You've never even opened Freidman and Schwartz, huh?
LoL Friedman is such a has been.
He wouldn't even pass prelims these days at a solid LRM.Friedman was a trained Mathematical statistician and has actually made published contributions to statistics. Not one of your reg monkeys can do that right now. And it was Friedman's Monetary History that killed of Kindelberger style narrative history in favor of more mathematically rigorous methods
F+S not purely narrative ala Kindelberger
It is interesting to note that research papers critical of mainstream economic thinking do not appear in the mainstream economic journals:
Throughout the 1970s and most of the 1980s, the so-called “right wing” was right about virtually everything on the economic front. Most of all communism, but also inflation, taxes, (most of) deregulation, labor unions, and much more, noting that a big chunk of the right wing blew it on race and some other social issues. The Friedmanite wing of the right nailed it on floating exchange rates.
Friedman did not advocate monetary policy instead of fiscal. His idea was to have least action by the Fed. Using monetary policy to get out of GFC would not be Friedman's choice - doing nothing would be.No. On the contrary, we are all Friedmanites now. Monetary policy not fiscal was the dominant tool to fight the GFC. No one is proposing hydraulic descriptions of the economy, even NK models have some kind of forward looking mechanism in them. IS-LM still very dead.
Two things happened. The more extreme version of Chicago/Minnesota school like RBCs were found to be poor at describing what happened during the recession and two, Chicago was way too successful. Every major macro program now looks like Chicago's program in the 80s. So what distinguished Chicago no longer holds true.
This is similar to Samuelson's legacy. Phillips curve out, IS-LM out. But General Equilibrium and Mathematical Economics were retained
That is only partially correct. Friedman actually had kudos for the Fed's relatively steady-as-she-goes policy during the Great Moderation in the 1990s and early 2000s. Friedman also would have fully approved of unconventional monetary policy (QE) to the extent that it prevented the broader money supply from collapsing, which it did. Friedman believed that the Fed made a big mistake in being too passive during the Great Depression.
Huh? Narrow money didn't collapse. Broader money did. Shame that Fed doesn't track M3 anymore or this would be evident to those who actually look at broader aggregates (even if they have to make them themselves). Commercial Paper and Repo collapsed almost completely.
Friedman would have the same criticisms about Fed Great Recession as Fed Great Depression because they were just as impotent.
Yep, money is endogenous and we cannot target it. Friedman was wrong on most things. McCarthyism made many people's career. Right wing ideologues did extremely well and got Nobel Prize.
Inflation is also not a monetary phenomenon but one that depends on conflict after triggers like exchange rate devaluation and the like.
Let's see. Milton Friedman made an entire school of economic thought on monetary policy without knowing how banking or central banks worked.
Turned out real well for the UK, US and Chile when they tried it. Pinochet actually had to kick out his Chicago school advisers because GDP per capita was lower than 8 years previous when they had taken power!
Let's see. Milton Friedman made an entire school of economic thought on monetary policy without knowing how banking or central banks worked.
Turned out real well for the UK, US and Chile when they tried it. Pinochet actually had to kick out his Chicago school advisers because GDP per capita was lower than 8 years previous when they had taken power!
You are an idiot.
It is interesting to note that research papers critical of mainstream economic thinking do not appear in the mainstream economic journals:
https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/-/media/boe/files/quarterly-bulletin/2013/the-natural-rate-hypothesis-an-idea-past-its-sell-by-date.pdf?la=en&hash=A3C932077297633F14B85826B65DEE9C48CEA560
Too big to fail had a lasting negative impact on Chicago. But has nothing to do with Friedman.
There have been hundreds of crises of various size in recent past.
Milton Friedman was one of the greatest economist and academic of all time. I am shocked to see that some here classify him as a right winger. He was not! He was a libertarian. You cannot think of the political specturum in a two-dimensional overly simplified way. He supported personal freedoms way more than today’s democrats and he was more of a free markets guy than today’s republicans.
He was a great intellect. And his legacy will not be harmed by the attack of lesser geniuses.
Milton Friedman was one of the greatest economist and academic of all time. I am shocked to see that some here classify him as a right winger. He was not! He was a libertarian. You cannot think of the political specturum in a two-dimensional overly simplified way. He supported personal freedoms way more than today’s democrats and he was more of a free markets guy than today’s republicans.
He was a great intellect. And his legacy will not be harmed by the attack of lesser geniuses.
I agree. Unfortunately Krugman described him as a little more than an extended footnote in history (though later he withdrew that opinion). How dare he said that!