Bitte verwenden Sie diesen Link, um diese Publikation zu zitieren, oder auf sie als Internetquelle zu verweisen: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/324926 
Autor:innen: 
Erscheinungsjahr: 
2022
Quellenangabe: 
[Journal:] Journal of Contextual Economics – Schmollers Jahrbuch [ISSN:] 2568-762X [Volume:] 142 [Issue:] 3 [Year:] 2022 [Pages:] 247-272
Verlag: 
Duncker & Humblot, Berlin
Zusammenfassung: 
Generating verisimilous and policy-relevant models of the macroeconomy in a democracy is a challenge. Three broad theoretical perspectives are considered: (A) the orthodox Keynesian Synthesis; (B) the Austrian response; and (C) the Public Choice response. The orthodox view is inaccurate, but has the advantage of being "a model." The Austrian critique, while largely correct, generates no usable political advice. The Public Choice critique provides a model for understanding the likely form and effects of government policies. But Public Choice scholars have missed the policy thrust of Progressivism, which accounts for the problem of political equilibrium, and insulates technocratic power from voters and interest groups. Keynesian orthodoxy has consistently won because it is playing a different game.
Schlagwörter: 
Models
Public Choice
Keynesianism
Austrian School
Equilibrium
JEL: 
B22
P11
Persistent Identifier der Erstveröffentlichung: 
Creative-Commons-Lizenz: 
cc-by Logo
Dokumentart: 
Article

Datei(en):
Datei
Größe





Publikationen in EconStor sind urheberrechtlich geschützt.