[DcifrThs]

[ QUOTE ]
To my knowledge the theory that changes in the money supply positively affect the price level is well accepted in economics. If you know of any papers showing differently I'd be interested to read them.

There are a number of other factors that influence the price level. For example, if an economy were to gain in productivity at a faster rate than the money supply increased than you would likely see a negative growth rate in prices assuming total demand is held constant.

[/ QUOTE ]

i'm not arguing against a "positive effect".

i'm arguing against strict causation and a tight link.

there are a number of logical reasons how a change in the supplyof money would lead to a change in prices. but saying changes in prices (inflation) are a direct result (or should be measured by) changes in the supply of money seemed a bit off to me so i researched it since that data is publicly available.

TVMH then mentioned that he is talking about the austrian definition of inflation.

it is convenient that the austrian definition flows praxeologically and can't be tested. i guess this is really where my views differ most from austrian economics: human action may be far beyond the models of economists, but the results of human actions i think can lend themselves to statistical methodologies if you are willing to accept a less than perfect level of strict adherence to reality.

for discussions like this imo, the use of data makes the most sense since it is directly linking statements made.

human actions that caused the increase in demand beyond the available supply are certianly more complex than parsing and analyzing their results (i.e. changes in the level of prices)...especially as they relate to the other results of human action of bankers et.al.: the changes in money supply.

just some thoughts on the issue,
Barron