A Summary View
In the Keynesian view, the central bank is a part of an extramarket remedy to a market malady. Investment markets are inherently unstable; government control of the economy's money supply is an important element in macroeconomic stabilization policy. The case against central banking—and for free banking—reverses the characterization of both remedy and malady. Free banking is a part of a market remedy to an extramarket malady. Even this stark reversal understates the case for free banking. It would remain valid even if we take the dramatic and chronic fiscal irresponsibility of the Treasury as given. Periodic crises that will inevitably occur in such a debt-ridden economic environment would be more ably countered by the market forces of free banking than by the policy moves of a central bank. But the extent of the Treasury's fiscal irresponsibility is itself dependent upon whether the Treasury can count on an accommodating central bank. Free banking limits the scope of this potential source of instability while at the same time enhancing the market's ability to deal with whatever instabilities that may persist.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Bagehot, Walter. 1873.Lombard Street: A Description of the Money Market. London: Henry S. King.
Ball, L., G. Mankiw, and D. Romer. (1988). “The New Keynesian Economics and the Output-Inflation Trade-off.”Brookings Papers on Economic Activity 1: 1–65.
Dowd, Kevin, ed. 1992.The Experience with Free Banking. London: Routledge.
Feldstein, Martin, ed. 1991.The Risk of Economic Crisis. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Figgie, Harry E., Jr. 1992.Bankruptcy 1995: The Coming Collapse of America and How to Stop It. Boston: Little, Brown.
Friedman, M. 1969.The Optimum Quantity of Money and Other Essays. Chicago: Aldine.
—— 1970.The Counter-Revolution in Monetary Theory. London: Institute of Economic Affairs.
Garrison, Roger W. 1993. “Public-Sector Deficits and Private-Sector Performance.” In Lawrence H. White, ed.The Crisis in American Banking. New York: New York University Press. Pp. 29–54.
—— 1994. “The Federal Reserve: Then and Now.”Review of Austrian Economics 8 (1): 3–19.
Keynes, J. 1936.The General Theory of Employment, Interest, and Money. New York: Harcourt, Brace.
Krugman, Paul. 1994.Peddling Prosperity: Economic Sense and Nonsense in the Age of Diminished Expectations. New York: W. W. Norton.
Rothbard, Murray N. 1994.The Case Against the Fed. Auburn, Ala.: Ludwig von Mises Institute.
Selgin, George A. 1988.The Theory of Free Banking: Money Supply under Competitive Note Issue. Totowa, N.J.: Roman and Littlefield.
—— 1991. “Monetary Equilibrium and the ‘Productivity Norm’ of Price-Level Policy. In Richard M. Ebeling, ed.,Austrian Economics: Perspectives on the Past and Prospects for the Future. Hillsdale, Mich.: Hillsdale College Press. Pp. 433–64.
Warburton, C. 1966.Depression, Inflation, and Monetary Policies: Selected Papers: 1945–53. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
White, Lawrence H. 1992. “Mises on Free Banking and Fractional Reserves.” In John W. Robbins and Mark Spangler, eds.A Man of Principle: Essays in Honor of Hans F. Sennholz. Grove City, Penn.: Grove City College Press. Pp. 517–33.
—— 1984.Free Banking in Britain: Theory, Experience, and Debate, 1800–1845. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Yeager, Leland B. 1986. “The Significance of Monetary Disequilibrium.”Cato Journal 6 (2): 369–99.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Garrison, R.W. Central banking, free banking, and financial crises. Rev Austrian Econ 9, 109–127 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01103332
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01103332