Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

De patinkin-puzzle

  • Published:
De Economist Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

This essay contains a review of the so-called Patinkin controversy which arose about the possible inconsistency of the classical dichotomy model. It can be established that this model is logically consistent and economically reasonable if and only if one is prepared to assume continually existing individual monetary equilibria. A real dichotomization of the economy into two independent sectors, which determine relative prices and the general price level, is therefore out of the question.

As opposed to Patinkin and Modigliani the same can be said for a model with no distribution effects and only inside money.

Although the real balance effect is not always operative as an adjustment mechanism, it hardly can be suspended in a static long-run model with that limited quantity of uncertainty which is needed for a minimal analysis of an economy with money as a medium of exchange.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Lijst van geciteerde literatuur

  1. A Symposium on Monetary Theory,Review o f Economic Studies XXVIII (1960), pp. 29–56.

  2. Ackley, G.,Macroeconomic Theory, New York 1961.

  3. Archibald, G. C. en R. G. Lipsey, Monetary and Value Theory: A Critique of Lange and Patinkin,Review of Economic Studies XXVI (1958/59), pp. 1–22.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Baumol, W. J., Stocks, Flows and Monetary Theory,Quarterly Journal of Economics LXXVI (1962), pp. 46–56.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Becker, G. S. en W. J. Baumol, The Classical Monetary Theory: The Outcome of the Discussion, in J. J. Spengler en W. R. Allen (red.)Essays in Economic Thought. Aristotle to Marshall, Chicago 1960, pp. 753–771.

  6. Bieri, H. G., Der Streit um die ‘klassischen Dichotomie’. Ein Bericht über die Patinkin-Kontroverse,Schweizerische Zeitschrift für Volks-wirtschaft und Statistik IC (1963), pp. 172–181.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Brunner, K., Inconsistency and Indeterminacy in Classical Economics, Econometrica XIX (1951), pp. 152–173.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Bushaw, D. W. and R. W. Clower,Introduction to Mathematical Economics, Homewood 1957.

  9. Claassen, E. M.,Monnaie, Revenu National et Prix, Parijs 1967.

  10. Claassen, E. M., Stock-Flow Decisions and Full Equilibrium,Kyklos XXII (1969), pp. 493–505.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Clower, R. W., Classical Monetary Theory Revisited, Economica XXX (1963), pp. 165–170.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Encarnación, J., Consistency between Say's Identity and the Cambridge Equation,Economic Journal LXVIII (1958), pp. 827–830.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Fleming, M., The Timing of Payments and the Demand for Money,Economica XXXI (1964), pp. 132–157.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Frevert, P., On the Stability of Full Employment Equilibrium,Review of Economic Studies XXXVII (1970), pp. 239–252.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Gupta, S. B., The Invalidity of the' Dichotomy in the Pure InsideMoney Model,Journal of Political Economy LXXVII (1969), pp. 118–121.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Hahn, F. H., The General Equilibrium Theory of Money: A Comment,Review of Economic Studies XIX, (1951/52), pp. 179–185.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Hahn, F. H., The Rate of Interest and General Equilibrium Analysis,Economic Journal LXV (1955), pp. 52–66.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Hansen, B., A Study in the Theory of Inflation, London 1951.

  19. Heertje, A., de+Die theoretische und empirische Bedeutung der Patinkin-. Kontroverse,Kyklos XVII (1964), pp. 31–39.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Helmstädter, E., Patinkin-Kontroverse Beitrag Nr. X,Kyklos XXII (1969), pp. 506–518.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Hickman, W. B., The Determinacy of Absolute Prices in Classical Economic Theory,Econometrica XVIII (1950), pp. 9–20.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Johnson, H. G., Monetary Theory and Policy,American Economic Review LII (1962), pp. 335–379.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Klundert, Th. van de, Enkele opmerkingen naar aanleiding van de theorie van Patinkin,De Economist CXV (1967), pp. 60–71.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Kuenne, R. E., Walras, Leontief and the Interdependence of Economic Activities,Quarterly Journal of Economics LXVIII (1954), pp. 323–354, en Reply,Quarterly Journal o f Economics LXIX (1955), pp. 631–636.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Kurimura, Y., On the Dichotomy in the Theory of Price,Metroeconomica III (1951), pp. 117–134.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Lange, O., Say's Law: A Restatement and Criticism, in O. Lange, F. McIntyre en T. O. Yntema (red.) :Mathematical Economics and Econometrics, Chicago 1942, pp. 49–68.

