Money continues to present theoretical and conceptual difficulties for mainstream neoclassical micro- and macroeconomics. In most treatments it is “neutral,” as either: a symbolic “veil” over an underlying “real” economy; a special “commodity” with utility for the rational maximizing individual; or as part of a model of aggregate economic “variables.” The methodological assumptions of these approaches cannot account for the fundamental characteristics of money as a measure of value and acceptable means of payment. Many of these diffculties are resolved if money is conceptualized as a structure of social relations.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Geoffrey Ingham (1996) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: