Testing Austrian Business Cycle Theory? A Second Rejoinder To Andrew Young

Abstract

Young (2005) attempted to test Austrian Business Cycle Theory (ABCT). Murphy, Barnett and Block (hence, MBB, 2009) criticized Young (2005) on the ground that his model failed on its own terms. MBB (2009) found significantly different parameter estimates using the same data as did Young (2005). Beyond these serious objections, there is the more fundamental difficulty that Young’s approach, even if conducted flawlessly, would still be an improper “test” of ABCT. Young (2010) is a response to MBB (2009). The present paper is a rejoinder to Young (2010). We argue that Young (2010) was not an adequate response to MBB (2009) for the following reasons: tba

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 11 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.