Amonn’s journal article weighs currency appreciation against stabilization after depreciation. Its central distinction is between a higher foreign exchange rate and greater domestic purchasing power. Neither automatically increases prosperity: cheaper imports may accompany impaired exports, while falling production costs coincide with falling selling prices. Consumers’ apparent gains must therefore be considered alongside their dependence on income earned through production. Czechoslovakia provides the principal practical setting.
Amonn first challenges the fiscal arguments for appreciation. He introduces a common claim:
Vor allem wird behauptet, daß sich infolge einer Erhöhung des Geldwertes die Schulden in ausländischen Währungen entsprechend verringern.
English translation: Above all it is asserted that, in consequence of an increase in the value of money, debts in foreign currencies are correspondingly reduced.
His objection turns on the difference between monetary amounts and real burdens. Foreign-currency obligations may cost fewer units of domestic money without requiring fewer goods to service them, because domestic purchasing power rises too. Internal debts create an additional difficulty:
Die finanzielle Belastung durch Schulden in inländischer Währung wächst natürlich mit einer Erhöhung des Geldwertes.
English translation: The financial burden of debts in domestic currency naturally grows with an increase in the value of money.
Nor can governments normally preserve revenues unchanged while enjoying lower expenditure. Value-based taxes yield less as prices fall; fixed taxes and public tariffs impose greater real burdens unless adjusted downward. Appreciation thus offers no general fiscal windfall.
Having rejected these simplified arguments, Amonn distinguishes more defensible considerations:
Neben diesen einer näheren Betrachtung nicht standhaltenden Argumente zugunsten einer Geldwerterhöhung gibt es aber auch eine ganze Reihe von wissenschaftlich durchaus unangreifbaren Gründen für eine derartige Politik.
English translation: Besides these arguments in favor of an increase in the value of money, which do not stand up to closer examination, there are, however, also a whole series of scientifically quite unassailable grounds for such a policy.
Financial prestige can protect substantial international interests, making it particularly important for Britain. Germany’s depreciation, by contrast, has already gone too far for appreciation to recover its former standing. Restoring rentier capital also has social significance: inflation injured the middle class, insurance institutions, foundations, and those dependent on their resources. Yet current holders of claims are not necessarily those who suffered the original losses. Appreciation cannot simply be understood as restitution. Its stronger justification concerns social usefulness, although increased payments to rentiers generally reduce the income available to labor.
Two further arguments, associated with the Czechoslovak finance minister Raschin, concern saving and monetary control. Appreciation may encourage saving more forcefully than stabilization by reversing inflation’s psychological effects. Currency restriction might also restore the note-issuing bank’s influence by making commercial banks dependent on its credit. Amonn treats neither argument as decisive, since saving, rentier capital, and commercial credit could also recover gradually under stable monetary conditions.
The strongest positive case concerns uneven price adjustment. Economic recovery requires a workable relationship between selling prices and production costs, but housing rents remain far below the level warranted by building costs. If political resistance prevents rents from rising, appreciation could instead lower other prices and costs toward them. Blocking both adjustments perpetuates disequilibrium. Amonn extends this reasoning to obstructed tax adjustments and discrepancies between domestic purchasing power and exchange rates. The appropriate benchmark is not necessarily the higher currency valuation: it depends on the existing and prospective circulation of money. Expected currency contraction through capital-levy payments therefore matters alongside current conditions.
Against appreciation stands the danger of crisis. Entrepreneurs incur costs before selling their products; falling output prices can destroy profits, consume capital, and prevent repayment. Rigid wages, postponed purchases, unemployment, and lost export markets compound the damage. Amonn accepts this objection but emphasizes the pace of appreciation over its classification as “natural” or artificial. Gradual price declines, especially when accompanied by productivity gains, need not eliminate profitability. Even appreciation under unchanged monetary circulation depends on policy, since maintaining that circulation is itself an institutional choice.
The conclusion remains guarded. Capital inflows and speculation may raise the exchange rate faster than domestic purchasing power, disrupting trade; monetary expansion to counter that movement conflicts with intended appreciation. Nevertheless, persistent housing-price disequilibrium can also be deeply damaging. Amonn’s conditional judgment compares imperfect adjustment paths: appreciation is hazardous, but may become defensible when political constraints block other means of restoring economic balance.
This work was divided into 1 sections when it entered the library's research corpus—an apparatus for search and citation, not necessarily the author's own table of contents. Each title opens its summary.
Put a question to this work; the Librarian answers from its 1 sections and cites the passage.
Ask the Librarian