Machlup’s Depression-era “guide” organizes crisis remedies by testing political slogans against economic interdependence. He treats crisis policy as theory in action: proposals about credit, work, wages, tariffs, money, saving, rationalization, or planning all presuppose a causal account of prices, costs, capital, and expectations. The argument is directed at measures that promise immediate relief while concealing their distributive costs and their effects on future production.
Alle Maßnahmen und Eingriffe, die von den Staaten und anderen öffentlichen Körperschaften unternommen werden, setzen eine bestimmte Theorie voraus.
English translation: All measures and interventions undertaken by states and other public bodies presuppose a particular theory.
This claim explains the book’s form. Machlup takes one watchword after another—“Ankurbelung,” public works, work-sharing, protection, autarky, monetary reform, technocracy—and asks whether it creates real means or merely reallocates purchasing power and losses. Credit expansion is his central case. New bank credit can give favored borrowers command over labor and materials and can simulate revival, but if not matched by real saving it sustains investments that the crisis has already revealed as unsound. Public works receive the same conditional judgment: financed from genuine savings and directed to productive uses they are unobjectionable; financed by inflation or capital consumption, they postpone adjustment and falsify calculation.
Mit der Ankurbelung durch Kreditausweitung kann man weder Reichtum schaffen, noch Armut beseitigen; da man aber mit der Ankurbelung vorübergehend die Armut verschleiern und Reichtum vortäuschen kann, werden wir zu Anschaffungen verleitet, die wir uns eigentlich nicht leisten dürften und die, wenn man sich über die wirkliche Lage klar wird, ihren Wert für uns verlieren.
English translation: By stimulating the economy through credit expansion one can neither create wealth nor eliminate poverty; but since such stimulation can temporarily disguise poverty and simulate wealth, we are tempted into purchases that we really could not afford and which, once the true situation becomes clear, lose their value for us.
The unemployment chapters translate this anti-magic argument into the language of enterprise accounts. Machlup rejects the idea that employment can be restored by dividing a fixed quantity of work or by preserving every nominal wage, tax, social charge, and administered price while expecting firms to hire at a loss. Work-sharing shortens labor time only by reducing output, earnings, or profitability unless accompanied by real cost adjustment. Debt relief and bank rescue are treated similarly: they may redistribute burdens, but when paid for by note issue they substitute monetary disorder for solvency. Recovery requires a price-cost relation in which production again pays.
Das Problem der Arbeitslosigkeit ist zur Hauptsache ein Problem der Rentabilität der Unternehmen.
English translation: The problem of unemployment is, in the main, a problem of the profitability of enterprises.
The foreign-trade discussion extends the same standard from firms to the national economy. Autarky is for Machlup a withdrawal from the division of labor that sustains modern population and productivity. Bilateral balancing is a statistical superstition, because payments move through services, interest, tourism, gifts, and capital flows as well as visible goods. Protection may benefit a branch, but only by forcing consumers and other producers to accept dearer inputs and poorer supply; even unilateral free trade is preferable to self-injury through retaliation against foreign error.
Jeder Schutz, der einem Erzeugungszweig gewährt wird, ist ein nationales Opfer.
English translation: Every protection granted to a branch of production is a national sacrifice.
His monetary chapters oppose both anti-money fantasies and monetary omnipotence. Barter is unfit for a complex economy; “Schwundgeld” is a tax on cash balances that tends toward inflation; index-money schemes politicize measurement and disturb contracts, interest, exchange rates, and investment. Gold is defended chiefly as a rule restraining discretionary credit. Money can redirect command and distort calculation, but it cannot create the real goods, tools, time, and saved resources on which production depends.
This is why Machlup defends saving against Depression-era consumptionism. Roundabout production requires waiting: machinery, raw materials, intermediate goods, and maintenance must be available before final goods can be supplied. To consume capital in the name of demand is to leave plant without complementary means. Hoarding may express distrust and interrupt circulation, but anti-saving rhetoric deepens the capital scarcity that recovery must overcome.
The discussions of rationalization, technocracy, and planning close the argument by rejecting both backward-looking and utopian answers. Machine-breaking ignores how technical improvement lowers costs and releases resources for other uses; technocratic fantasies ignore scarcity, capital requirements, and the need for monetary calculation among heterogeneous means. Interventionism fails cumulatively: each control creates distortions that call forth further controls, privileges, and administrative discretion. Corporatist arrangements suppress competition without achieving coherent planning, while socialism confronts the calculation problem because production goods lack market prices. The final lesson is an epistemic warning: public policy cannot repeal scarcity, and public interest is not discovered by privileging visible victims or favored sectors over the coordinating information of prices.
This work was divided into 63 sections when it entered the library's research corpus—an apparatus for search and citation, not necessarily the author's own table of contents. Each title opens its summary.
Put a question to this work; the Librarian answers from its 63 sections and cites the passage.
Ask the Librarian