Money’s true nature is a battle of ideas. Today’s #wizreadswednesdays examines the theoretical tug-of-war between metallism and chartalism in defining what money truly is. The GMAT GRE RC passage contrasts how these competing frameworks explain everything from gold coins to digital dollars
Read the passage(s) and answer the question(s) that follows. You can choose the GMAT style Reading Passage and the question or the GRE RC practice variant. Even better, you could try both.
GMAT Business & Economy RC Passage
Economic theories regarding the origin and nature of money have primarily crystallized around two competing perspectives: metallism and chartalism. Metallists contend that money emerged organically as a medium of exchange to overcome barter limitations, with societies naturally selecting precious metals due to their intrinsic value. This perspective, championed by classical economists and later monetarists like Milton Friedman, treats money as fundamentally a commodity whose exchange value exists independently of government intervention. The metallist framework positions the state’s role as merely certifying weight and purity through stamped coinage, while maintaining that money serves primarily as a neutral medium of exchange that remains ultimately irrelevant to “real” economic analysis.
Chartalism, in contrast, rejects the commodity-based understanding of money, arguing instead that money derives its value from its status as a token representing societal debt relationships. The term itself originates from the Latin “charta,” meaning token or ticket. Chartalists assert that money’s value stems not from intrinsic properties but from institutional structures, particularly the state’s ability to impose tax liabilities payable only in the currency it issues. This perspective, which has gained considerable traction among post-Keynesian economists, more convincingly explains phenomena like fiat currencies and the persistence of monetary systems decoupled from precious metals. By recognizing money as fundamentally a social and legal construct rather than a naturally occurring commodity, chartalism offers a more robust framework for understanding modern monetary systems and their operations.
GMAT RC Practice Question
Which of the following about chartalism can be inferred from the passage?
A) It was developed as a direct response to Milton Friedman’s monetarist theories.
B) It provides a more adequate explanation for modern fiat currency systems.
C) It rejects the notion that money functions as a medium of exchange.
D) It was the dominant economic theory until the rise of classical economics.
E) It attributes money’s origin exclusively to government taxation policies.
GMAT RC Question Answer & Explanation ▼
The passage states that the chartalist perspective “has gained considerable traction among post-Keynesian economists” and “more convincingly explains phenomena like fiat currencies and the persistence of monetary systems decoupled from precious metals.” This directly supports the inference that chartalism provides a more adequate explanation for modern fiat currency systems. The author concludes that “chartalism offers a more robust framework for understanding modern monetary systems and their operations,” further strengthening this inference.
Correct Answer: Choice (B)
GRE Reading Comprehension Passage – Business & Economy
Economic discourse on monetary theory bifurcates into metallism and chartalism—contrasting frameworks that elucidate currency’s origins and essence. Metallists contend that money emerged organically as an exchange medium, with societies gravitating toward precious metals for their inherent value and divisibility. This commodity-based paradigm, championed by classical economists and monetarists, confines governmental authority to authenticating metallic purity, while positioning currency as a neutral transactional facilitator in an otherwise “real” economy. Conversely, chartalism—derived from Latin “charta” (token)—rejects the intrinsic-value premise, asserting instead that money’s worth emanates from institutional legitimacy, particularly the state’s capacity to impose tax obligations dischargeable only in its issued currency. This institutional perspective, prevalent among post-Keynesian theorists, offers superior explanatory power for contemporary fiat systems, recognizing money as fundamentally a socio-legal construct rather than a spontaneously emergent commodity.
GRE RC Question
The passage suggests that the fundamental difference between metallism and chartalism centers on:
A) Whether government intervention in monetary policy is beneficial to economic growth
B) The historical period in which each theory gained prominence among economists
C) The source from which money derives its value and legitimacy
D) How effectively each theory explains international currency exchange rates
E) The degree to which monetary theory should incorporate mathematical modeling
GRE RC Question Answer & Explanation ▼
The passage explicitly contrasts the two theories based on where they believe money gets its value. Metallists contend that money has value because it emerged as a commodity with “inherent value and divisibility,” while chartalists reject this “intrinsic-value premise,” asserting instead that “money’s worth emanates from institutional legitimacy.”
Correct Answer: Choice (C)
Leave a Reply