Using the general equilibrium growth model to study great depressions: a reply to Temin

Timothy Kehoe and Edward Prescott

No 418, Staff Report from Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis

Abstract: Three of the arguments made by Temin (2008) in his review of Great Depressions of the Twentieth Century are demonstrably wrong: that the treatment of the data in the volume is cursory; that the definition of great depressions is too general and, in particular, groups slow growth experiences in Latin America in the 1980s with far more severe great depressions in Europe in the 1930s; and that the book is an advertisement for the real business cycle methodology. Without these three arguments ? which are the results of obvious conceptual and arithmetical errors, including copying the wrong column of data from a source ? his review says little more than that he does not think it appropriate to apply our dynamic general equilibrium methodology to the study of great depressions, and he does not like the conclusion that we draw: that a successful model of a great depression needs to be able to account for the effects of government policy on productivity.

Date: 2008
New Economics Papers: this item is included in nep-bec, nep-dge and nep-fdg
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (6)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.minneapolisfed.org/research/sr/SR418.pdf
http://www.minneapolisfed.org/publications_papers/pub_display.cfm?id=4115 (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:fip:fedmsr:418

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Staff Report from Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Kate Hansel ().