{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.016819571865443424, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 6.043010752688172, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Endogenous Money: A Note on Some Post-Keynesian Controversies

Keynes's theory of liquidity preference sought to illuminate the essential properties of money under the conditions of uncertainty that often lead to involuntary unemployment. Subsequent Post-Keynesian literature built upon this concept to show that a deregulated financial system could induce phases of endemic financial instability and crises. Keynes's finance motive provides an important starting point in Post-Keynesian theories of endogenous money. This article examines the controversies between two major contending analytical approaches, the Horizontalist and Structuralist schools.