一時期／支部 15
THE PSYCHOLOGICAL AND BUSINESS INCENTIVES TO LIQUIDITY
I
We must now develop in more 詳細（に述べる） the 分析 of the 動機s
to liquidity-preference which were introduced in a 予選
way in 一時期／支部 13. The 支配する is 大幅に the same as that
which has been いつかs discussed under the 長，率いるing of the
需要・要求する for money. It is also closely connected with what is
called the income-velocity of money;ｾfor
the income-velocity of money 単に 対策 what 割合 of
their incomes the public chooses to 持つ／拘留する in cash, so that an
増加するd income-velocity of money may be a symptom of a
減少（する）d liquidity-preference. It is not the same thing,
however, since it is in 尊敬（する）・点 of his 在庫／株 of 蓄積するd
貯金, rather than of his income, that the individual can
演習 his choice between liquidity and illiquidity. And,
anyhow, the 称する，呼ぶ／期間／用語 'income-velocity of money' carries with it the
誤って導くing suggestion of a presumption in favour of the 需要・要求する
for money as a whole 存在 比例する, or having some
determinate relation, to income, 反して this presumption should
適用する, as we shall see, only to a 部分 of the public's
cash holdings; with the result that it overlooks the part played
by the 率 of 利益／興味.
In my Treatise on Money I 熟考する／考慮するd the total 需要・要求する for
money under the headings of income-deposits, 商売／仕事-deposits, and 貯金-deposits, and I need not repeat
here the 分析 which I gave in 一時期／支部 3 of that 調書をとる／予約する. Money
held for each of the three 目的s forms, にもかかわらず, a 選び出す／独身
pool, which the 支えるもの／所有者 is under no necessity to segregate into
three water-tight compartments; for they need not be はっきりと
divided even in his own mind, and the same sum can be held
まず第一に／本来 for one 目的 and secondarily for another. Thus we
canｾ平等に 井戸／弁護士席, and, perhaps,
betterｾconsider the individual's
aggregate 需要・要求する for money in given circumstances as a 選び出す／独身
決定／判定勝ち（する）, though the 合成物 result of a number of different
動機s.
In analysing the 動機s, however, it is still convenient to
分類する them under 確かな headings, the first of which 概して
corresponds to the former 分類 of income-deposits and
商売／仕事-deposits, and the two latter to that of
貯金-deposits. These I have 簡潔に introduced in 一時期／支部 13
under the headings of the 処理／取引s-動機, which can be
その上の 分類するd as the income-動機 and the 商売／仕事-動機,
the 予防の-動機 and the 思索的な-動機.
(i) The Income-動機. One 推論する／理由 for
持つ／拘留するing cash is to 橋（渡しをする） the interval between the 領収書 of
income and its disbursement. The strength of this 動機 in
inducing a 決定／判定勝ち（する） to 持つ／拘留する a given aggregate of cash will
主として depend on the 量 of income and the normal length of
the interval between its 領収書 and its disbursement. It is in
this 関係 that the 概念 of the income-velocity of money
is 厳密に appropriate.
(ii) The 商売／仕事-動機. 類似して, cash is
held to 橋（渡しをする） the interval between the time of incurring
商売／仕事 costs and that of the 領収書 of the sale-proceeds; cash
held by 売買業者s to 橋（渡しをする） the interval between 購入（する） and
realisation 存在 含むd under this 長，率いるing. The strength of
this 需要・要求する will 主として depend on the value of 現在の 生産（高）
(and hence on 現在の income), and on the number of 手渡すs through which
生産（高） passes.
(iii) The 予防の-動機. To 供給する
for contingencies 要求するing sudden 支出 and for unforeseen
適切な時期s of advantageous 購入（する）s, and also to 持つ／拘留する an
資産 of which the value is 直す／買収する，八百長をするd ーに関して／ーの点でs of money to 会合，会う a
その後の 義務／負債 直す／買収する，八百長をするd ーに関して／ーの点でs of money, are その上の 動機s
for 持つ／拘留するing cash.
The strength of all these three types of 動機 will partly
depend on the cheapness and the reliability of methods of
得るing cash, when it is 要求するd, by some form of 一時的な
borrowing, in particular by overdraft or its 同等（の）. For
there is no necessity to 持つ／拘留する idle cash to 橋（渡しをする） over intervals
if it can be 得るd without difficulty at the moment when it is
現実に 要求するd. Their strength will also depend on what we may
称する，呼ぶ／期間／用語 the 親族 cost of 持つ／拘留するing cash. If the cash can only be
保持するd by forgoing the 購入（する） of a profitable 資産, this
増加するs the cost and thus 弱めるs the 動機 に向かって 持つ／拘留するing a
given 量 of cash. If deposit 利益／興味 is earned or if bank
告発（する），告訴（する）／料金s are 避けるd by 持つ／拘留するing cash, this 減少（する）s the cost and
強化するs the 動機. It may be, however, that this is likely
to be a minor factor except where large changes in the cost of
持つ／拘留するing cash are in question.
(iv) There remains the 思索的な-動機.
This needs a more 詳細（に述べる）d examination than the others, both
because it is いっそう少なく 井戸／弁護士席 understood and because it is 特に
important in transmitting the 影響s of a change in the
量 of money.
In normal circumstances the 量 of money 要求するd to
満足させる the 処理／取引s-動機 and the 予防の-動機 is
おもに a resultant of the general activity of the 経済的な system
and of the level of money-income. But it is by playing on the
思索的な-動機 that 通貨の 管理／経営 (or, in the absence
of 管理／経営, chance changes in the 量 of money) is
brought to 耐える on the 経済的な system. For the 需要・要求する for money to 満足させる the former 動機s
is 一般に irresponsive to any 影響（力） except the actual
occurrence of a change in the general 経済的な activity and the
level of incomes; 反して experience 示すs that the aggregate
需要・要求する for money to 満足させる the 思索的な-動機 usually shows
a continuous 返答 to 漸進的な changes in the 率 of 利益／興味,
i.e. there is a continuous curve relating changes in the 需要・要求する
for money to 満足させる the 思索的な 動機 and changes in the
率 of 利益／興味 as given by changes in the prices of 社債s and
負債s of さまざまな 成熟s.
Indeed, if this were not so, 'open market 操作／手術s' would be
impracticable. I have said that experience 示すs the
continuous 関係 明言する／公表するd above, because in normal
circumstances the banking system is in fact always able to
購入（する） (or sell) 社債s in 交流 for cash by bidding the
price of 社債s up (or 負かす／撃墜する) in the market by a modest 量; and
the larger the 量 of cash which they 捜し出す to create (or
取り消す) by 購入（する）ing (or selling) 社債s and 負債s, the greater
must be the 落ちる (or rise) in the 率 of 利益／興味. Where,
however, (as in the 部隊d 明言する／公表するs, 1933-1934)
open-market 操作／手術s have been 限られた／立憲的な to the 購入（する） of very
short-時代遅れの 安全s, the 影響 may, of course, be おもに
限定するd to the very short-称する，呼ぶ／期間／用語 率 of 利益／興味 and have but
little reaction on the much more important long-称する，呼ぶ／期間／用語 率s of
利益／興味.
In 取引，協定ing with the 思索的な-動機 it is, however,
important to distinguish between the changes in the 率 of
利益／興味 which are 予定 to changes in the 供給（する） of money
利用できる to 満足させる the 思索的な-動機, without there having
been any change in the liquidity 機能（する）／行事, and those which are
まず第一に／本来 予定 to changes in 期待 影響する／感情ing the liquidity
機能（する）／行事 itself. Open-market 操作／手術s may, indeed, 影響（力）
the 率 of 利益／興味 through both channels; since they may not
only change the 容積／容量 of money, but may also give rise to changed 期待s
関心ing the 未来 政策 of the central bank or of the
政府. Changes in the liquidity 機能（する）／行事 itself; 予定 to a
change in the news which 原因（となる）s 改正 of 期待s, will
often be discontinuous, and will, therefore, give rise to a
corresponding discontinuity of change in the 率 of 利益／興味.
