The Money Multiplier is one real beauty when you start to learn Monetary Economics (most probably from Mishkin textbook). It makes you feel wise, you DO understand how Central Banks influence the Money Supply and Bankers are only pawns in this magnificent Game of Thrones of the Economy in which the Central Bank reigns supreme.
But “they” are trying to kill it!
Even though in a way or another, most economists still believe in some version of the Money multiplier it’s uncool to express it that way, and you will soon find yourself ridiculed by someone who really understands banking.
I must confess my sins. I too believe the multiplier is dead.
Just look at this graph:
Bernanke killed the Money multiplier!! Quantitative Easing exposed the “truth”!
What are the problems/wrong assumptions of the Money multiplier?
- Normally, central banks just “follow along” the demand for reserves, so instead of a “monetary policy driven injection of reserves” Money multiplier, it really is kind of a “Money divisor” as banks look for reserves after they create loans (and deposits). And Central Banks must accommodate the banking system expansion if it wants to ensure financial stability.
- A straw man version of the MM assumes Banks lend reserves. This is not true. (as it may be explained later)
So, the Money multiplier has been disproved by Central Banks operations during the crisis as by some “endogenous demand driven vision of the economy”.
But still, I still believe in its beauty and we should not mourn its death, because I know it will rise again, and stronger than ever.
Let me do my best to try to defend (my version) of the Money multiplier.