Skip to main content

Misconceptions about Austrian Business Cycle Theory: A Comment

  • Chapter
  • 114 Accesses

Abstract

A recent set of articles (see Michael Bordo 1986; Roger Garrison 1986; Herschel Grossman 1986; Gottfried Haberler 1986; Axel Leijonhufvud 1986 and Leland B. Yeager, 1986) reviews the Austrian theory of the business cycle in comparison to other theories. One of the main issues they consider is the neutrality of disturbances in the money supply, and on this point Thomas Humphrey (1984) is cited as refuting the Austrians’ claim to be unique in that they consider relative price changes (Yeager 1986, p. 382). Humphrey quotes and summarizes several quantity theorists and Monetarists on the real effects of a monetary disturbance and concludes that rather than being distinct, the Austrian theory is quite similar to that of the Monetarists both in its explanation of how money affects the economy and in its policy implications.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Bordo, Michael D. “Austrian Influence on Business Cycle Theory.” Cato Journal 6 (Fall 1986): 455–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garrison, Roger W. “Hayekian Trade Cycle Theory: A Reappraisal.” Cato Journal 6 (Fall 1986): 437–53.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grossman, Herschel I. “Money, Real Activity and Rationality.” Cato Journal 6 (Fall 1986): 401–08.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haberler, Gottfried. “Reflections on Hayek’s Business Cycle Theory.” Cato Journal 6 (Fall 1986): 421–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayek, Friedrich A. Profits, Interest and Investment. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul Ltd., 1939.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayek, Friedrich A. “Three Elucidations of the Ricardo Effect.” Journal of Political Economy 77 (March/April 1969): 274–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leijonhufvud, Axel. “Real and Monetary Factors in Business Fluctuations.” Cato Journal 6 (Fall 1986): 409–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mises, Ludwig von. Human Action: A Treatise on Economics, 3rd rev. ed. Chicago: Henry Regnery Co., 1963.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yeager, Leland B. “The Significance of Monetary Disequilibrium.” Cato Journal 6 (Fall 1986): 369–99.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1990 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Clark, J., Keeler, J. (1990). Misconceptions about Austrian Business Cycle Theory: A Comment. In: Rothbard, M.N., Block, W. (eds) The Review of Austrian Economics. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-3454-7_8

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-3454-7_8

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-94-017-3456-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-017-3454-7

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics