Share This Article:

A Comment on Reis

Abstract Full-Text HTML Download Download as PDF (Size:72KB) PP. 91-94
DOI: 10.4236/tel.2011.13019    4,958 Downloads   8,614 Views  
Author(s)    Leave a comment


This note gives a counterexample on Reis [1]. Using a certain family of utility functions, this note not only gives a sharper representation than that of Reis but also demonstrates that interest rate inelastic money demand does not lead to superneutrality. This implies that superneutrality does not exist when uncerinty is introduced.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Cite this paper

K. Miyazaki, "A Comment on Reis," Theoretical Economics Letters, Vol. 1 No. 3, 2011, pp. 91-94. doi: 10.4236/tel.2011.13019.


[1] R. Reis, “The Analytics of Monetary Non-Neutrality in the Sidrauski Model,” Economics Letters, Vol. 94, No. 1, 2007, pp. 129-135. doi:10.1016/j.econlet.2006.08.017
[2] M. Sidrauski, “The Rational Choice and Patterns of Gro- wth in a Monetary Economy,” American Economic Review, Vol. 57, No. 2, 1967, pp. 534-544.
[3] A. Lioui and P. Poncet, “Monetary Non-Neutrality in the Sidrauski Model under Uncertainty,” Economics Letters, Vol. 100, No. 1, 2008, pp. 22-26. doi:10.1016/j.econlet.2007.10.023
[4] S. Fischer, “Capital Accumulation on the Transition Path in a Monetary Optimizing Model,” Econometrica, Vol. 47, No. 6, 1979, pp. 1433-1439. doi:10.2307/1914010
[5] R. E. Lucas Jr., “Inflation and Welfare,” Econometrica, Vol. 68, No. 2, 2000, pp. 247–274. doi:10.1111/1468-0262.00109

comments powered by Disqus

Copyright © 2018 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.

Creative Commons License

This work and the related PDF file are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.