The book lays most of the blame for the Great Depression upon the Federal Reserve, arguing that it did not do enough to prevent the Depression. Economists such as
Peter Temin raised questions about whether or not most monetary quantity levels were
endogenous rather than exogenously determined as
A Monetary History argues, especially during the Depression.
Paul Krugman argues that the
2008 financial crisis has shown that, during a
financial crisis, central banks cannot control broad money, and that money supply bears little relationship to the GDP. According to Krugman, the same was true in the 1930s, and the claim that the Federal Reserve could have prevented the Great Depression is thus highly dubious. Some economists have challenged this view, arguing that the observed breakdown in the money-GDP relationship may reflect measurement problems rather than a fundamental structural change. Traditional monetary aggregates treat all monetary assets as perfect substitutes regardless of their liquidity characteristics, potentially failing to capture true monetary services during periods of financial innovation and crisis. Studies using alternative measurement approaches, such as Divisia monetary aggregates that weight assets according to their liquidity services, have found more stable relationships between money demand and economic variables. This research suggests that instabilities in money demand may reflect how monetary aggregates are constructed rather than changes in economic behavior. In
The Golden Fetters, economic historian
Barry Eichengreen argued that because of the then internationally prevailing gold exchange standard, the Federal Reserve's hands were tied. According to Eichengreen, in order to maintain the credibility of the gold standard, the Federal Reserve could not undertake actions (such as drastically increasing the money supply) in the manner advocated by Friedman and Schwartz.
James Tobin, while appreciating the rigor with which Friedman and Schwartz demonstrated the importance of the monetary supply, questioned their measures of the
velocity of money and how informative this measure of the frequency of monetary transactions really is in order to understand the
macroeconomic fluctuations of the early-to-mid 20th century.
Murray Rothbard, an
Austrian School and
anarcho-capitalist economist, argued that the money supply actually increased during the time period where Friedman claimed the Federal Reserve contracted the money supply. He used this argument to say that the Great Depression was a manifestation of the
Austrian business cycle theory. Both Rothbard and Friedman held the belief that the Great Depression was a result of the Federal Reserve. ==See also==