Editorial Reviews. Review. Keynes Hayek: The Clash That Defined Modern Economics. Nicholas Wapshott. Norton, $ (p) ISBN Wapshott makes the case that Keynes, and not radical free marketeers like Hayek, are the real saviours of capitalism. The final quote, from John Kenneth. Nicholas Wapshott, author of Keynes Hayek: The Clash That Defined Modern Economics, talks with EconTalk host Russ Roberts about John.
|Published (Last):||4 June 2010|
|PDF File Size:||7.5 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||2.48 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
That set the tone for the next 80 years of debate really between the two sides, and I must say, although all the people I know on both sides are charming, when they come to discuss each other’s work, it still remains at wapsnott level of vituperative hysteria, which is wapsbott and certainly raises the stakes.
As moral conservatives, they were shocked, though perhaps they should have remembered Hayek’s frequent protestations that he was not himself a conservative but an old-fashioned liberal. I’m a big fan of books that compare two opposed philosophies which helps me come to a conclusion on which side to support or merely the pros and cons of each side. Friedman, an ardent new dealer in his youth, was an economist who fought with same macro-economic weapons as the Keynesians, but sought to substitute manipulation of monetary policy, through interest rates, for that of fiscal policy, through taxing and spending.
Okay, hayke review my book, I’ll review your book.
Barely worth talking about. If I remember correctly, he was not part of the Economics Hayrk. But Reagan and Thatcher were still spending a hell of a lot. Dec 23, Otto Lehto rated it liked it.
I do think there are basic things–if you rely on the markets to keep society honest, if you like, then there are various things that you have to take out of the equation. From Character to Identity,” by Daniel Klein. I think there was just enough economic te After reading this book I have a completely new appreciation for the body of work of both Keynes and Hayek.
He was a civil servant–that is, he worked for the state. He certainly worked back from his original position of trying to create jobs–he canceled that. And he could not believe that this guy who hayeo arrived off the boat from Austria and first thing he did was to send a bazooka in his way. But he is thinking along interventionist lines long before that. There’s nothing to be ashamed of; it’s perhaps too hard. So I want you to talk about two things: I must say, an enviable position.
And most economists don’t agree with me. The Road to Serfdom.
Since we are talking about The General Theorybecause it is interesting, the collaborations, as you say: For example, there is a hwyek exchange of comments between Keynes and a young Hayek over Keynes’ tract on monetary theory. To that extent, all macroeconomics today that is used is macroeconomics.
wapahott Never mind that we’ve fallen out in the past, never mind that we have our profound disagreements which we will never come to mind with an agreement on. Hayek remained an outsider throughout his life and Prices and Production and The Pure Theory of Capitalhis two main contributions to pure economics, remain unread by most.
Does anyone understand them? No trivia or quizzes yet. So it was extraordinary in a way, that these two men, who in wapshotr circumstances, had they met socially and didn’t know what each other did for a living would have been entirely charming. Sin embargo, la primera mitad es brillante, altamente recomendable. This book is a paragon of that genre. We’re still in that struggle right now in economics.
We don’t have the knowledge to understand the underlying processes and we should concede as much. You just can’t catch Keynes’s attention for very long because he’s very busy.
Keynes Hayek | W. W. Norton & Company
Oct 19, Nadim Karmoussa rated it really liked it Shelves: As the stock market crash of plunged the world into turmoil, two men emerged with competing claims on how to restore balance to economies gone awry.
The final quote, from John Kenneth Galbraith, is a cracker: Nothing is heard from him about this book, which is a book that is a wapsnott intellectual challenge to his whole world view.
It weirdly oscillated between being too partisan to one side then the other, which I took as essentially a failure of journalism — written by an economist rather than a disinterested third party, and therefore never able to really separate from the material. On the right are those who fear governments and believe in the self-correcting power of markets.
That of course led to the other thing, which Keynes disliked keynds I think Hayek disliked even more, which is measuring the economy.
Keynes Hayek: The Clash that Defined Modern Economics
I am not suggesting by this analogy that economic thought keyhes analogous to fiction. Wapshott on Keynes and Hayek Oct 17 Keynes was active earlier in the 20th century and was instrumental in the thinking of those who created the programs of FDR’s administration that dealt with the after-effects of the Crash of Oh, you don’t want to stay over in that college.
In the whole of his life he kept going back to The General Theorypicking off this bit or that bit. Also he didn’t speak English very well.
Perhaps the one criticism of this excellent book, is that not enough time is devoted to conveying how the stagflation of the s shattered the Keynesian consensus. The book is fun to read, but it takes too many intellectual liberties to classify as scholarly.