Search

The article focuses on Robert Solow which belongs to the generation of economists who elaborated and promoted the postwar Keynesian mainstream. It mentions neoclassical synthesis was a two-way street with influence between Walrasian and Keynesian ideas flowing both ways. It also mentions distinguish between Walrasian enthusiasts and Walrasian skeptics within the seminal authors of the neoclassical synthesis.

The article discusses Austrian economist Oskar Morgenstern and the historical school of economics based in Vienna, Austria from 1925 to 1950. It outlines Morgenstern's professional career, his shifting attitudes regarding Jews and Nazism, and his interest in the use of mathematics and mathematical models in economics. Other subjects explored include the Austrian Institute for Business Cycle Research run by Morgenstern and the Mathematical Colloquium founded by mathematician Karl Menger, science philosopher Otto Neurath, and the interpersonal relationships of the intelligentsia of Vienna in the interwar period.

The question of whether there is general equilibrium in Adam Smith lies at the heart of the battlefield between those who wish to see Smith as a precursor of modern economics and those who see in his writing an alternative system. In this article I will argue that it is possible for general equilibrium to be present in Smith and yet, for his system to be an alternative to, rather than a precursor of, modern economics. I will show that coordination is crucial in both systems although the narratives that produce it are fundamentally different. I will argue that in the end, there are two coordinating mechanisms in Smith. First, there is the invisible hand of the Theory of Moral Sentiments, which facilitates the process of specialization and trade (or division of labor). It is a coordinating mechanism and not a tautology, as it is based on a presumption about human behavior yet it is not dependent on the market. Without the belief in the coordinating power of the invisible hand, labor would not have been divided and people would not have become dependent on others. Second, the growing dependency on strangers brings to the fore the coordinating powers of the market. Their function in this elaborate system is to uphold the promise of the invisible hand of the Theory of Moral Sentiments and guarantee life's necessities, as well as support the new social drive that, through the deception of nature, is manifested in the accumulation of wealth. I will argue that according to Smith, these functions are well performed by the markets when prices are all at their natural rate. It is only then that across all industries and employment, division of labor would occur, affluence would be generated, and the worse-off people in society would not be left behind. The mere existence of general equilibrium ensures none of the above and is hence unrelated to the question of successful coordination. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the author's quest to write a biography of economist Harry Johnson. He uses the writings of economist John Stuart Mill's "Autobiography," as well as the autobiographical writings of John Kenneth Galbraith including "The Scotch," and "A Life in Our Times," and two memoirs written by John Maynard Keynes, "Melchior: A Defeated Enemy," and "My Early Beliefs," as a starting point to determine what type of information should be included when writing a biography of an economist. The author focuses on particular aspects of Johnson's life including his studies at Cambridge University, his decision to leave Manchester University for Chicago University, and his relationship with the other economists at Chicago University.

A first person narrative is presented which explores Oskar Morgenstern's studies and theories of economics during the 1920s. He published his first book, "Wirtschaftprognose: Eine Untersuchung ihrer Voraussetzungen und Möglichkeiten," in 1928 after attending the university of Vienna in Austria to gain a degree in political science, the closest degree to economic study available during the time.

The author responds to the article "Ricardo as a 'Classical Economist': The 'New View' Reexamined," by Terry Peach. Using David Ricardo's "Notes on Malthus's Principles of Political Economy," as well as Thomas Robert Malthus' "Principles of Political Economy," Hollinger feels that Ricardo is unabashedly representative of "new view." He argues against Peach's assertions that Ricardo's ideas cease to be relevant during a "nonstationary" economic period. A discussion of different growth rates of wages and capital is presented.

The author responds to the article "Ricardo as a 'Classical Economist': The 'New View' Reexamined--A Reply to Dr. Peach" by Samuel Hollander. He feels that some of the criticism involving David Ricardo's response to Thomas Robert Malthus' "Principles of Political Economy," is unjust. His original essay included such references, but that section was cut at the request of the journal's editors. While he admits that some of Ricardo's writings do reflect the "new view" of economic theory, these views were not vital to Ricardo's beliefs.