It is widely acknowledged among economists today that their discipline is in a state of some disarray. Behind the controversies particular to the times lies a fundamental crisis of thought, rooted in the increasingly apparent inadequacy of the neoclassical approach that has been dominant for some fifty years. The failure to impose such a formalistic framework has fostered the return from the wilderness of the subjectivist Austrian School of economics and renewed debate on the nature of markets and the predictability of economic phenomena. Until recently subjectivist economics has been largely ignored by mainstream economists. But as the dominant neoclassical, Keynesian, and monetarist approaches have each been championed in turn only to be found wanting at the end of the day, the Austrian approach has come to seem increasingly promising. In this book, first published in 1986 and now reprinted with a new foreword from Solomon M. Stein and Virgil Henry Storr, Ludwig M. Lachmann presents his case for viewing economic events as elements within an ongoing process dependent on human actions in a world where the future, though not unimaginable, is unknowable. In stark contrast to the mechanistic world view of mainstream orthodoxy, his perspective takes due account of the complex workings of the human mind. His insistence on the variety of ways in which markets may function warns against elevating any "process" theory to the levels of abstraction characteristic of neoclassical equilibrium theory. Drawing easily on the classics as well as the most recent theoretical developments, Lachmann sheds new light on each of the areas he discusses. Ludwig M. Lachmann (1906-1990) witnessed and participated in numerous controversies for over fifty years as a leading member of the Austrian School, while remaining receptive to ideas from a diversity of disciplines and schools of thought. He studied under F. A. Hayek at the London School of Economics in the 1930s, and was a distinguished member of the Austrian School of economics and has played an active part in its revival over the past ten years. His previous publications include Capital and its Structure (1956), The Legacy of Max Weber (1970), and Capital Expectations and the Market Process (1977).

Rothbard opens with a theoretical treatment of business cycle theory, showing how an expansive monetary policy generates imbalances between investment and consumption. He proceeds to examine the Fed's policies of the 1920s, demonstrating that it was quite inflationary even if the effects did not show up in the price of goods and services. He showed that the stock market correction was merely one symptom of the investment boom that led inevitably to a bust. The Great Depression was not a crisis for capitalism but merely an example of the downturn part of the business cycle, which in turn was generated by government intervention in the economy. Had the book appeared in the 1940s, it might have spared the world much grief. Even so, its appearance in 1963 meant that free-market advocates had their first full-scale treatment of this crucial subject. The damage to the intellectual world inflicted by Keynesian- and socialist-style treatments would be limited from that day forward.--Amazon.com

2012 Reprint of 1962 Edition. Exact facsimile of the original edition, not reproduced with Optical Recognition Software. If Mises has an unheralded masterpiece, "The Ultimate Foundation of Economic Science" is it. There are two senses in which this book is indeed ultimate: it deals with the very core of economics as a science, and it is the last book that he wrote. For that reason, it is a real milestone in the history of his work. In this volume, Mises argued that economics is a science because human action is a natural order of life and that it is the actions of humans that determine markets and capital decisions. Since Mises believed these links could be proven scientifically, he concluded that economics, with its basis on that human action, is indeed a science in its own right and not an ideology or a metaphysical doctrine.