Modelling sovereign money
A number of modellings – based on different approaches such as DSGE, systems dynamics and stock-flow-analysis – came up with basically convergent findings. Sovereign money would not only be safe, but also bring about significantly more financial and economic stability, non-volatile normal interest rates and low inflation. Financial assets and debt would not grow in disproportion to GDP. Not least, a higher level of output and employment would be achieved:
Lainà, Patrizio. 2018. Full-Reserve Banking. Separating Money Creation from Bank Lending, Academic Diss., University of Helsinki.
Lainà, Patrizio. 2015. Money Creation under Full-Reserve Banking: A Stock-Flow Consistent Model, Levy Economics Institute Working Papers, No. 851, Oct 2015.
Andresen, Trond. 2018. On the Dynamics of Money Circulation, Money Creation and Debt. A Control Systems Approach, Academic Diss, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim.
Yamaguchi, Kaoru 2014: Money and Macroeconomic Dynamics. An Accounting System Dynamics Approach, Awaji Island: Muratopia Institute/Japan Futures Research Center.
Yamaguchi, Kaoru and Yamaguchi, Yokei 2016: The Heads and Tails of Money Creation and its System Design Failures, shows the dynamics of the present bankmoney regime and those of an alternative public money system.
• From Debt Money to Public Money. Modeling the Transition Process, von Kaoru Yamaguchi, Professor of Economics and System Dynamics, Kyoto, Japan.
Also by Yamaguchi > Money and Macroeconomic Dynamics, 2015
Benes, Jaromir / Kumhof, Michael 2012: The Chicago Plan Revisited, IMF Working Paper WP/12/202. A revised draft dates from February 12, 2013.