Only, indeed, in so far as the change in the news is 異なって
解釈する／通訳するd by different individuals or 影響する／感情s individual
lnterests 異なって will there be room for any 増加するd
activity of 取引，協定ing in the 社債 market. If the change in the news
影響する／感情s the judgment and the 必要物／必要条件s of everyone in
正確に the same way, the 率 of 利益／興味 (as 示すd by the
prices of 社債s and 負債s) will be adjusted forthwith to the new
状況／情勢 without any market 処理／取引s 存在 necessary.
Thus, in the simplest 事例／患者, where everyone is 類似の and
類似して placed, a change in circumstances or 期待s will
not be 有能な of 原因（となる）ing any 排水（気）量 of money whatever;ｾit will 簡単に change the 率 of 利益／興味
in whatever degree is necessary to 相殺する the 願望（する） of each
individual, felt at the previous 率, to change his 持つ／拘留するing of
cash in 返答 to the new circumstances or 期待s; and,
since everyone will change his ideas as to the 率 which would
induce him to alter his holdings of cash in the same degree, no
処理／取引s will result. To each 始める，決める of circumstances and
期待s there will correspond an appropriate 率 of
利益／興味, and there will never be any question of anyone changing
his usual holdings of cash.
In general, however, a change in circumstances or 期待s
will 原因（となる） some 再編成 in individual holdings of money;ｾsince, in fact, a change will 影響（力）
the ideas of different individuals 異なって by 推論する／理由s partly
of differences in 環境 and the 推論する／理由 for which money is
held and partly of differences in knowledge and 解釈／通訳 of
the new 状況／情勢. Thus the new equilibrium 率 of 利益／興味 will
be associated with a 議席数是正 of money-holdings.
にもかかわらず it is the change in the 率 of 利益／興味, rather
than the 議席数是正 of cash, which deserves our main
attention. The latter is incidental to individual differences,
反して the 必須の 現象 is that which occurs in the
simplest 事例／患者. Moreover, even in the general 事例／患者, the 転換 in
the 率 of 利益／興味 is usually the most 目だつ part of the
reaction to a change in the news. The movement in 社債-prices is,
as the newspapers are accustomed to say, 'out of all 割合
to the activity of 取引，協定ing';ｾwhich is
as it should be, in 見解（をとる） of individuals 存在 much more 類似の
than they are dissimilar in their reaction to news.
II
Whilst the 量 of cash which an individual decides to 持つ／拘留する
to 満足させる the 処理／取引s-動機 and the 予防の-動機
is not 完全に 独立した・無所属 of what he is 持つ／拘留するing to 満足させる the
思索的な-動機, it is a 安全な first approximation to regard
the 量s of these two 始める，決めるs of cash-holdings as 存在 大部分は
独立した・無所属 of one another. Let us, therefore, for the 目的s
of our その上の 分析, break up our problem in this way. Let
the 量 of cash held to 満足させる the 処理／取引s- and
予防の-動機s be M1, and the 量
held to 満足させる the 思索的な-動機 be M2.
Corresponding to these two compartments of cash, we then have two
liquidity 機能（する）／行事s L1 and L2.
L1 おもに depends on the level of income,
whilst L2 おもに depends on the relation
between the 現在の 率 of 利益／興味 and the 明言する／公表する of
期待. Thus
M = M1 + M2 = L1(Y) + L2(r),
where L1 is the liquidity 機能（する）／行事
corresponding to an income Y, which 決定するs M1, and
L2 is the liquidity 機能（する）／行事 of the 率 of
利益／興味 r, which 決定するs M2. It
follows that there are three 事柄s to 調査／捜査する: (i) the
relation of changes in M to Y and r, (ii)
what 決定するs the 形態／調整 of L1, (iii) what
決定するs the 形態／調整 of L2.
