TESTING AUSTRIAN BUSINESS CYCLE THEORY? A SECOND REJOINDER TO ANDREW YOUNG

Robert P. Murphy (), William Barnett () and Walter E. Block ()
Additional contact information
Robert P. Murphy: Mises Institute
William Barnett: Loyola University New Orleans
Walter E. Block: Loyola University New Orleans

Romanian Economic Business Review, 2012, vol. 7, issue 3, 7-20

Abstract: Young (2005) attempted to test Austrian Business Cycle Theory (ABCT). Murphy, Barnett and Block (hence, MBB, 2009) criticized Young (2005) on the ground that his model failed on its own terms. MBB (2009) found significantly different parameter estimates using the same data as did Young (2005). Beyond these serious objections, there is the more fundamental difficulty that Young’s approach, even if conducted flawlessly, would still be an improper “test” of ABCT. Young (2010) is a response to MBB (2009). The present paper is a rejoinder to Young (2010). We argue that Young (2010) was not an adequate response to MBB (2009) for the following reasons: tba

Keywords: Austrian Business Cycle Theory; testing economic theories; illustrating economic theories (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2012
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.rebe.rau.ro/RePEc/rau/journl/FA12/REBE-FA12-A1.pdf (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:rau:journl:v:7:y:2012:i:3:p:7-20

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Romanian Economic Business Review from Romanian-American University Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Alex Tabusca ().