Can Keynesianism explain the 1930s? Reply to Cowen
- 1 January 1991
- journal article
- other
- Published by Taylor & Francis in Critical Review
- Vol. 5 (1) , 81-114
- https://doi.org/10.1080/08913819108443211
Abstract
Tyler Cowen's “Why Keynesianism Triumphed” proposed that only Keynesian economists have presented a successful explanation for the Great Depression of 1929–1933 and the continuing slow and intermittent recovery of the rest of the 1930s. This paper examines recent scholarship on the 1930s and finds that there is increasing doubt about the validity of Keynesian explanations, lending credence to both older and recent scholarship that vindicates free‐market views of why the Depression happened and why the recovery was so slow and uneven.Keywords
This publication has 25 references indexed in Scilit:
- The failure of the bank of United States: A reappraisal: A replyExplorations in Economic History, 1986
- The failure of the bank of United States: A reappraisalExplorations in Economic History, 1985
- A Reinterpretation of the Banking Crisis of 1930The Journal of Economic History, 1984
- A Reconsideration of the Causes of the Banking Panic of 1930The Journal of Economic History, 1980
- Consumption in the Great DepressionJournal of Political Economy, 1978
- On the Origins of the Great DepressionSouthern Economic Journal, 1978
- Three-and-a-Half Million U.S. Employees Have Been Mislaid: Or, an Explanation of Unemployment, 1934-1941Journal of Political Economy, 1976
- A Reappraisal of Some Factors Associated with Fluctuations in the United States in the Interwar PeriodSouthern Economic Journal, 1973
- The American Automobile Industry: Investment Demand, Capacity, and Capacity Utilization, 1921-1940Journal of Political Economy, 1972
- Investment Behavior and Business CyclesThe Review of Economics and Statistics, 1955