Abstract
How do neoclassical economists reply to Austrian critiques of their work? Typically, although to be sure there are exceptions, they ignore them. That is, the former move mountains in an effort to avoid the arguments of the latter. Sometimes this occurs even when neoclassicals explicitly reply to Austrian critiques. A case in point is Gallaway and Vedder (2006). Ostensibly written as a critique of Barnett and Block (2006), this “Reply” manages to ignore every substantive criticism leveled at them by their critics. Instead, it focuses on a point irrelevant to the substantive issues, but an interesting one for all that
Subject
General Business, Management and Accounting
Reference7 articles.
1. Barnett, William II and Walter Block. 2006. "On Gallaway and Vedder on Stabilization Policy" Quarterly Journal of Austrian Economics. Vol. 9, No. 1, spring, pp. 57-81; http://www.mises.org/ journals/qjae/pdf/qjae9_1_5.pdf
2. Barnett, William II, and Walter Block. Unpublished. “Austrian Business Cycle Theory and Evolving Institutions.”
3. Block, Walter, Christopher Westley and Alex Padilla. Unpublished. “Internal vs. external explanations: a new perspective on the history of economic thought”
4. Card, David, and Alan B. Krueger. 1994. "Minimum Wages and Employment: A Case Study of the FastFood Industry in New Jersey and Pennsylvania," American Economic Review, Vol. 84, No. 4, September, pp. 772-793
5. Gallaway, L., and R. K. Vedder. 1987. "Wages, Prices, and Employment: Von Mises and the Progressives.” Review of Austrian Economics. 1: 33-80.
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献