Titlebook: Debates in Macroeconomics from the Great Depression to the Long Recession; Cycles, Crises and P Arie Arnon Book 2022 The Editor(s) (if appl

阻塞

https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-54917-4he .—doubted the basic assumptions that most others continued to uphold. One of the crucial assumptions that they questioned was the tendency toward full employment in capitalism. The new, roughly formulated ideas were a fundamentally heretical thought: Even under competitive conditions, the market

石墨

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-9732-3cal approach. Hayek had always been deeply interested in the methodological and philosophical aspects of social thinking. This article, both in Hayek’s mind and as others read it, marked the start of a transformation in Hayek’s intellectual journey. He came to share the methodological skepticism so

可能性

后退

Malaise

https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137283566es of government intervention—became world famous after the Second World War. Friedman strongly disagreed with the Keynesian claim that markets, left to themselves, might lead to suboptimal performance that could only be corrected via policy interventions. This fundamental dispute was the source for

Charlatan

GEON

沐浴

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4039-8062-5antly, in macro policy making, before the end of the millennium. The views of the various tendencies within NCM regarding macro policy were diverse—particularly dissimilar were the New Keynesians—but they all shared a common theoretical conceptualization. A focal tenet was the method of New Classica

ACRID

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4039-8062-5riticisms from his supporters. That group of authors, mostly known as ‘post-Keynesian’ economists (although some were not identified as such), raised a wide range of ideas that were in line, in their opinion, with the principles Keynes promoted in the .. Naturally, these scholars’ writings were focu

motivate