[Pelham]

You're right, Keynes wasn't as far out of the mainstream of classical economics as many people think. But I think he did dismiss the importance of savings, which helped push 'Keynesian' economics into overweighting the demand-side and neglecting supply side issues. Personally, I rather like Schumpeter.

[justshutupandtakeit]

I have long looked for a copy of The History of Economic Analysis for a decent price. Thanks for reminding me to look again. He is a brilliant thinker.

Keynes has assumed a bogeyman role in economic discussions here because his ideas appear to be anathema for conservative government. But there is much more to them than those who have not studied him know. And he was a great writer. Some of the problems and determinants of economic changes that he illustrated are yet to be definitively settled. He clearly was very concerned with the supply side even at the highest levels of theory.

One of his greatest achievements was provoking the mind of Milton Friedman and Paul Samuelson. Two giants in the field of economic education. A field far too sparse.

[Marxbites]

I think that Hayek would largely disagree even though he admired Keynes just not his theory, which I believe he thoroughly refutes.

Hayek DID foresee the Great Depression, he saw the same Govt interventionist activity in America as he had seen the Euro-socialists were up to before duped American Govt bought fully into it.

After all Hoover was actually the first New (raw) Dealer.

Hayeks biggest criticism of Keynes was Keynes statement that we would all die anyway eventually.

I suggest you do a little research on the matter at mises.org - a huge repository of Hayek & Rothbard articles there.

I'll take Rothbard and Hayek any day over all the others.