Adios to the T-Bill?

[Rakesh Narpat Bhandari]

>
>There's more than one kind of endogenist. Quoting myself from Wall Street:
>
>>Robert Pollin (1991; 1993) usefully divided the two major schools 
>>of post-Keynesian endogenists into the accommodative and the 
>>structural. Accommodative endogeneity holds that the central bank 
>>has no choice but to validate private credit demand by providing 
>>whatever reserves the banking system needs to accommodate the loans 
>>that it has already made; that means there is no effective 
>>constraint on credit. Leading proponents of this school include 
>>Nicholas Kaldor and Basil Moore. Structural endogeneity - the 
>>branch that appeals to both Pollin and me - holds that central bank 
>>attempts to constrain the growth of credit are frequently evaded 
>>through creative finance.
>
>Though not always; clearly a central bank isn't powerless, and the 
>paths of evasion aren't limitless.

Doesn't structural endogeneity have its roots in a 1970s paper by 
Albert Wojl..., saw his name pop up in the press recently

Still this just doesn't square with the power which post keynesians 
seem attribute to the Fed over macro-economy--still seems to me that 
they are caught in some kind of money fetishism, no?

RB