Bruce Caldwell Delivers Keynote Address On Hayek For Library & Archives Workshop On Political Economy
On Friday, June 24, the second annual Hoover Institution Library & Archives Workshop on Political Economy hosted a public lecture by renowned scholarBruce Caldwell, professor of economics at Duke University and director of Duke's Center for the History of Political Economy.
The twenty-one essays in this book provide an overview of the contributions of Nobel laureate and Hoover Institution honorary fellow Friedrich A. von Hayek to the fields of economics, political theory, history, and philosophy.
David R. Henderson on Keynes Hayek: The Clash that Defined Modern Economics by Nicholas Wapshott
As part of the inaugural Hoover Institution Library and Archives’ Workshop on Political Economy, Professor Angus Burgin of Johns Hopkins University gave the keynote lecture titled "Hayek, Friedman, and the Return of Laissez-Faire."
Hoover fellow Russell Roberts is using rap music to make the dismal science far less dismal. By Charles Lindsey.
Why shouldn’t American universities give conservative ideas their due? By Peter Berkowitz.
A review of episodes in economic and intellectual history indicates the superiority of a limited government market economy over the alternative models of economic organization. The siren calls of pundits, politicians, and even some economists in favor of communist central planning during the Great Depression; market socialism after World War II; and, more recently, massive welfare states and/or extensive government micromanagement of markets each ran afoul of their own problems and comparisons to the limited government (based on sound criteria) capitalist model. The limited government capitalist model, once again under attack from those who would greatly expand the role of government, needs its defenders, as the alternative models have proven historically, intellectually, and practically bankrupt.
Behind the headlines lies an old and basic question: in the clash between Islamism and the nation-state, who will win? By Charles Hill.
This essay discusses the inflation of the 1970s and the disinflations of the 1980s and 1990s. It provides historical and intellectual history perspectives on these events. It argues that the consensus view of economists on inflation and its costs has changed more than on any other subject in the past thirty years. As late as 1980, many economists argued that the cost of inflation was low and that the cost of disinflation so great that it was better to live with 10 or 12 percent inflation than bear the temporarily higher unemployment and lost output that would accompany a disinflation.
Fortunately, Federal Reserve Board chairmen Paul Volcker and Alan Greenspan engineered two rounds of disinflation, first from 12.0 percent to 4.5 percent and then to 2.5 percent. Although there were costs--a severe recession in 1981–82 and a not-so-soft landing in 1990–91--the low and relatively stable inflation of the 1980s and 1990s has been a major factor in a long boom in the United States, two long expansions interrupted by a short, mild recession. And economists' thinking about the costs and consequences of high inflation has shifted to the view that stable low inflation, like the lowest possible tax rates and minimum necessary regulation, is a fundamental pillar of maximizing sustained long-run growth.