(i) The relation of changes in M to Y
and r depends, in the first instance, on the way in which
changes in M come about. Suppose that M consists of
gold coins and that changes in M can only result from
増加するd returns to the activities of gold-鉱夫s who belong to
the 経済的な system under examination. In this 事例／患者 changes in M
are, in the first instance, 直接／まっすぐに associated with changes in Y,
since the new gold accrues as someone's income. 正確に／まさに the same
条件s 持つ／拘留する if changes in M are 予定 to the 政府
printing money wherewith to 会合，会う its 現在の 支出;ｾin this 事例／患者 also the new money accrues as
someone's income. The new level of income, however, will not
continue 十分に high for the 必要物／必要条件s of M1
to 吸収する the whole of the 増加する in M; and some 部分
of the money will 捜し出す an 出口 in buying 安全s or other
資産s until r has fallen so as to bring about an 増加する
in the magnitude of M2 and at the same time to
刺激する a rise in Y to such an extent that the new money
is 吸収するd either in M2 or in the M1
which corresponds to the rise in Y 原因（となる）d by the 落ちる in r.
Thus at one 除去する this 事例／患者 comes to the same thing as the
代案／選択肢 事例／患者, where the new money can only be 問題／発行するd in the
first instance by a 緩和 of the 条件s of credit by the
banking system, so as to induce someone to sell the banks a 負債
or a 社債 in 交流 for the new cash.
It will, therefore, be 安全な for us to take the latter 事例／患者 as
typical. A change in M can be assumed to operate by
changing r, and a change in r will lead to a new
equilibrium partly by changing M2 and partly by changing Y and therefore M1. The
分割 of the increment of cash between M1
and M2 in the new position of equilibrium will
depend on the 返答s of 投資 to a 削減 in the 率
of 利益／興味 and of income to an 増加する in
投資.
Since Y partly depends on r, it follows that a
given change in M has to 原因（となる） a 十分な change in r
for the resultant changes in M1 and M2
それぞれ to 追加する up to the given change in M.
(ii) It is not always made （疑いを）晴らす whether the
income-velocity of money is defined as the 割合 of Y to M
or as the 割合 of Y to M1. I 提案する,
however, to take it in the latter sense. Thus if V is the
income-velocity of money,
Y
L1(Y) = ｾｾ = M1.
V
There is, of course, no 推論する／理由 for supposing that V is
constant. Its value will depend on the character of banking and
産業の organisation, on social habits, on the 配当 of
income between different classes and on the 効果的な cost of
持つ／拘留するing idle cash. にもかかわらず, if we have a short period of
time in 見解（をとる） and can 安全に assume no 構成要素 change in any of
these factors, we can 扱う／治療する V as nearly enough constant.
(iii) Finally there is the question of the relation
between M2 and r. We have seen in
一時期／支部 13 that 不確定 as to the 未来 course of the
率 of 利益／興味 is the 単独の intelligible explanation of the type
of liquidity-preference L2 which leads to the
持つ／拘留するing of cash M2. It follows that a given M2
will not have a 限定された quantitative relation to a given 率 of
利益／興味 of r;ｾwhat 事柄s is
not the 絶対の level of r but the degree of its
相違 from what is considered a 公正に／かなり 安全な level of r,
having regard to those 計算／見積りs of probability which are
存在 relied on. にもかかわらず, there are two 推論する／理由s for
推定する／予想するing that, in any given 明言する／公表する of 期待, a 落ちる in r will be
associated with an 増加する in M2. In the first
place, if the general 見解（をとる） as to what is a 安全な level of r
is 不変の, every 落ちる in r 減ずるs the market 率
比較して to the '安全な' 率 and therefore 増加するs the 危険 of
illiquidity; and, in the second place, every 落ちる in r
減ずるs the 現在の 収入s from illiquidity, which are
利用できる as a sort of 保険 賞与金 to 相殺する the 危険 of
loss on 資本／首都 account, by an 量 equal to the difference
between the squares of the old 率 of 利益／興味 and the
new. For example, if the 率 of 利益／興味 on a long-称する，呼ぶ／期間／用語 負債 is
4 per cent, it is より望ましい to sacrifice liquidity unless on a
balance of probabilities it is 恐れるd that the long-称する，呼ぶ／期間／用語 率 of
利益／興味 may rise faster than by 4 per cent of itself per 年,
i.e. by an 量 greater than 0.16 per cent per 年. If,
however, the 率 of 利益／興味 is already as low as 2 per cent,
the running 産する／生じる will only 相殺する a rise in it of as little as
0.04 per cent per 年. This, indeed, is perhaps the 長，指導者
障害 to a 落ちる in the 率 of 利益／興味 to a very low level.
