{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02822240943555181, 'fraction_numerical': 0.004212299915754001, 'mean_word_length': 5.089743589743589, '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}}
Turnover Statistics and Federal Government Balances in Money Supply Targets

In the middle of the last decade, Congress mandated that the Federal Reserve announce its goals for monetary aggregates. This increased emphasis on aggregates combined with the more recent financial innovations and deregulation has led to considerable discussion about the "best" monetary aggregate. Today, arguments abound for every conceivable money stock or credit aggregate, ranging from Davidson and Hafer's support of M I [5] to Friedman's support of total net credit [7]. Given such a range of disagreement, one can empathize with the frustration that prompted a Congressional committee to ask, "Can we identify a particular conception of 'money' (Ml, M2 or whatever) with sufficient precision to allow its use as a proxy for economic performance?"' A promising approach to the resolution of this problem has been the substitution of weighted-sum monetary aggregates for the conventional simple-sum aggregates. In a simple-sum aggregate, each component is assigned a weight of one. For instance, one dollar of currency carries the same weight as one dollar of passbook savings. But in the Divisia aggregate approach [2], each component is assigned a weight which is proportional to the opportunity cost of holding that financial asset. Consequently, a dollar of currency, which earns no interest, carries greater weight than a dollar of passbook savings. The higher cost of holding currency directly reflects the value of its services as a medium of exchange, the basic function of money. A study by Spindt [19] uses a second weighting system based on turnover statistics. The basic assumption is that the more often a financial asset changes hands, the greater its services as a medium of exchange. Using a St. Louis type reduced-form model, Spindt discovered that his turnover-weighted aggregate bore a closer relationship to GNP than did the Federal Reserve's MI. In his detailed analysis, Spindt estimates some time series that are not directly measured, for example, the turnover of currency. As a result, he does not advocate the substitution of his aggregate index for the conventional aggregates. Nevertheless, he does point out that the integration of the turnover statistics "may be helpful in explaining certain anomalies in the behavior of the conventional aggregates [19, 24]."