IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/cambje/v36y2012i1p155-160.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A note on America's 1920--21 depression as an argument for austerity

Author

Listed:
  • Daniel Kuehn

Abstract

This note argues that recent interest in the 1920--21 depression in the USA as a historical precedent for austerity is inappropriate. Most of the austerity measures preceded the depression, which had already begun receding by the time Warren Harding implemented the relatively modest spending and tax cuts that are cited by modern proponents of austerity. The evidence suggests that the 1920--21 depression was the result of a variety of supply constraints, rather than a deficiency of effective demand, and is therefore a poor test of the efficacy of Keynesian fiscal policy. Copyright The Author 2012. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Cambridge Political Economy Society. All rights reserved., Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Daniel Kuehn, 2012. "A note on America's 1920--21 depression as an argument for austerity," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 36(1), pages 155-160.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:cambje:v:36:y:2012:i:1:p:155-160
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/cje/ber028
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Bruce Carlin & William Mann, 2017. "Finance, farms, and the Fed's early years," NBER Working Papers 23511, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Patrick Newman, 2016. "The depression of 1920–1921: a credit induced boom and a market based recovery?," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer;Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, vol. 29(4), pages 387-414, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:cambje:v:36:y:2012:i:1:p:155-160. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/cje .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.