Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T06:51:13.607Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Review Article

Review products

Mosini Valeria (2012) Reassessing the Paradigm of Economics: Bringing Positive Economics Back into the Normative Framework, Routledge, London and New York pp. 164 Hardback: ISBN 978-0-415-57511-9 Ebook: ISBN 978-0-203-80684-5 RRP: AUD 115

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2023

Edward Mariyani-Squire
Edward Mariyani-Squire*
Affiliation:
University of Western Sydney
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. As you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Review Article
Information
The Economic and Labour Relations Review , Volume 23 , Issue 2: Sport Economics , June 2012 , pp. 123 - 134
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s) 2012

References

Bernanke, B., Gertler, M. (1990) ‘Financial fragility and economic performance’, The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 105(1), pp. 87–114.Google Scholar
Boland, L. A. (1979) ‘A critique of Friedman’s critics’, Journal of Economic Literature, 17(2), pp. 503–522.Google Scholar
Brady, M. E. (1986) ‘A note on Milton Friedman’s application of his “methodology of positive economics’”, Journal of Economic Issues, 20(3), pp. 845–851.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brimmer, A. F. (1989) ‘Distinguished Lecture on Economics in Government: Central banking and systemic risks in capital markets’, The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 3(2), pp. 3–16.Google Scholar
Emmer, R. E. (1967) Economic Analysis and Scientific Philosophy, Allen and Unwin, London.Google Scholar
Friedman, M. (1953) Essays in Positive Economics, Chicago University Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
Friedman, M. (1962) Capitalism and Freedom, Chicago University Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
Friedman, M., Friedman, R. (1980) Free to Choose, Penguin Books, Harmondsworth.Google Scholar
Friedman, M., Savage, L. (1948) ‘The utility analysis of choices involving risk’, The Journal of Political Economy, 56(4), pp. 279–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friedman, M., Schwartz, A. J. (1963) A Monetary History of the United States, 1867–1960, Princeton University Press, Princeton.Google Scholar
Helm, D. (1984) ‘Predictions and causes: A comparison of Friedman and Hicks on method’, Oxford Economic Papers, 36, pp. 118–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keen, S. (2011) Debunking Economics: The Naked Emperor Dethroned?, Revised and expanded edition, London and New York.Google Scholar
Mäki, U. (2009) ‘Unrealistic assumptions and unnecessary confusions: Rereading and rewriting F53 as a realist statement’ in Mäki, Uskali (ed.) The Methodology of Positive Economics: Reflections on the Milton Friedman Legacy, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mont Pèlerin Society (1947) Statement of Aims. Mont Pèlerin (Vaud), Switzerland, 8 April, available: https://www.montpelerin.org/montpelerin/mpsGoals.html [accessed 20 May 2012].Google Scholar
Quiggin, J. (2010) Zombie Economics: How Dead Ideas Walk Among Us, Princeton University Press, Princeton and Oxford.Google Scholar
Stanley, T. D. (1985) ‘Positive economics and its instrumental defence’, Econometrica, 52, pp. 305–319.Google Scholar
Varoufakis, Y, Halevi, J., Theocarakis, N. J. (2011) Modern Political Economics: Making Sense of the Post-2008 World, Routledge, London and New York.Google Scholar