| Summary: | This dissertation examines both the macroeconomic and microeconomic implications for self-management of a current school of thought in Yugoslavia. Specifically, it examines the monetary theory of Ivo Perisin, Asim Stranjak, Antun Sokman, Milutin Golijanin and others associated with the Yugoslav Monetary Reform Proposal currently under discussion in Yugoslavia. In this work I discuss the similarities in approach between the nineteenth-century Banking School and the Yugoslav Monetary Reform Proposal. I also examine the similarity in approach between Marxian monetary theory and the Reform Proposal. A major portion of the dissertation is devoted to refuting the claim made by the Yugoslav authors of the Reform that their monetary theory is rooted in Marxian value theory. It is concluded that due to several methodological errors, several of which are shared by the Banking School and examined in full in this dissertation, that these Yugoslav monetary theorists more properly belong in the camp of Tooke and Fullarton than of Marx. At the heart of the Reform Proposal is the real bills doctrine. In addition to examining the macroeconomic consequences of employing the real bills doctrine as a theory of finance in a Western market economy, this dissertation asks whether it may be appropriate as a foundation for monetary policy in the self-managed Yugoslavia. The major finding of this dissertation is that under current institutional arrangements and with current investment and pricing policies pursued in Yugoslavia today, this theory of finance is inappropriate.
|
|---|
