3,422 works, 150 years of economic thought. Each one summarized and searchable, with cited passages inside.
Japan’s industrial expansion looks different when low wages and depressed farm incomes enter the explanation. Reviewing the July 1937 Japan issue of Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv, Emil Lederer values its economic evidence while questioning the political assumptions that shape its interpretation. His criticism becomes concrete in the conflict over rice prices: cheap rice helps sustain low industrial wages, but threatens farmers’ livelihoods; support for farmers puts pressure on workers’ real incomes. Rather than dismissing the collection as propaganda, Lederer distinguishes its empirical strengths from its neglect of competing social interests and peaceful alternatives to territorial expansion. This short review offers a pointed example of how a critic can use a publication’s own evidence to challenge the national necessities its contributors take for granted.
What makes an annotated statute useful as a record of legal change? In this brief review, Helene Lieser singles out the earlier Austrian laws appended to Edmund Prochaska’s edition of the new Czechoslovak instalment-transactions law. Her approval rests on that juxtaposition: current legislation becomes clearer when its predecessors are available alongside it. The notice records a concise judgment about legal documentation rather than an assessment of particular statutory provisions.
Confusion about the calculus, the authors contend, usually springs not from calculus itself but from shaky command of the algebra, geometry, and limits beneath it. Written for beginners rather than as a treatise on mathematical economics, this primer builds from graphing total cost against output toward the ideas an economist must handle to read the published literature: the limit, the derivative, marginal cost and marginal utility as special cases of it, maxima and minima, Lagrange multipliers for constrained cost minimization, Euler's theorem and the exhaustion of product under competition, least-squares regression, and Cramer's rule for market equilibrium. W. L. Crum credits Joseph Schumpeter with the volume's major additions, and the economic example — never abstract rigor for its own sake — governs every step.
The derivative of $y$ with respect to $x$ is the instantaneous rate of change of $y$ with $x$.
Can an economy hoard money even when its total cash holdings remain unchanged? In this reply to R. F. Kahn’s review of Prosperity and Depression, Gottfried Haberler argues that it can: expenditure and income may fall without any reduction in the money stock. This distinction anchors his defence of a monetary account of economic fluctuations against Kahn’s criticisms. Haberler’s distinctive concern is to separate differences of vocabulary from differences of explanation—especially where saving–investment identities threaten to substitute for accounts of how adjustment occurs. His qualified acceptance of public works sharpens the stakes: additional government spending must increase total demand, not merely displace expenditure elsewhere. The reply offers a focused encounter with the contested boundary between monetary circulation, effective demand, and the financing of recovery.
Confident opinion at the turn of the century assumed democracy's advance was as irreversible as the tide; by 1938 Bolshevism, Fascism, and National Socialism had made that assumption look naive. Across six lectures given on the Harris Foundation at Chicago, Rappard defines democracy not by its etymology but by the paired ideals of liberty and equality, then traces its uneven rise from Athens through Britain, France, and his native Switzerland. He reads the three great dictatorships as offspring of the World War—Lenin's from defeat, Mussolini's from disappointed victory, Hitler's from Versailles and slump—and diagnoses the strain within surviving democracies as a crisis of parliamentarism rather than of democracy itself. The remedy he presses is unfashionable: a retreat of the state from economic life, without which self-government becomes an illusion.
Democracy thrives on peace, and dictatorships on war.
The double meaning of the word Volk, Amonn contends, has quietly corrupted the foundations of economics by fusing the pure theoretical categories of the exchange economy with the practical concepts of Volkswirtschaftslehre. This introduction to economic thinking—second edition of 1944, essentially unchanged from the 1938 original—treats concepts frankly as instruments made by thought and defines each by the problem it is meant to solve. Moving from economic goods, scarcity, and Wohlstand through the production factors, prices, money, credit, and comparative costs, he denies that Volkswirtschaft is any real unit like a household, insisting it is only an ideational association of separate economies. Four appendices turn the method against Max Weber, Sombart, Gottl, and Englis, whose definitions he finds either candidly stipulative or objective merely in appearance.
Begriffe sind Denkwerkzeuge.
English translation: “Concepts are tools of thought.”
