SHOE Archives

Societies for the History of Economics

SHOE@YORKU.CA

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Robin Neill <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Societies for the History of Economics <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 6 Mar 2009 16:25:58 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (31 lines)
Samuel Bostaph answered my question with:
 >
Try your question this way: A rise in the price of groceries is a
fall in the price of money, so is the rise in the price of groceries
inflation or deflation?
 >


Interesting.  Thank you.  However, a rise in the price of groceries,
does not by definition entail a decline in the rate of interest.
Should we distinguish between the groceries price of money and
the money price of money?

As the money price of groceries rises there is inflation
of grocery prices, so, as the money price of money rises
(as the rate of interest rises and asset prices fall)
there is inflation of the price of money.

The question centers on the inclusion of asset prices (and
by way of necessary entailment the price of money) in the
calculation of the general level of prices.  I am asking,
given the special nature of money in the system,
is there a reason for not including asset prices in the
calculation of the general level of prices?

I am looking for some reason for not including asset
prices in the calculation of the rate of inflation. Or
have we been remiss all along?

Robin Neill.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2