Catallaxy Files

Australia's leading libertarian and centre-right blog

Some Austrian readings

4 comments

I got an email asking me to recommend some readings in Austrian Business Cycle theory. I suspect the individual wasn’t asking that I recommend they read Mises and Hayek or even Rothbard. So here are some secondary sources (in no particular order):

John P. Cochran and Fred R. Glahe The Hayek-Keynes Debate: Lessons for Current Business Cycle Research

Mark Skousen The structure of production

Mark Skousen Vienna & Chicago, Friends or Foes?: A Tale of Two Schools of Free-Market Economics (highly recommended)

Roger Garrison Time and Money: The Macroeconomics of Capital Structure and Austrian Macroeconomics: A Diagrammatical Exposition

Steve Horwitz Microfoundations and Macroeconomics: An Austrian Perspective

Tyler Cowen has a series of clips talking about business cycle research here. He also has a book Risk and Business Cycles: New and Old Austrian Perspectives – I haven’t read it so can’t comment I just include it for completeness.

The Garrison and Horwitz books are compliments IMHO and if you were only going to read one book on that list then Skousen’s Vienna & Chicago, Friends or Foes? should be the book.

Written by Sinclair Davidson

January 14th, 2013 at 9:23 pm

Posted in Uncategorized

4 Responses to 'Some Austrian readings'

Subscribe to comments with RSS or TrackBack to 'Some Austrian readings'.

  1. That name Rothbard rings a bell. Something to do with pimping swans to the aristocracy.

    Blogstrop

    15 Jan 13 at 6:17 am

  2. The silence you hear is the silence of hundreds of Cat readers pouring through the works on the Austrian Business Cycle


    The Garrison and Horwitz books are compliments IMHO ”

    Hmmm
    “Darling is my microfoundations laid on too thick?”
    “No sweetheart, its right out of Garrison and Horwitz.”

    Not what I would use for compliments, but who am I to judge?

    Grey

    15 Jan 13 at 5:10 pm

  3. You’re an imbecile, Grey.

    You are arguing that having microfoundations for macroeconomics is wrong.

    Thanks Sinclair.

    .

    16 Jan 13 at 9:45 am

  4. You’re an imbecile, Grey.

    Since the entire admittedly minor point I was making seems to have gone whoosh over your head, I would say that insult was rather ironic, dot, wouldn’t you?

    Grey

    16 Jan 13 at 6:44 pm

Leave a Reply