Unless 推論する／理由s are believed to 存在する why 未来 experience will
be very different from past experience, a long-称する，呼ぶ／期間／用語 率 of
利益／興味 of (say) 2 per cent leaves more to 恐れる than to hope,
and 申し込む／申し出s, at the same time, a running 産する／生じる which is only
十分な to 相殺する a very small 手段 of 恐れる.
It is evident, then, that the 率 of 利益／興味 is a 高度に
psychological 現象. We shall find, indeed, in 調書をとる／予約する V that
it cannot be in equilibrium at a level below the 率
which corresponds to 十分な 雇用; because at such a level a
明言する／公表する of true インフレーション will be produced, with the result that M1
will 吸収する ever-増加するing 量s of cash. But at a level above
the 率 which corresponds to 十分な 雇用, the long-称する，呼ぶ／期間／用語
market-率 of 利益／興味 will depend, not only on the 現在の
政策 of the 通貨の 当局, but also on market 期待s
関心ing its 未来 政策. The short-称する，呼ぶ／期間／用語 率 of 利益／興味 is easily controlled by the
通貨の 当局, both because it is not difficult to produce a
有罪の判決 that its 政策 will not 大いに change in the very
近づく 未来, and also because the possible loss is small compared
with the running 産する／生じる (unless it is approaching 消えるing
point). But the long-称する，呼ぶ／期間／用語 率 may be more recalcitrant when once
it has fallen to a level which, on the basis of past experience
and 現在の 期待s of 未来 通貨の 政策, is
considered '危険な' by 代表者／国会議員 opinion. For example, in a
country linked to an international gold 基準, a 率 of
利益／興味 lower than 勝つ／広く一帯に広がるs どこかよそで will be 見解（をとる）d with a
正当と認められる 欠如（する） of 信用／信任; yet a 国内の 率 of 利益／興味
dragged up to a parity with the highest 率 (highest
after 許すing for 危険) 勝つ／広く一帯に広がるing in any country belonging to
the international system may be much higher than is 一貫した
with 国内の 十分な 雇用.
Thus a 通貨の 政策 which strikes public opinion as 存在
実験の in character or easily liable to change may fail in
its 客観的な of 大いに 減ずるing the long-称する，呼ぶ／期間／用語 率 of 利益／興味,
because M2 may tend to 増加する almost without
限界 in 返答 to a 削減 of r below a 確かな
人物／姿／数字. The same 政策, on the other 手渡す, may 証明する easily
successful if it 控訴，上告s to public opinion as 存在 reasonable
and practicable and in the public 利益／興味, rooted in strong
有罪の判決, and 促進するd by an 当局 ありそうもない to be
superseded.
It might be more 正確な, perhaps, to say that the 率 of
利益／興味 is a 高度に 従来の, rather than a 高度に
psychological, 現象. For its actual value is 大部分は
治める／統治するd by the 勝つ／広く一帯に広がるing 見解（をとる） as to what its value is 推定する／予想するd
to be. Any level of 利益／興味 which is 受託するd with
十分な 有罪の判決 as likely to be 持続する will be
持続する; 支配する, of course, in a changing society to
fluctuations for all 肉親，親類d of 推論する／理由s 一連の会議、交渉／完成する the 推定する／予想するd normal.
