Saving and money – what is the relationship?

Conventional wisdom says that savings is the amount of money left after monetary income was used for consumer outlays, implying that saving is synonymous with money. Hence, for a given consumer outlays an increase in money income implies more saving and thus more funding for investment. This in turn sets the platform for higher economic growth.

Following this logic, one could also establish that increases in money supply are beneficial to the entire process of capital formation and economic growth. (Note increases in money supply result in increases in monetary income and this in turn for a given consumer outlays implies an increase in savings).

 

Relation between saving and money

Saving as such has nothing to do with money. It is the amount of final consumer goods produced in excess of present consumption.

The producers of final consumer goods can trade saved goods with each other or for intermediate goods such as raw materials and services.  Observe that the saved goods support all the stages of production, from the producers of final consumer goods down to the producers of raw materials, services and all other intermediate stages.

Support means that these savings enable all these producers to maintain their lives and wellbeing whilst they are busy producing things. Also, note that if the production of final consumer goods were to rise, all other things being equal, this would expand the pool of real savings and would increase the ability to further produce a greater variety of consumer goods i.e. wealth.

Note that people do not want various means as such but rather final consumer goods. This means that in order to maintain their life people require an access to consumer goods. Only once there has been a sufficient increase in the pool of consumer goods, people may aim at enhancing their wellbeing by seeking other things such as entertainment and services related products – such as medical treatment etc.

 

Introducing money

The introduction of money does not alter what we so far have said. When a final producer of a consumer good sells his saved goods for money to another producer, he has supplied the other producer with his saved goods.

The supplied good sustains the other producer and allows him to produce other goods. Note that the money received by the producer is fully backed by his unconsumed production. Whenever, he deems it necessary he can always exchange his money for goods.

Whenever people buy capital goods such as machinery they transfer to the individuals who are employed in the making of the machinery money, which in turn can be exchanged for consumer goods. With money, the machinery maker can choose to purchase not only final consumer goods but also various services. The services provider who receives the money could in turn acquire final consumer goods and services to support his life and well-being.

Without the medium of exchange i.e. money, no market economy and hence no division of labour could take place. Money enables the goods of one specialist to be exchanged for the goods of another specialist. This all that money can do.

By means of money, people can channel real savings i.e. unconsumed consumer goods to others, which in turn permits the widening of the process of real wealth generation.

In addition, in the world without money it will be impossible to save various final consumer goods like perishable goods for a long period. The introduction of money solves this problem.

There is however, one provision in all this: that the flow of the production of goods continues unabated. This means that whenever a holder of money decides to exchange some money for goods, these goods are there for him.

 

 

Do people save money?

As we have seen above people do not save money but rather they exchange it for goods and services. Money can be seen as a receipt as it were received by the producers of final consumer goods.

Now, when a producer of a final consumer good exchanges his money for some other consumer good he has already paid for them with the goods he produced and saved prior to this exchange. Money therefore is his claim on real savings. It is however, not savings.

When a producer of final consumer goods buys an intermediate good he in fact transfers his claims on real savings to the seller of intermediate goods in return for the prospects that the transformed intermediate good into a future consumer good will generate benefits far in excess the cost incurred.

The pool of real savings not only supports all the stages of production, but it also effectively buys time. By having the raw materials or intermediate goods readily available various producers can proceed immediately with the stages of making the final good. If the intermediate goods and materials were not readily available they would have to make it themselves, which of course would delay the making of the final good.

Once real savings are exchanged for money, it is of no consequence what the holder of the money does with it. Whether he uses it immediately in exchange for other goods or puts it under the mattress, it will not alter the given pool of real savings. How individuals decide to employ their money will only alter their demand for money, this however, has nothing to do with savings.

Individuals can exercise their demand for money either by holding it themselves or by placing it in the custody of a bank in a demand deposit or in a safe deposit box.

Whenever an individual lends some of his money he in fact transfers his claims on consumer goods to a borrower. By lending money, individuals in fact lower their demand for it.

Note that the act of lending – transferring of claims – does not alter the existing pool of real savings.

Likewise, if the owner of money decides to buy a financial asset like a bond or a stock he simply transfers his claims on real savings to the seller of financial assets – no present real savings are affected because of these transactions.

Problems however, emerge whenever the central bank embarks on loose monetary policies. Since the expanded money supply was never earned, it therefore is not backed up so to speak by consumer goods. When such money is exchanged for consumer goods, it amounts to consumption that is not supported by production.

 

The printing of money therefore cannot result in more savings but on the contrary in the weakening of the pool of real savings. Since money is a claim on real savings by means of monetary pumping we now have more money chasing the same amount of goods.

Consequently, a holder of honest money, i.e. an individual who has produced real wealth that wants to exercise his claim over goods, discovers that he cannot get back the equivalent value of all the goods he previously produced and exchanged for money, all other things being equal.

He discovers that his purchasing power of money has fallen – he in fact been robbed by means of loose monetary policy.

Any so-called economic growth, in the framework of loose monetary policy can only be on account of the private sector that manages to grow the pool of real savings despite the loose monetary policy undermining this process.

Is it possible to ascertain the state of real savings? After all this is what drives economic growth? Because of the heterogeneous nature of final goods, it is not possible to quantify the size of the pool of real savings at any point in time.

All that can be established that in a true free market economy, without the central bank printing money, the pool of real savings is less likely to be threatened.

We can thus conclude that savings is not about money as such but about final consumer goods that support various individuals that are engaged in various stages of production. It is not money that funds economic activity but the saved pool of final consumer goods. The existence of money only facilitates the flow of the real savings.

 

2 Comments

  • “The printing of money therefore cannot result in more savings but on the contrary in the weakening of the pool of real savings. Since money is a claim on real savings by means of monetary pumping we now have more money chasing the same amount of goods. Consequently, a holder of honest money, i.e. an individual who has produced real wealth that wants to exercise his claim over goods, discovers that he cannot get back the equivalent value of all the goods he previously produced and exchanged for money, all other things being equal.

    He discovers that his purchasing power of money has fallen…”

    So how come we had astronomic and unprecedented levels of money creation under QE and there’s been little effect on inflation (just as I and many others predicted)?

  • Gawd, for the friggin record.
    There is no ‘printing of money’ … in and of itself …. either paper, digital or otherwise.
    Why the faux construct here?

    We all know that what serves as modern money – being private credit issue by commercial banks for the purpose of the acquisition of ‘produced’ goods and services – only comes into existence because a borrower seeks those goods and services.
    That is the acceptable premise of endogenous money.

    So, what’s with the ‘printing of money’ meme?
    Whats’ with the ‘money exceeding production’ meme?
    It’s never been the problem of a modern monetary economy.

    Rather, the ‘lack of money’ is the problem – minimally the lack of economically-productive money is the problem, being somewhat caused by savings and monetary investment that takes money from productive economic use, usually to unproductive financial-economic use.

    What do the Austrian seers offer to solve our ‘lack of money’ problem?
    What is their free-market solution ?
    Thanks.

Comments are closed.