IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/fth/caldec/96-06.html

Monetarists And Keynesians On Central Banking: A Study Of A Failed Debate

Author

Listed:
  • Thomas Mayer

Abstract

This paper reviews and appraises the debate about whether the central bank should pursue counter-cyclical policy or generate a stable monetary growth rate. It focuses on whether the participants have followed the rules of "good conversation," and concludes that they have not. Monetarist have over-stated their case, and their opponents have, in large part, just ignored salient points that the monetarists have raised. All the same, the debate has advanced economics to some extent. To support these conclusions the literature generated by this debate is discussed in some detail.

Suggested Citation

  • Thomas Mayer, "undated". "Monetarists And Keynesians On Central Banking: A Study Of A Failed Debate," Department of Economics 96-06, California Davis - Department of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:fth:caldec:96-06
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.econ.ucdavis.edu/working_papers/96-6.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Thomas Mayer, 2001. "The role of ideology in disagreements among economists: a quantitative analysis," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(2), pages 253-273.
    2. repec:ejw:journl:v:10:y:2013:i:1:p:87-96 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Thomas Mayer, 2001. "The role of ideology in disagreements among economists: a quantitative analysis," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(2), pages 253-273.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:fth:caldec:96-06. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Thomas Krichel (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/educdus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.