Monetarists and Keynesians on Central Banking: A Study of a Failed Debate

Thomas Mayer

No 137, Working Papers from University of California, Davis, Department of Economics

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.

Pages: 65
Date: 2003-01-07
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://repec.dss.ucdavis.edu/files/JdEqicur9CXgcHJnWSFAXpmM/96-6.pdf (application/pdf)

Related works:
Working Paper: MONETARISTS AND KEYNESIANS ON CENTRAL BANKING: A STUDY OF A FAILED DEBATE
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:cda:wpaper:137

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Working Papers from University of California, Davis, Department of Economics Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Letters and Science IT Services Unit ().