Don Boudreaux quotes Buchanan thusly:
"But the 1930’s were perilous times, and the Great Depression left deep scars. The revolution in economic thought stirred men’s souls; the banner of full employment was to be advanced at all costs and against whatever odds. This became the vital center of attention. Little time was available for careful examination of the intellectual stumbling blocks which the old-fashioned ideas on public debt seemed to represent. Out these ideas went, and the “new” ideas were left only to be picked up and carried forward, not by scholars of public debt theory, but by fiscal policy advocates."
I have three questions:
1. Is this a historically accurate or inaccurate description of way people thought at the time?
2. Is this a a historically accurate or inaccurate description of the way people approached scientific analysis of the economy at the time (not whether the analysis is now considered completely right, but whether they were uncareful, whether they were just being advocates, etc.)?
3. If the answer to one or both of the preceding questions are "no", how should feel about this quote and about Buchanan's argument about the impact of Keynesianism on the late 20th century?
How Are These Times Different?
42 minutes ago