Synopses & Reviews
Focusing on the period of Milton Friedman's collaboration with Anna J. Schwartz, from 1948 to 1991, this work examines the history of debates between Friedman and his critics over money's causal role in business cycles. Professor Hammond shows that critics' reactions were grounded in two distinctive features of Friedman and Schwartz's way of doing economic analysis--their National Bureau business cycle methods and Friedman's Marshallian methodology. Drawing extensively on unpublished materials, Professor Hammond's treatment offers new insights on Milton Friedman's attempts to settle debates with his critics and his eventual recognition of the methodological impediments.
Review
"This book provides carefully researched and eloquently argued recapitulation of leading controversies in economic theory over the past half century." Robert W. Clower, Journal of Economic Literature
Review
"This book provides carefully researched and eloquently argued recapitulation of leading controversies in economic theory over the past half century." Robert W. Clower, Journal of Economic Literature
Description
Includes bibliographical references (p. 219-234) and index.
Table of Contents
Introduction; 1. Theory and measurement at the National Bureau; 2. Origins of Friedmanâs Marshallian methodology; 3. Origins of the monetary project; 4. Critiques from within the National Bureau; 5. Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc, part I; 6. Reactions to the Monetary History; 7. Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc, part II; 8. Friedman and his critics on the theoretical framework; 9. The Great Depression; 10. Measurement without measurement: Hendry and Ericssonâs critique; Conclusion; Bibliography.