In particular, when M1 is 増加するing faster than M, the 率 of 利益／興味 will
rise, and 副／悪徳行為 versa. But it may fluctuate for １０年間s
about a level which is chronically too high for 十分な 雇用;ｾ特に if it is the 勝つ／広く一帯に広がるing
opinion that the 率 of 利益／興味 is self-adjusting, so that the
level 設立するd by 条約 is thought to be rooted in
客観的な grounds much stronger than 条約, the 失敗 of
雇用 to 達成する an optimum level 存在 in no way associated,
in the minds either of the public or of 当局, with the
prevalence of an 不適切な 範囲 of 率s of 利益／興味.
The difficulties in the way of 持続するing 効果的な 需要・要求する at
a level high enough to 供給する 十分な 雇用, which 続いて起こる from
the 協会 of a 従来の and 公正に／かなり stable long-称する，呼ぶ／期間／用語
率 of 利益／興味 with a fickle and 高度に 安定性のない ごくわずかの
efficiency of 資本／首都, should be, by now, obvious to the reader.
Such 慰安 as we can 公正に／かなり take from more encouraging
reflections must be drawn from the hope that, 正確に because
the 条約 is not rooted in 安全な・保証する knowledge, it will not be
always unduly 抵抗力のある to a modest 手段 of persistence and
consistency of 目的 by the 通貨の 当局. Public opinion
can be 公正に／かなり 速く accustomed to a modest 落ちる in the 率 of
利益／興味 and the 従来の 期待 of the 未来 may be
修正するd accordingly; thus 準備するing the way for a その上の
movementｾup to a point. The 落ちる in
the long-称する，呼ぶ／期間／用語 率 of 利益／興味 in 広大な／多数の／重要な Britain after her
出発 from the gold 基準 供給するs an 利益／興味ing example
of this;ｾthe major movements were
影響d by a 一連の discontinuous jumps, as the liquidity
機能（する）／行事 of the public, having become accustomed to each
連続する 削減, became ready to 答える／応じる to some new
incentive in the news or in the 政策 of the 当局.
III
We can sum up the above in the proposition that in any given
明言する／公表する of 期待 there is in the minds of the public a
確かな potentiality に向かって 持つ／拘留するing cash beyond what is 要求するd
by the 処理／取引s-動機 or the 予防の-動機, which
will realise itself in actual cash-holdings in a degree which
depends on the 条件 on which the 通貨の 当局 is willing
to create cash. It is this potentiality which is summed up in the
liquidity 機能（する）／行事 L2. Corresponding to the
量 of money created by the 通貨の 当局, there will,
therefore, be cet. par. a determlnate 率 of 利益／興味 or,
more 厳密に, a determinate コンビナート／複合体 of 率s of 利益／興味 for
負債s of different 成熟s. The same thing, however, would be
true of any other factor in the 経済的な system taken 分かれて.
Thus this particular 分析 will only be useful and 重要な
in so far as there is some 特に direct or purposive
関係 between changes in the 量 of money and changes
in the 率 of 利益／興味. Our 推論する／理由 for supposing that there is
such a special 関係 arises from the fact that, 概して
speaking, the banking system and the 通貨の 当局 are
売買業者s in money and 負債s and not in 資産s or consumables.
If the 通貨の 当局 were 用意が出来ている to 取引，協定 both ways on
明示するd 条件 in 負債s of all 成熟s, and even more so if
it were 用意が出来ている to 取引，協定 in 負債s of 変化させるing degrees of 危険, the
関係 between the コンビナート／複合体 of 率s of 利益／興味 and the
量 of money would be direct. The コンビナート／複合体 of 率s of
利益／興味 would 簡単に be an 表現 of the 条件 on which the
banking system is 用意が出来ている to acquire or part with 負債s; and the
量 of money would be the 量 which can find a home in
the 所有／入手 of individuals whoｾafter
taking account of all 関連した circumstancesｾprefer
the 支配（する）／統制する of liquid cash to parting with it in 交流 for a 負債 on the 条件 示すd by the market
率 of 利益／興味. Perhaps a コンビナート／複合体 申し込む／申し出 by the central bank to
buy and sell at 明言する／公表するd prices gilt-辛勝する／優位d 社債s of all 成熟s,
in place of the 選び出す／独身 bank 率 for short-称する，呼ぶ／期間／用語 法案s, is the
most important practical 改良 which can be made in the
technique of 通貨の 管理／経営.
