Thank you for your warm reply, Hari,
 
yes, I agree with you on the point that Flassbeck and Lapavitsas are wrong on
inflation, and no, I can't remember Marx argueing that money supply is the main
driver of inflation (change of market prices during and across industrial
cycles).
 
It remains to be seen whether the current "quantitative easing" of the ECB (EUR
1100 billion for buying bonds up to autumn 2016) will have any effect on the
current deflationary tendencies within the Euro area.

Regarding different causes of inflation I'd like to recommand
Krüger, Stephan (2012): Politische Ökonomie des Geldes. Gold, Währung,
Zentralbankpolitik und Preise [Political Economy of Money. Gold, Currency,
Central Bank Policy, and Prices] - no English translation available yet],
especially part four: Prices - inflation and deflation.
data: http://d-nb.info/1009779990
contents: http://d-nb.info/1009779990/04
abstract and preface:
http://www.vsa-verlag.de/nc/detail/artikel/politische-oekonomie-des-geldes/

I'd like to add some political remarks.

Flassbeck - http://www.flassbeck-economics.de/ - 
and Lapavitsas -
http://www.researchonmoneyandfinance.org/index.php/component/finder/search?q=costas+lapavitsas
-

used their argument "unit labour costs, not the money supply, are the main
determinant of inflation for the union as a whole, as well as
for its national entities" as a reason for their conclusion, that the break-up
of the Euro area (and hence the institutions of the European Union to some
extent) is their preferred alternative for overcoming the economic, social, and
political crises in Europe.

"Indeed, as the economic costs of membership are increasing and the benefits
shrinking, several countries have to consider the exit option." [p. 37] "Many
people still dream of a politically fully unified Europe that would help
overcome the difficulties currently faced by EMU. In our view that dream should
not guide politics. Given the obvious inability of the European institutions to
appropriately manage the currency union, realistic observers have to admit that
currency union was too ambitious a goal. The attempt to advance more rapidly on
the way towards political union by means of a currency union has not worked out.
Now, paradoxically, Europe has to retreat if it is to progress again." [p. 38]

As far as I know comrade Lapavitsas is still pleading that Greece should leave
the Euro area - in contrary to the position of Milios, Varoufakis, et al.

F&L's paper got a certain political importance when Oskar Lafontaine and Sahra
Wagenknecht picked up F&L's argument in advance of the German Left Party's
Congress in 2013, due to adopt the manifesto for the 2014 European elections. At
the end both Lafontaine and Wagenknecht - and the supporting current
"anticapitalist platform" - moved back and did not submit their motion to the
delegates. At the end delegates adopted a distinct pro-European manifesto. 

A summary of what was at stake theoretically and politically can be read here:
http://www.sozialismus.de/fileadmin/users/sozialismus/pdf/Sozialismus_Heft_06_2013_Bischoff_Radke_Europa.pdf

The outcome of the Congress was a precondition for the rather good election
result of the German Left Party (DIE LINKE), and just as important, a clear
demarcation line against the emerging right populist party AfD ("Alternative for
Germany"). Both Syriza and the Left Party are part of the current faction of
left and green parties in the European Parliament: http://www.guengl.eu/  It
remains to be seen to what extent this Parliamentary Group can support the new
Greek government and its goal to renegotiate the "standby arrangements".

Sometimes even references involve political implications of some significance.

Hinrich


hari kumar wrote:
>
> Thank you very much for these references. Very useful mine of 'facts'
> rather than opinions.
>
> Admittedly, I do have to spend a lot more time than I have done so far
> on them. However in one document from the Rosa Luxemburg Institute, it
> is stated by Flassbeck & Lapavitsas (F & L):
>
> "With open eyes and without ideologi- cal barriers the ECB would have
> found early on that unit labour costs, not the money supply, are the
> main de- terminant of inflation for the union as a whole, as well as
> for its national entities.
> >From p.16 : In:
> Flassbeck, Heiner; Lapavitsas, Costas (2013): The Systemic Crisis of the Euro
> -
> True Causes and Effective Therapies.
> http://www.rosalux.de/news/39476/flassbecklapavitsas-studie-the-systemic-crisis-of-the-euro-true-causes-and-effective-therapie.html
>
> My question to you and all on the list may be viewed as naive - nonetheless:
> I had always understood that it was indeed the money supply driving
> inflation. Indeed as I recall it in prior writings that Marx had also
> believed that.
> What am I missing? Is the view expressed by F & L - in fact correct?
>
> Thanks in advance for your views.
> Hari Kumar
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l

Reply via email to