Economic Theory

, Volume 53, Issue 1, pp 111–138 | Cite as

Imperfect recognizability and coexistence of money and higher-return assets

Research Article

Abstract

Existing solutions to the problem of coexistence of money and higher-return substitutes that rely on imperfect recognizability of the substitutes adopt extreme assumptions: they either have a zero cost of counterfeiting the substitutes or omit plausible refinements that would rule out pooling equilibria. Here coexistence is obtained with a general distribution of positive counterfeiting costs within a signaling-game framework in which the intuitive criterion is invoked. Moreover, if the cost of counterfeiting is small, then any monetary equilibrium that satisfies the intuitive criterion necessarily exhibits coexistence. A continuity assumption on off-equilibrium beliefs is also considered. It is satisfied by equilibria with small use of substitutes, but not by cash-in-advance equilibria.

Keywords

Counterfeiting Cash-in-advance Monetary system Signaling games 

JEL Classification

E40 E42 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Aiyagari S.R.: Gresham’s law in a lemons market for assets. Can J Econ 22(3), 686–697 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alchian A.: Why money?. J Money Credit Banking 9(1), 133–140 (1977)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Banerjee A., Maskin E.: A Walrasian theory of barter and exchange. Q J Econ 111(4), 955–1005 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Battigalli P., Siniscalchi M.: Strong belief and forward induction reasoning. J Econ Theory 106, 356–391 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Billingsley P.: Probability and Measure, 3rd edn. Wiley, New York (1995)Google Scholar
  6. Cho I., Kreps D.: Signaling games and stable equilibria. Q J Econ 102(2), 179–222 (1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Freeman S.: Transactions costs and the optimal quantity of money. J Polit Econ 93(1), 146–157 (1985)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hicks J.: A suggestion for simplifying the theory of money. Econ New Ser 2, 1–19 (1935)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. In, Y., Wright, J.: Signaling Private Choices. http://profile.nus.edu.sg/fass/ecsjkdw/ (2011)
  10. Jevons W.: Money and the Mechanism of Exchange. Appleton, London (1875)Google Scholar
  11. Lester, B., Postlewaite, A., Wright, R.: Information and liquidity. J Money Credit Banking (2010, forthcoming)Google Scholar
  12. Li, Y.-T., Rocheteau, G.: Liquidity Constraints. http://www.grocheteau.com/ (2009)
  13. Lagos R., Wright R.: A unified framework for monetary theory and policy analysis. J Polit Econ 113, 463–484 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Mailath G., Okuno-Fujiwara M., Postlewaite A.: Belief-based refinements in signaling games. J Econ Theory 60, 241–276 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Nosal E., Wallace N.: A model of (the threat of) counterfeiting. J Monet Econ 54, 994–1001 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Podczeck, K., Puzzello, D.: Independent random matching. Econ Theory (2010, forthcoming). doi:10.1007/s00199-010-0584-4
  17. Ramey G.: D1 signaling equilibria with multiple signals and a continuum of types. J Econ Theory 69, 508–531 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Zhu T.: Existence of a monetary steady state in a matching model: divisible money. J Econ Theory 123, 135–160 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Zhu T., Wallace N.: Pairwise trade and coexistence of money and higher-return assets. J Econ Theory 133, 524–535 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Kellogg School of ManagementNorthwestern UniversityEvanstonUSA

Personalised recommendations