Keynes vs Friedman

As a follow up to yesterday’s blog on Keynes, today’s extract in The Telegraph from Edmund Conway’s new book looks at Milton Friedman and Monetarism.

IB students need to have a sound awareness of the Monetarism versus Keynesian debate. Friedman and Keynes came from opposing ends of economic ideology. They doctrines have dominated economic thinking and policy over the last 50 years. In short Keynes placed greater emphasis on unemployment than inflation and gave warning that the state of the economy could be improved by some government interference. Friedman argued otherwise.

Conway provides a good analysis of the difference between these two economic giants:

“Inflation is always and everywhere a monetary phenomenon,” Friedman said. In short, by pumping extra money into the system (as the Keynesians were prone to doing) governments would drive up inflation, risking major economic pain. Friedman believed that if central banks were charged with maintaining control of prices, most other aspects of the economy – unemployment, economic growth, productivity – would take care of themselves.

While Keynes had asserted that it was difficult to persuade workers to accept lower wages, classical monetarist theory argued otherwise: that lower incomes for workers and lower prices for firms were acceptable in the face of rising inflation. The growth rate of an economy, argued Friedman, could be determined by controlling the amount of money being printed by central banks. Print more cash and people would spend more, and vice versa. It also marked an important political departure: whereas Keynes argued politicians should attempt to control the economy through fiscal policy, Friedman advocated giving independent central banks control over the economy using interest rates

The piece then goes on to examine the successes and failures of the two doctrines over the last fifty years. I always think it important for students to have an awareness of the changing economic conditions and favored policies over the decades, it only helps them to ingrain a deeper understanding of the theory.

He finishes the extract with an excellent quote from Martin Wolf:

Just as Keynes’s ideas were tested to destruction in the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s, Milton Friedman’s ideas might suffer a similar fate in the 1980s, 1990s and 2000s. All gods fail, if one believes too much.

The article in full can be found here.