Quotessence
Home / Authors / Bruce Caldwell

Bruce Caldwell Quotes

Author

Filter quotes by topic

Famous Bruce Caldwell Quotes

“As for Hayek, he had no funds for a rental, having just bought a house. It was a good time to make a purchase: there was plenty of inventory and house prices were falling as tens of thousands cleared out of London. But he had also been given notice. As luck would have it, one came available on Turner Close. As noted earlier, in order to be able to afford the down pay- ment, that spring Hayek sold to the Bank for International Settlements, via its director, Per Jacobsson, six hundred or so volumes on money and bank- ing published before 1900, mostly in English, which he had collected in the late 1920s for the never-completed big volume on money. They were in their new home by August (Bartley interviews, Nov 2, 1983; IB 94).”

“In Hayek’s monetary theory of the cycle the upswing is generated by monetary expansions that cause an excess of investment over volun- tary saving and a shift in the structure of production toward more time- consuming processes. This structure, created by a depressed money rate of interest, cannot be sustained. Monetary expansion, then, will not pro- duce an everlasting boom, and when the expansion eventually stops, crisis and depression follow. With regard to the sources of monetary expansion, while others like Mises put the blame on the misguided (“inflationist” or “cheap money”) attitude of the monetary authorities, Hayek pointed to the endogenous process of money creation by the banks, in particular in a sys- tem of fractional reserve banking (see, e.g., Hayek 2012a [1933a], chap. 4, vs. Mises 2006b [1928]).”

“There was frequently a moral lesson lurking just below the surface in Hayek’s accounts, usually having to do with Keynes’s overweening self- confidence and the dangers of hubris. His retelling of their final conversation is illustrative. Hayek had asked Keynes whether he was at all concerned about the uses to which his disciples were putting his theories, and in particular, whether a theory that had made sense in “the age of plenty” of the 1930s might not stimulate inflation as the economy neared full employment. Keynes assured Hayek that were his theories ever to become harmful, he could turn public opinion against them like that, and snapped his fingers. Unfortunately, as Hayek concluded, “six weeks later he was dead”.”

“Those concessions might also explain why Keynes responded to the book as he did, a response that might surprise later generations. Keynes read it on the boat on the way to Bretton Woods, and on arriving in Atlantic City sent a letter saying that it was a “grand book” and that “morally and philosophically I find myself in agreement with virtually the whole of it; and not only in agreement with it, but in a deeply moved agreement” (Keynes to Hayek, June 28, 1944, quoted in Keynes 1980b, 385). Keynes went on to say that they would probably disagree on the question of where to draw the line regarding more or less intervention. Keynes thought that almost certainly more planning was necessary, which could be carried out safely if the lead- ers were “rightly orientated in their own minds and hearts to the moral is- sue” (Keynes 1980b, 387). So there were obvious differences between them. But the general sentiment expressed underlines once again the fact that in the context of their times and especially with respect to central planning and the men of science who advocated such a path for Britain, Keynes and Hayek were on the same side.”

“The Marshall Society talk was doubtless interesting, but probably not altogether pleasant for Hayek. Some forty-odd years later, Joan Robinson in her Ely Lecture talked about how Hayek had “covered the blackboard with his triangles” and about the “pitiful state of confusion” within economics that his talk, in retrospect, represented. In her recounting, Kahn had “asked in a puzzled tone, ‘Is it your view that if I went out tomorrow and bought a new overcoat, that would increase unemployment?’ ‘Yes,’ said Hayek. ‘But,’ pointing to his triangles on the board, ‘it would take a very long mathematical argument to explain why’” (Robinson 1978a [1972], 2–3). In his own reminiscence, Kahn (1984) observed: “It is only fair to Hayek to mention that he had to condense four lectures into one, and that they were written when he had a high temperature” (182).”

“On the more technical kind of economics my advance was impeded by my inadequate knowledge of mathematics which I had never found helpful in my work, even at such times as when I had temporarily mastered the particular techniques required, but felt not to be worth the effort to acquire real competence merely to be able to refute or criticize the work of others—as I now recognize, a serious mistake”

“Hayek echoed Robbins’s description of the Common Room as a place where, despite sharp political differences, the ambiance was friendly, an atmosphere that suited his own tastes well (Hayek 1994, 81). Some examples of the kind of collegial repartee that was characteristic of the School was a “Mock Trial” of economists that Director Beveridge organized in June 1933 (reported in the Economist, June 17, 1933) or Beveridge’s address (titled “My Utopia”) before the School’s Cosmopolitan Club at the beginning of the Michaelmas term in 1934. In the latter Beveridge (1936) spoke of an “elaborate apparatus” that had been invented by “John Maynard von Hayek” which had apparently solved the problem of making money neutral: “So far as I can make out, it automatically changes the air and so affects the blood pressure of bankers and businessmen, as prices rise or fall in relation to productive efficiency” (135). There were also regular events to mark the end of term, all dutifully entered by Hayek into his appointment book: the Christmas party at the end of Michaelmas term and the Strawberry Tea at the end of summer term.”