To-day, however, in actual practice, the extent to which the
price of 負債s as 直す／買収する，八百長をするd by the banking system is '効果的な' in
the market, in the sense that it 治める／統治するs the actual market-price,
変化させるs in different systems. いつかs the price is more
効果的な in one direction than in the other; that is to say, the
banking system may 請け負う to 購入（する） 負債s at a 確かな price
but not やむを得ず to sell them at a 人物／姿／数字 近づく enough to its
buying-price to 代表する no more than a 売買業者's turn, though
there is no 推論する／理由 why the price should not be made 効果的な
both ways with the 援助（する） of open-market 操作／手術s. There is also
the more important 資格 which arises out of the 通貨の
当局 not 存在, as a 支配する, an 平等に willing 売買業者 in
負債s of all 成熟s. The 通貨の 当局 often tends in
practice to concentrate upon short-称する，呼ぶ／期間／用語 負債s and to leave the
price of long-称する，呼ぶ／期間／用語 負債s to be 影響（力）d by belated and
imperfect reactions from the price of short-称する，呼ぶ／期間／用語 負債s;ｾthough here again there is no 推論する／理由 why
they need do so. Where these 資格s operate, the
directness of the relation between the 率 of 利益／興味 and the
量 of money is 対応して 修正するd. In 広大な／多数の／重要な Britain
the field of 審議する／熟考する 支配（する）／統制する appears to be 広げるing. But in
適用するing this theory in any particular 事例／患者 allowance must be
made for the special 特徴 of the method 現実に
雇うd by the 通貨の 当局. If the 通貨の 当局
取引，協定s only in short-称する，呼ぶ／期間／用語 負債s, we have to consider what
影響（力） the price, actual and 見込みのある, of short-称する，呼ぶ／期間／用語 負債s
演習s on 負債s of longer 成熟.
Thus there are 確かな 制限s on the ability of the
通貨の 当局 to 設立する any given コンビナート／複合体 of 率s of
利益／興味 for 負債s of different 条件 and 危険s, which can be
summed up as follows:
(1) There are those 制限s which arise out of
the 通貨の 当局's own practices in 限界ing its
乗り気 to 取引，協定 to 負債s of a particular type.
(2) There is the 可能性, for the 推論する／理由s
discussed above, that, after the 率 of 利益／興味 has fallen to a
確かな level, liquidity-preference may become 事実上 絶対の
in the sense that almost everyone prefers cash to 持つ／拘留するing a 負債
which 産する／生じるs so low a 率 of 利益／興味. In this event the
通貨の 当局 would have lost 効果的な 支配（する）／統制する over the
率 of 利益／興味. But whilst this 限界ing 事例／患者 might become
事実上 important in 未来, I know of no example of it
hitherto. Indeed, 借りがあるing to the 不本意 of most 通貨の
当局 to 取引，協定 boldly in 負債s of long 称する，呼ぶ／期間／用語, there has not
been much 適切な時期 for a 実験（する）. Moreover, if such a 状況／情勢
were to arise, it would mean that the public 当局 itself
could borrow through the banking system on an 制限のない 規模 at
a 名目上の 率 of 利益／興味.