  27. Lange, O:,Price Flexibility and Employment, Bloomington 1945.

  28. Leoutief, W., The Consistency of the Classical Theory of Money and Prices,Econometrica XVIII (1950), pp. 21–24.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Lloyd, C. L., The Equivalence of the Liquidity Preference and Loanable Funds Theories and the New Stock-Flow Analysis,Review of Economic Studies XXVII (1960), pp. 206–209.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Lloyd, C. L., Classical Monetary Theory and the Velocity of Circulation,The Canadian Journal of Economics III (1970), pp. 87–94.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Lloyd, C. L., Two Classical Monetary Models, in J. N. Wolfe (red.)Value, Capital and Growth: Papers in Honour of J. R. Hicks, Edinburgh 1968, pp. 305–317.

  32. Marschak, J., The Rationale of the Demand for Money and of Money Illusion,Metroeconomica II (1950), pp. 71–100.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Mauer, L. J., The Patinkin-Controversy-A Review,Kyklos XIX (1966), pp. 299–315.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Mishan, E. J., Say's Law and Walras' Law Once More,Quarterly Journal of Economics LXXVII (1963), pp. 617–625.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Missorten, W., De betekenis van de liquiditeitsvoorkeurtheorie en de monetaire leenfoudstheorie voor het totstandkomen van de intereststand,Maandschrift Economce XXXI (1966/67), pp. 283–291.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Modigliani, F., The Monetary Mechanism and Its Interaction with Real Phenomena,Review of Economics and Statistics XLV (1963), pp. 79–102.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Musgrave, R. A.,The Theory of Public Finance, New York 1959.

  38. Niehaus, J., The Neoclassical Dichotomy as a Controlled Experiment,Journal of Political Economy LXXVII (1969), pp. 504–511.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Orbis Economcus, Tien jaar Don Patinkin,Money, Interest and Prices, X (1966/67), pp. 1–60.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Patinkin, D., Money,Interest and Prices, Evanston 1956 en New York 1965.

  41. Patinkin, D., Relative Prices, Say's Law and the Demand for Money,Econometrica XVI (1948), pp. 135–154.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Patinkin, D., The Indeterminacy of Absolute Prices in Classical Economic Theory,Econometrica XVII (1949), pp. 1–27.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Patinkin, D., The Invalidity of Classical Monetary Theory,Econometrica XIX (1951), pp. 134–151.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Patinkin, D., A Reconsideration of the General Theory of Money,Review of Economic Studies XVIII (1950/51), pp. 42–61.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Patinkin, D., Further Considerations of the General Equilibrium Theory of Money,Review of Economic Studies XIX (1951/52), pp. 186–195.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Patinkin, D., Dichotomies of the Pricing Process in Economic Theory,Economica XXI (1954), pp. 113–128.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Patinkin, D., Liquidity Preference and Loanable Funds: Stock and Flow Analysis,Economica XXV (1958), pp. 300–318.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Patinkin, D., Financial Intermediaries and the Logical Structure of Monetary Theory,American Economic Review LI (1961), pp. 95–116.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Pen, J., Patinkins theorie na tien jaar,De Economist CXIV (1966), pp. 273–281.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Rosenstein-Rodan, P. N., The Coordination of the General Theories of Money and Price,Economica III (1936), pp. 257–280.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Schneider, E., Patinkin über Geld und Gtiterpreise, inFestkrift til Frederik Zeuthen, Kopenhagen 1958, pp. 315–331.

  52. Shackle, G. L. S., Recent Theories Concerning the Role and Nature of Interest,Economic Journal LXXI (1961), pp. 209–254; herdrukt in Surveys ofEconomic Theory (deel 1), Louden, New York 1956, pp, 108–153.

    Google Scholar 

  53. Takata, Y., Critical Notes on the Theory of the Rate of Interest,Osaka Economic Papers II (1954), pp. 1–17.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Trezza, B., The Real Balance Effect and Classical Monetary Theory,Metroeconomica XX (1968), pp. 145–148.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Tsiang, S. C., Walras' Law, Say's Law and Liquidity Preference in General Equilibrium Analysis,International Economic Review VII (1966), pp. 329–346.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Valavanis, St., A Denial of Patinkin's Contradiction,Kyklos VIII (1955), pp. 351–368.

    Google Scholar 

  57. Vermaat, A. J.,De controverse tussen de ‘Loanable Funds’ theorie en de ‘Liquidity Preference’ theorie, Amsterdam 1966.

  58. Vermaat, A. J., De wet van Walras,De Economist CXVI (1968), pp. 441–473 en 587–618.

    Google Scholar 

  59. Willms, M., Das Gleichgewichtsproblem in der klassischen und neoklassischen Geldtheorie,Jahrbuch für Sozialwissenschaft XVII (1966), pp. 168–197.

    Google Scholar 

  60. Witte., J. G., Walras' Law and the Patinkin Paradox: A Qualitative Calculus for Macroeconomics,Journal of Political Economy LXXIV (1966), pp. 72–76.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. A. J. Vermaat
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Vermaat, A.J. De patinkin-puzzle. De Economist 119, 43–96 (1971). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01705894

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01705894

Keywords

Search

Navigation