Suchergebnisse

Abstract
The introduction of a digital currency is part of the continuous evolution of the financial system, which has always been driven by technological innovations. For the first time in many years, Western central banks are exposed to potential currency competition. But a digital euro also has the potential to affect the two-tier structure of the grown financial system. The ECB should not engage in an interest rate competition with commercial banks and the digital currency should remain non-interest-bearing. Instead of imposing holding limits, notice periods could also be used to reduce the risk of bank runs. The ECB should limit itself and implement a hybrid digital central bank currency.

Abstract
The inflation of 1923 was not a new experience; the feeling of uncertain monetary conditions had been deeply rooted in Germany since the early modern period. If there is a German trauma of inflation, it goes back to the Kipper and Wipper period at the beginning of the 30 Years War. Memories of the horrors of inflation were handed down into the 20th century, e.g., in the 18th, century by J. H. G. Justi and especially influential in the 19th century by Gustav Freytag. Only in the Federal Republic of Germany did a strong focus on the year 1923 set in. Based on this traditional historical experience, contemporaries explained inflation in 1923 by deviations from the metal standard and inflation was morally wrong. Its cause was seen in the lack of adherence to civic virtues. This normative level is closely linked to the economic discussion of inflation.

Jeder, der sich mit Geld und Banken im Deutschen Reich in der ersten Hälfte des 20. Jahrhunderts beschäftigt, kennt den Namen Alfred Lansburgh. Die Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung nannte ihn "in Sachen des Geldes vielleicht einen der klügsten Menschen, die in Deutschland je gelebt und gearbeitet haben." Seine bekannteste Schrift "Vom Gelde" erfährt bis heute immer wieder Neuauflagen. Er hinterließ ein umfangreiches Werk, das ihn als langjährigen Beobachter, Analytiker und Kommentator aller Entwicklungen von Geld und Banken im späten Kaiserreich und in der Weimarer Republik ausweist. Allerdings ist wenig über seine Person und über seine theoretischen und politischen Ansichten bekannt. Die vorliegende Arbeit rekonstruiert die Biographie Alfred Lansburghs. Lansburgh war sein Leben lang ein überzeugter liberaler Publizist. Nach einer nicht besonders erfolgreichen Karriere im Bankwesen wurde er zunächst Wirtschaftsjournalist und dann Herausgeber einer der wichtigsten Wirtschaftszeitschriften seiner Zeit. Früher als kaum ein anderer hat er die während des Ersten Weltkriegs einsetzende Zerrüttung der Währung erkannt und dagegen angeschrieben. Aufgrund seiner jüdischen Abstammung wurde er ein Opfer des Nationalsozialismus, dessen Unterdrückung ihn in den Selbstmord trieb. Der Vorgang der "Arisierung" seines Verlages zeigt aber auch die Ambivalenz, in der sich die Akteure der damaligen Zeit befanden. ; Everyone who deals with money and banking in Germany in the first half of the 20th century knows Alfred Lansburgh. The Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung called him "in matters of money perhaps one of the cleverest people who have ever lived and worked in Germany." His best-known writing, "Vom Gelde" (On Money), continues to be reprinted to this day. He left behind an extensive body of work in which he is identifiable as a long-time observer, analyst, and commentator on all developments in money and banking in the late Kaiserreich and the Weimar Republic. However, little is known about him as a person or about his theoretical and political views. This paper reconstructs the biography of Alfred Lansburgh. He was a convinced liberal publicist throughout his life. After a not particularly successful career in banking, he became an economic journalist and then editor of one of the most important economic journals of his time. Earlier and more intensively than almost anyone else, he recognized the collapse of the currency that began during World War 1 and wrote against it. Due to his Jewish origin, he became a victim of National Socialism, the suppression of which drove him to suicide. The process of the "Aryanization" of his publishing house also shows the ambivalence in which the actors of the time found themselves.

Abstract
In the history of economic thought, monetary theories in the Germanspeaking world of the early modern era are considered backward compared to the approaches in other European countries. This backwardness can be illustrated by two authors from the mid-18th century who were not only contemporaries but also successively in the service of Frederick II ("the Great") of Prussia. The first is Johann Philipp Graumann, one of the 'projectors' of the 18th century. As master of the mints in Prussia, he developed a coin project, where he tried to implement a new monetary standard to promote trade, generate seigniorage income and implement the Prussian coins as a kind of a reserve currency. In his writings, he developed a typical mercantilistic monetary theory with a clear understanding of the mechanism in the balance of payments. But even when he tried to include credit instruments, he did not take banks or broader financial markets into account. The second thinker is Johann Heinrich Gottlob Justi, who took the opposite position concerning the coin project as well as in his theory. He defended a strictly metalistic monetary approach where the value of money is only based on the metal's value. While Graumann rejected the English coin system, Justi recommended its laws for countries without their own mines, because the sovereign should not misuse his right of coinage. For him, the monetary system had tobe reliable and stable to serve trade and economic development.