(3) The most striking examples of a 完全にする
決裂／故障 of 安定 in the 率 of 利益／興味, 予定 to the
liquidity 機能（する）／行事 flattening out in one direction or the other,
have occurred in very 異常な circumstances. In Russia and
Central Europe after the war a 通貨 危機 or flight from the
通貨 was experienced, when no one could be induced to 保持する
holdings either of money or of 負債s on any 条件 whatever, and
even a high and rising 率 of 利益／興味 was unable to keep pace
with the ごくわずかの efficiency of 資本／首都 (特に of 在庫／株s of
liquid goods) under the 影響（力） of the 期待 of an ever
greater 落ちる in the value of money; whilst in the 部隊d 明言する／公表するs
at 確かな dates in 1932 there was a 危機 of the opposite 肉親，親類dｾa 財政上の 危機 or 危機 of
liquidation, when scarcely anyone could be induced to part with holdings of
money on any reasonable 条件.
(4) There is, finally, the difficulty discussed in
section IV of 一時期／支部 11, p. 144, in the way of bringing the
効果的な 率 of 利益／興味 below a 確かな 人物／姿／数字, which may
証明する important in an 時代 of low 利益／興味-率s; すなわち the
中間の costs of bringing the borrower and the ultimate
貸す人 together, and the allowance for 危険, 特に for moral
危険, which the 貸す人 要求するs over and above the pure 率 of
利益／興味. As the pure 率 of 利益／興味 拒絶する／低下するs it does not
follow that the allowances for expense and 危険 拒絶する／低下する pari
passu. Thus the 率 of 利益／興味 which the typical borrower
has to 支払う／賃金 may 拒絶する／低下する more slowly than the pure 率 of
利益／興味, and may be incapable of 存在 brought, by the methods
of the 存在するing banking and 財政上の organisation, below a
確かな 最小限 人物／姿／数字. This is 特に important if the
estimation of moral 危険 is appreciable. For where the 危険 is
予定 to 疑問 in the mind of the 貸す人 関心ing the honesty of
the borrower, there is nothing in the mind of a borrower who does
not ーするつもりである to be dishonest to 相殺する the resultant higher 告発（する），告訴（する）／料金.
It is also important in the 事例／患者 of short-称する，呼ぶ／期間／用語 貸付金s (e.g. bank
貸付金s) where the expenses are 激しい;ｾa
bank may have to 告発（する），告訴（する）／料金 its 顧客s 1ｽ to 2 per cent., even if
the pure 率 of 利益／興味 to the 貸す人 is nil.
IV
At the cost of 心配するing what is more 適切に the 支配する
of 一時期／支部 21 below it may be 利益／興味ing 簡潔に at this 行う／開催する／段階
to 示す the 関係 of the above to the 量 theory
of money.
In a static society or in a society in which for any other
推論する／理由 no one feels any 不確定 about the 未来 率s of
利益／興味, the liquidity 機能（する）／行事 L2, or the
propensity to hoard (as we might 称する，呼ぶ／期間／用語 it), will always be 無 in equilibrium. Hence in equilibrium M2 = 0
and M = M1; so that any change
in M will 原因（となる） the 率 of 利益／興味 to fluctuate until
income reaches a level at which the change in M1
is equal to the supposed change in M. Now M1 V = Y,
where V is the income-velocity of money as defined above
and Y is the aggregate income. Thus if it is practicable
to 手段 the 量, O, and the price, P, of
現在の 生産（高）, we have Y = OP,
and, therefore, MV = OP;
which is much the same as the 量 theory of money in its
伝統的な form.
For the 目的s of the real world it is a 広大な／多数の／重要な fault in the
量 theory that it does not distinguish between changes in
prices which are a 機能（する）／行事 of changes in 生産（高）, and those which
are a 機能（する）／行事 of changes in the 行う-部隊.
The explanation of this omission is, perhaps, to be 設立する in the
仮定／引き受けることs that there is no propensity to hoard and that there
is always 十分な 雇用. For in this 事例／患者, O 存在
constant and M2 存在 無, it follows, if we
can take V also as constant, that both the 行う-部隊 and
the price-level will be 直接／まっすぐに 比例する to the 量 of
money.