The policies the Fed cooked up during the mid-1990s that brought on the unsustainable boom (mistakenly called the "New Economy") are also the policies that Greenspan employed in the last year, ostensibly to give us a "soft landing." The government is now engaged in a number of foolish regulatory ventures that certainly will make economic life more difficult as we seek to climb out of this latest downturn.
Economists are fond of writing open letters to politicians in attempts to lead them down "proper" policy paths. In 1930, a thousand economists signed an open letter to President Herbert Hoover asking him not to sign the infamous Smoot-Hawley Tariff. Hoover signed it anyway, creating one more disastrous policy mistake that ultimately created the Great Depression.
According to the popular view, the revival of some important economic indicators has raised the likelihood that the aggressive lowering of interest rates by the Fed will invigorate the economy. The irony is that the very same loose monetary policies that are expected to energize the economy in fact undermine its main source of strength.
Since it takes some time to say for sure that we are in recession, by the time we know we are in recession, we are already most of the way through it. This time, it took eight months--from March until November 2001--to determine we were in a recession. Here we are, in December 2001, and there are some signs that we may soon start to recover.
Prior to the Keynesian era, recessions were called panics and had durations of about three months. The shortness in duration reflected the lack of interventionism by extra-market authorities. Today, recessions last much longer, as the bad idea that the state should manage the economy has become legitimized.
Is there any merit to the popular definition of recession? Why must it be two quarters of negative growth and not one, or perhaps three? Frank Shostak gives another view and assesses the prospects for recovery.
The Fed-fueled boom in Web commerce turned to bust, but that says nothing about the merit of the medium, writes Lew Rockwell.
Contrary to popular belief, interest rates have nothing to do with money. The attempt to manipulate interest via the money supply can only cause distortions.
It is sad that, even though Keynesian economics has been discredited time and again, we still hear the pundits declare that consumers cause recessions- and prosperity- simply by choosing to spend or not to spend. The "heroic consumer" who spends and spends in the face of adversity needs to be put to rest.
Roger Garrison’s long-awaited book compares and contrasts Austrian business cycle theory with a number of other approaches,
