SHOE Archives

Societies for the History of Economics

SHOE@YORKU.CA

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
[log in to unmask] (E. Roy Weintraub)
Date:
Fri Mar 16 15:51:31 2007
In-Reply-To:
Message-ID:
References:
<[log in to unmask]> <[log in to unmask]><000801c76569$9c1a4fd0$3f664684@IBMC7120137F65> <[log in to unmask]> <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (21 lines)
Nicholas J. Theocarakis wrote:

> ----------------- HES POSTING -----------------
> Kevin Hoover is, of course, correct.   Meade was first and Hansen & 
> Samuelson's textbooks were both pathbreaking - as textbooks go - and 
> very popular.  Indeed, in Greece in the 70s Ackley, Hansen and 
> Samuelson were translated into Greek, while Branson was not.  The 
> reason I have mentioned Branson's textbook was that is was totally 
> structured around the IS-LM concept.  All chapters on the monetary or 
> the real sector ended up in such a way that they would be analytically 
> incorporated in the IS-LM model.
>


Sidney Weintraub's 1951 (Pitman: London and New York) Income and 
Employment Analysis (written from 1948-50), an intermediate macro 
textbook, used the C+I but not IS-LM, even though the LM curve was drawn.

E. Roy Weintraub


ATOM RSS1 RSS2