The monetary ideas of Georg Friedrich Knapp have recently resurfaced in the context of the Modern Monetary Theory whose representatives see themselves in his tradition. The historical debate on Knapp's "State Theory of Money," which divided opinion when it was first published in 1905 as well as during the period of German inflation that peaked in 1923, is therefore of particular interest. Knapp describes money largely from a legal perspective, labelling it a "creature of the legal order". The principle "Mark = Mark" reflects his nominalistic approach. However, he opposed monetary state financing, and favoured balanced governmental budgets. One of his students, Karl Helfferich, was the most influential monetary theorist in the German Reich during the first decades of the 20th century. In defining Knapp's view as an ultimate ideal that might be realised at some point, and his own metallist approach as a practical necessity, he tries to reconcile his teacher's nominalistic theory on the one hand with his own gold currency-principles on the other.The monetary theory of the Marxist Rudolf Hilferding was eclectic, but he moved closer to a nominalistic approach after studying Knapp's theory. During inflation, Helfferich, a representative of the Balance of Payments Theory, and Hilferding, more of the Quantity Theory of Money, also held opposing views in the public debate on the monetary reforms required. The relationship between the three authors was highly complex. While Helfferich and Knapp were personally close, they were far apart in their theories although Helfferich tried to conceal this fact. Hilferding and Helfferich, meanwhile, held similar views on some practical points, such as the necessity of a gold-based currency, but clashed vehemently on a personal level. ; English Translation of "Karl Helfferich und Rudolf Hilferding über Georg Friedrich Knapps 'Staatliche Theorie des Geldes': Geldtheorien zur Zeit der Hyperinflation von 1923", IBF Paper Series 04-19, Frankfurt, 2020, http://hdl.handle.net/10419/215928.

The monetary ideas of Georg Friedrich Knapp have recently resurfaced in the context of the Modern Monetary Theory whose representatives see themselves in his tradition. The historical debate on Knapp's "State Theory of Money," which divided opinion when it was first published in 1905 as well as during the period of German inflation that peaked in 1923, is therefore of particular interest. Knapp describes money largely from a legal perspective, labelling it a "creature of the legal order". The principle "Mark = Mark" reflects his nominalistic approach. However, he opposed monetary state financing, and favoured balanced governmental budgets. One of his students, Karl Helfferich, was the most influential monetary theorist in the German Reich during the first decades of the 20th century. In defining Knapp's view as an ultimate ideal that might be realised at some point, and his own metallist approach as a practical necessity, he tries to reconcile his teacher's nominalistic theory on the one hand with his own gold currency-principles on the other.The monetary theory of the Marxist Rudolf Hilferding was eclectic, but he moved closer to a nominalistic approach after studying Knapp's theory. During inflation, Helfferich, a representative of the Balance of Payments Theory, and Hilferding, more of the Quantity Theory of Money, also held opposing views in the public debate on the monetary reforms required. The relationship between the three authors was highly complex. While Helfferich and Knapp were personally close, they were far apart in their theories although Helfferich tried to conceal this fact. Hilferding and Helfferich, meanwhile, held similar views on some practical points, such as the necessity of a gold-based currency, but clashed vehemently on a personal level. (The English version of this paper is available at: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/216102)

In the history of economic thought, monetary theories in the German-speaking world of the early modern era are considered backward compared to the approaches in other European countries. This backwardness can be shown by two authors from the middle of the 18th century, who were not only contemporaries but also successively in the service of Frederick II ("the Great") of Prussia. The first is Johann Philipp Graumann, one of the 'projectors' of the 18th century. As master of the mints in Prussia, he developed a coin project, where he tried to implement a new monetary standard to promote trade, generate seigniorage income and implement the Prussian coins as a kind of a reserve currency. In his writings, he developed a typical mercantilistic monetary theory with a clear understanding of the mechanism in the balance of payments. But even when he tried to include credit instruments, he did not take banks or broader financial markets into account. The second thinker is Johann Heinrich Gottlob Justi, who took the opposite position concerning the coin project as well as in his theory. He defended a strictly metalistic monetary approach where the value of money should only be based on the metal's value. While Graumann rejected the English coin system, Justi recommended its laws for countries without their own mines, because the sovereign should not misuse his right of coinage. For him, the monetary system had to be reliable and stable to serve trade and economic development.