Reply to Hortlund's "Defense of the Real Bills Doctrine"

Richard H. Timberlake

Econ Journal Watch, 2006, vol. 3, issue 2, 393-397

Abstract: IN A CRITIQUE OF MY PAPER ON “GOLD STANDARDS AND THE Real Bills Doctrine in U.S. Monetary Policy†that appeared in Econ Journal Watch (August 2005), Per Hortlund has raised several interesting issues about the Real Bills Doctrine (RBD). As Hortlund observes, my article had two major themes, first, the innocence of the gold standard for the monetary infelicities that caused the Great Contraction of 1929-1933, and, second, the culpability of the RBD for the debacle. Hortlund accepts my defense of the gold standard. However, he finds some arguments to support a case for the RBD, and he raises an important issue concerning the substance of the RBD and its implementation as policy during 1929-1933, part of which I thoroughly accept.

Date: 2006
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://econjwatch.org/File+download/114/2006-05-t ... quo.pdf?mimetype=pdf (application/pdf)
https://econjwatch.org/217 (text/html)

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:ejw:journl:v:3:y:2006:i:2:p:393-397

Access Statistics for this article

Econ Journal Watch is currently edited by Daniel Klein

More articles in Econ Journal Watch from Econ Journal Watch Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Jason Briggeman ().