Is The Macroeconomic Thinking Was Revolutionized By Still Relevant? | the macroeconomic thinking was revolutionized by

{

The term “macro” was introduced in the 1970's by Milton R. Fisher and thereafter the term “micro” became popular too. But the fact is the two terms are used interchangeably. The purpose of this article is to demystify the often muddy waters of the popular use of the two terms. In other words, I want to see how the two terms are used, and point out what they really mean. After reading this article you should be in a better position to understand the concept of the macro-economic thinking was revolutionized by the Great Recession.

|

The term “macro” was introduced in the 1970's by Milton R. Fisher and thereafter the term “micro” became popular too. But the fact is the two terms are used interchangeably. The purpose of this article is to demystify the often muddy waters of the popular use of the two terms. In other words, I want to see how the two terms are used, and point out what they really mean. After reading this article you should be in a better position to understand the concept of the macro-economic thinking was revolutionized by the Great Recession.

}

Milton R. Fisher first pointed out that the central topic of discussion in the United States leading up to the Great Depression was the condition of the overall economy. His work and the subsequent works on the topic of micro economics laid the groundwork for modern monetarily based economics. Fisher distinguished between what he called “monetary depreciation” and the more encompassing “monetary inflation.” It was Fisher's notion that the former was a product of governmental action, and the latter was the natural response to increasing demands for products and services which in turn inflated prices to a point that they could no longer accommodate.

As I outlined earlier, the concept of macroeconomics encompasses the analysis of the whole economy as a whole. The debate over Fisher's monetarist approach versus Say's broad-based approach to Say's philosophy can be likened to the debate over the definition of civilization. Do the people living in the cities consider themselves to be part of a civilization or are they independent and unorganized? And do the cities fall into either of these categories, or did they only experience the early symptoms of both approaches, with the later being the exception rather than the norm?

The debate over macroeconomics is still ongoing today. Some modern thinkers, such as Paul Singer, argue that Say's broad-based approach to Say's philosophy provides the correct definition of macroeconomics. Others, such as George Soros, focus on the qualitative aspects of Say's approach and argue that monetary policy, interest rates, and other factors do affect macroeconomics. Still others such as Oxford professor Michael Boothroyd focus on the political factors that have impacted the macroeconomy and argue that Say's broad approach lacks a clear-cut answer to this question.

Still yet, some modern thinkers such as Nobel Prize winner Robert Solow, reject the use of a broad and generalized definition of macroeconomics and maintain that Say's main concern in his writings and his institute are micro economics and micro-prices. According to Solow, Say's main . . . . . . issue is the protection of labor. He is concerned about the effects of trade protection on the wages of workers. Solow contends that Say's approach is not inclusive of the politics of the United States, as his work has been largely ignored or confined within academic circles and the mainstream media.

Still, others such as David Norton, author of More Than Great Markets, believes that Say's work has much left in it. Still others such as Dean Baker agree with Solow in that macro-prices are not the important issue in macroeconomics. Baker emphasizes the need for domestic policies to support micro-prices within the economy. Political constraints can limit the ability of government to protect the interests of average citizens. Baker also feels that the focus of Say's work has been too narrow. In addition, some of Say's methods and data are unreliable because they are based on surveying selected groups of industries and the distribution of prices differs from industry to industry.

PDF) What Keynesian Revolution? A Reconsideration Seventy Years - the macroeconomic thinking was revolutionized by
PDF) What Keynesian Revolution? A Reconsideration Seventy Years – the macroeconomic thinking was revolutionized by | the macroeconomic thinking was revolutionized by

History of macroeconomic thought - Wikipedia - the macroeconomic thinking was revolutionized by
History of macroeconomic thought – Wikipedia – the macroeconomic thinking was revolutionized by | the macroeconomic thinking was revolutionized by
Keynesian vs Classical School Of Thought - Vskills Blog - the macroeconomic thinking was revolutionized by
Keynesian vs Classical School Of Thought – Vskills Blog – the macroeconomic thinking was revolutionized by | the macroeconomic thinking was revolutionized by
Objectives of Public Expenditure:
Objectives of Public Expenditure: | the macroeconomic thinking was revolutionized by
Objectives of Public Expenditure:
Objectives of Public Expenditure: | the macroeconomic thinking was revolutionized by
Objectives of Public Expenditure:
Objectives of Public Expenditure: | the macroeconomic thinking was revolutionized by
Objectives of Public Expenditure:
Objectives of Public Expenditure: | the macroeconomic thinking was revolutionized by