Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Texas at Austin, 1989. / Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 187-192).

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Chicago, 1975. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 97-98).

Originally presented as the author's thesis (master's)--Jāmiʻat Umm al-Qurá, 1985. / Includes bibliographical references (p. 421-445).

Thesis (doctoral)--Universität, Graz. / Includes bibliographical references (p. 325-339) and register.

Thesis (M.A.)--Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, 1990. / Abstract. Also available via the Internet.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of California, San Diego, 2000. / Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 77-79).

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Wisconsin--Madison, 1972. / Typescript. Vita. eContent provider-neutral record in process. Description based on print version record. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 286-302).

The thesis analyses in detail the relationship between the money stock defined by money aggregates M1 and M2 and the real GDP in the Czech Republic for period between 1996 and 2015. A long-term relationship between the real GDP and the money aggregate is not found using quarterly time series data. These conclusions are in accordance with the economic theory which does not confirm that money affects level of the real GDP in the long run. Short-term relationship between given variables is also analysed. Results indicate that the growth rate of the money aggregate M1 statistically significantly affects the growth rate of the real GDP in the same direction which is in line with monetary theories of business cycle. On the other hand, any statistically significant relationship for the money aggregate M2 is not found which speaks in favour of the Real Business Cycle theory. The Policy Ineffectiveness Proposition accepted by New Classical Macroeconomists is also tested in the thesis. The issue is investigated for the whole period and subsequently for shorter time from 2000 to 2015 where the uniform monetary policy is applied. Results for the money aggregate M1 imply that expected changes in the growth rate of M1 play important role in the money-output relationship which is consistent with the New Keynesian Macroeconomic theory. Considering the shorter period of time, Lucas' theory seems to be more appropriate explanation. Outcomes for the aggregate M2 provide mixed conclusions which support rather the Real Business Cycle theory. At the end of the thesis, there is a section devoted to the quasi money (one of M2 aggregate components) as a possible source of mixed results.

This thesis maps development of money illusion through the history of economic thought and analyzes relevance of the concept in these days. The story begins in 1928 with Irving Fisher, who saw money illusion as a failure to perceive changes in purchasing power of money. Different notion was developed by John Maynard Keynes when he proposed a non-homogeneous labor supply. In the 1970s, the success of rational expectations theory led to a dismissal of the original theories of money illusion and Tobin's critique revealed also an inconsistency of the Keynesian notion. Since then, money illusion lost its position in the mainstream economic science. The modern theories were, however, able to align money illusion with rational expectations and provided the phenomenon with a psychological framework. Money illusion became described as a tendency to think in nominal rather than real terms. While the concept was revived as a part of behavioral and New Keynesian economics, the question of its aggregate effects remains as the Keynes' inconsistency have not been resolved until these days.

Nachdem eine Bargeldabschaffung schon vor längerem u.a. von Wissenschaftsvertretern wie Rogoff, Summers und Bofinger diskutiert und im Ergebnis befürwortet wurde, scheint das Thema aufgrund aktueller Entwicklungen sowie bereits vollzogener Maßnahmen verstärkt in Wissenschaft und Praxis angekommen zu sein, wo es kontrovers diskutiert wird. Dabei werden sowohl für als auch gegen Abschaffung bzw. Beschränkung des Bargeldes gewichtige Gründe ins Feld geführt. Aufgrund der großen Aktualität und Relevanz der Thematik wird sie zuerst aus theoretischer Sicht beleuchtet, bevor empirische Entwicklungen aufgezeigt, sowie die gegensätzlichen Argumentationslinien der Befürworter und Gegner einer Abschaffung bzw. Beschränkung des Bargeldes sowie bereits veränderte institutionelle Rahmenbedingungen dargestellt und bewertet werden. / The topic of abolishing cash is discussed since some time, and economists such as Rogoff, Summers and Bofinger argue for it. Due to some current developments, as much as some already taken measures, the public is increasingly discussing it in a controversial way. There are good reasons for such a fundamental change, as well as against it. Against the backdrop of the current discussion, this paper emphasises the theoretical background, empirical developments and the competing argumentative lines of the supporters and opponents of an abolishing or limitation of cash, as well as the respective institutional change which has already happened.