...conceptual, real-world on money supply changes cannot be used with most textbook multipliers (e.g., see Miskin, 2004, p. 377). The major reason for this is that precise empirical multiplier analysis (e.g., Friedman & Schwartz, 1963), is very complex and cumbersome both in respect to calculations and interpretation. Even though money supply targeting is no longer a policy consideration, the whole process of money creation and variations in monetary growth rates are still of interest from the standpoint of monetary theory.'

The purpose of this paper is to present an innovative money multiplier model that is more "user-friendly". This new multiplier will be compared to the standard Friedman and Schwartz model in respect to derivation, use, and interpretation of results. To illustrate the applications of this new multiplier, it will be used to analyze money supply changes in two periods: the Great Depression (1929-1933), and a recent period of unusually slow monetary growth (1991-1994).

The Friedman and Schwartz Multiplier

Humphrey (1987) credits Friedman and Schwartz (1963), and also Philip Cagan (1965), for expanding the concept of the deposit multiplier into a money multiplier. Such multipliers are derived from a defined ratio of the money supply (M) to the monetary base (R+C, or total reserves plus currency). Friedman and Schwartz (1963, p.791) utilize the following multiplier in their empirical analysis (See Appendix I of this paper for the derivation):

M = H x [D/R (1 + D/C)]/ [D/R + D/C] (1)

The money supply (M) is a function of the three "proximate determinants": the monetary base or high powered money (H), the deposit to reserve ratio (D/R), and the deposit to cash ratio (D/C). Changes in H reflect changes in the liabilities of the central bank, while D/R is heavily influenced by activities of the banking system, and D/C reflects changes in the public's demand for currency.

In order to estimate the impact of these determinants on the money supply over a specified time interval, Friedman and Schwartz transform equation (1) into log form, and then, for each proximal determinate, assume the other two determinates are unchanged in order to identify the ceteris paribus influence of each determinate (1963, p. 995). Since this technique will not account for 100 percent of the variation in M, it is then necessary to calculate a residual term which Friedman and Schwartz label the "interaction" term. This term reflects the combined, but inseparable, influences of the two ratios (D/R, D/C).

This brief explanation of the Friedman and Schwartz multiplier reveals two potential problems. Most importantly, to the extent that the interaction term is significant, the analytical specificity of the multiplier is reduced. Secondly, the log calculations that are necessary are somewhat cumbersome (see Appendix I for more details). The...

NOTE: All illustrations and photos have been removed from this article.



Looking for additional articles?
Search our database of over 3 million articles.

Looking for more in-depth information on this industry?
Search our complete database of Industry & Market reports by text, subject, publication name or publication date.

About Goliath
Whether you're looking for sales prospects, competitive information, company analysis or best practices in managing your organization, Goliath can help you meet your business needs.

Our extensive business information databases empower business professionals with both the breadth and depth of credible, authoritative information they need to support their business goals. Whether it be strategic planning, sales prospecting, company research or defining management best practices - Goliath is your leading source for accurate information.