Making money costly to hold might encourage spending—but could it also shrink the money supply? In this brief 1938 review of A. Dahlberg’s When Capital Goes on Strike, G. L. S. Shackle examines a proposal to tax bank balances and depreciate notes. His distinctive interpretation is that the scheme would make liquidity expensive for money holders while making borrowing cheap. Yet attempts to escape the tax through debt repayment or purchases of banks’ securities could reduce the quantity of money. Sympathetic to further investigation, Shackle nevertheless asks whether a steady incentive can withstand a slump’s self-reinforcing momentum. The review offers a compact distinction between changing the rewards for holding money and adjusting policy to an approaching downturn.
Full employment is both the achievement and, in Josef Herbert Fürth’s account, the vulnerability of Germany’s economic policy: once unemployment disappears, workers gain the bargaining power to demand higher wages. In this brief 1939 round-table contribution to “Divergencies in the Development of Recovery in Various Countries,” Fürth asks whether democracies can borrow that policy without importing its coercion. Italy’s unsuccessful imitation complicates any simple recipe for recovery, but his central concern is the suppression of wage demands through censorship, the destruction of independent labour organizations, and force. His argument offers a pointed test of policy transfer: not merely whether public spending creates jobs, but whether the controls used to sustain the result can coexist with civil rights.
Faithful exposition is not the same as a convincing test of a theory. In this short review of Arthur Schweitzer’s study of Spiethoff’s business-cycle theory, Oskar Morgenstern welcomes renewed attention to Spiethoff’s treatment of capital but questions the standards used to assess it. Why demand conformity to a preconceived theoretical system when the conjectures themselves remain untested? Morgenstern offers a concrete alternative: compare rival notions of “capital shortage” and investigate them statistically. His measured judgement distinguishes the value of recovering neglected work from the task of establishing its explanatory strength. The review gives readers a concise instance of economic criticism that asks not merely whether an account is faithful or systematic, but what evidence would help decide between competing explanations.
Theoretical disagreement need not erase intellectual gratitude. In this brief 1939 review of John Bates Clark: A Memorial, reprinted with editorial annotations, Hayek recalls Clark’s generosity toward younger scholars while rejecting his reduction to a believer in natural economic harmony. Rather than defend marginal productivity analysis at length, he offers a personal recollection and a revealing document: Clark’s 1890 letter to Robert Zuckerkandl, describing his initial belief that he had independently discovered principles of value and acknowledging Austrian predecessors. The letter gives substance to Hayek’s account of cordial relations across the capital-theory controversy. This small review preserves a precise glimpse of how recognition, mentorship and disagreement could coexist among economists.
A peace settlement cannot credibly restrain defeated states if the victors refuse equivalent restraints themselves. In this 1939 letter to The Spectator, republished in 1997, Friedrich August von Hayek argues for an immediate Anglo-French federation as a practical pledge of British commitment to Europe. His case joins two problems often treated separately: the vulnerability of minorities to national economic policy, even under democratic government, and France’s reasonable fear that a Central European federation would reinforce German predominance. Drawing on Central Europe’s mixed populations, Hayek challenges the hope that better borders alone could secure peace. This brief intervention shows why he regarded voluntary limits on British and French sovereignty not as a concession to follow victory, but as a condition for a settlement others could accept on equal terms.
To analyze business cycles, this first volume of Schumpeter's 1939 study contends, is to analyze the whole economic process of the capitalist era, not some detachable pathology bolted onto an otherwise placid system. Progress itself unstabilizes: innovation, carried out by new firms drawing on bank-created credit, repeatedly knocks the economy away from equilibrium and forces the recessions that absorb it. Weaving theory, statistics, and history, he organizes the record around three superimposed waves, Kondratieff, Juglar, and Kitchin, and reads railroadization as the paradigm of long-gestation innovation. A secondary wave of speculation and debt, engaging Fisher's debt-deflation, explains why some depressions turn abnormal and destructive. The volume closes with dense historical outlines from 1787 to 1913 across England, Germany, and the United States, following cotton, steam, steel, and electrification.
Revival is the last and not the first phase of a cycle.