated under a gold standard, a system in which arguably the government was required to tax or borrow sufficient revenue to fund government spending. Some of the old models are still useful in accurately explaining the mechanics of the banking system. Others have outlived their usefulness and have led to misleading constructs. Two such vestiges of the gold standard are the role of bank reserves (including the money multiplier) and the concept of monetization. An examination of the workings of the market for bank reserves reveals the essential concepts. (Additional monetary history and a more detailed explanation are provided in the appendix).

　The Fed defines the method that banks are required to use in computing deposits and reserve requirements. The period which a depository institution's average daily reserves must meet or exceed its specified required reserves is called the reserve maintenance period. The period in which the deposits on which reserves are based are measured is the reserve computation period. The reserve accounting method was amended in 1968 and again in 1984 but neither change altered the Fed's role in the market for reserves.

　Before 1968 banks were required to meet reserve requirements contemporaneously: reserves for a week had to equal the required percentage for that week. Banks estimated what their average deposits would be for the week and applied the appropriate required reserve ratio to determine their reserve requirement. The reserve requirement was an obligation each bank was legally required to meet. Bank reserves and deposits, of course, continually change as funds are deposited and withdrawn which confounded the bank manager's task of managing reserve balances. Because neither the average deposits for a week nor the average amount of required reserves could be known with any degree of certainty until after the close of the last day it was "like trying to hit a moving target with a shaky rifle." Therefore, in September 1968, lagged reserve accounting (LRA) replaced contemporaneous reserve accounting (CRA). Under LRA the reserve maintenance period was seven days ending each Wednesday (see Figure 1). Required reserves for a maintenance period were based on the average daily reservable deposits in the reserve computation period ending on a Wednesday two weeks earlier. The total amount of required reserves for each bank and for the banking system as a whole was known in advance. Actual reserves could vary, but at least the target was stable.