Economic Schools of thought late 1800's and early 1900's.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

For the sake of time I will post links then try to summarize each one.

Austrian - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austrian_School_of_Economics
Basically Lassiez Faire, Gold Standard, and Free Trade. Liberal and Libertarian in a modern sense. 


German - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_school_of_economics
For the most part rather then being a set philosphy it was more about scientific approach to studying the economy. None the less many of the people who promoted this often tended to be more Economic Nationalist, Protectionist, often defended Trade Unions, and advocated much more Gov't involvement in the Economy. I would guess that since every Economics Professor in Germany was brought up under this that the roots of fascist economics are found in this school. Ironically they strongly Influence US economic policy in the late 1800's cause several German Economists emmigrated here. It mostly dealth with Trade policy though. European Social Democrats of today may also take some influences from here. Conservative, reactionary, and some forms of modern day socialism. 

English - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_historical_school_of_economics
Similar to the Germans in that they wanted to return to Inductive reasoning instead of the Deductive reasoning used by the Classical and Neoclassical Schools. They were also similariy Protectionist and viewed classicalists as defending Free-trade in an imperial and colonial setting where it is out of place in there view. Other then that there were not as Interventionist as the Germans. Probably the same as Germans.

Marxian - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marxian_economics

Pure and simple old fashioned Communism.

I am tempted to include Keynes but I want to keep it between about 1850 and 1920 and force you to choose between the four that are up there. It is also late and I am getting tired. Ideological labels are in a standard Global sense not US or 21st century specific.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Mine is really a mix between Austrian and German but I put Austrian cause I think its closest.

Feh, I'm not entirely sure I'm comfortable answering Marxian or German. I'll answer German for the sake of the poll, but I consider myself a Keynesian.

I am pretty sure Keynes would have used at least some of the works of the German School to advance and base his own arguements.  Gustav Von Schmoller was one of the few to defend Labor Unions and he formed the "Society for Social Policy" which consisted of Conservative Economists who called for a Corporatist State-Industry-Labor Nexus. Neoclassicalists and other liberals labeled them "Socialists of the Chair". Again Ideological Labels are in there 19th Century defination.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

As it stands I'm primarily an adherent of neoclassical with corresponding behavioral/psychological adjustments made to models.

Btw... You should do more to distinguish the various schools of thought as there are some that are micro, some that are macro, some that are somewhat both.

My understanding of micro and macro are very limited at best. I also wanted to keep this narrowly focused on a set period and the dominant schools and there policies.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Austrian with a bit of German thrown in.

Yea Yea, I two like a side of German with my Austrian.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

But are crashes, deflation, and depression necessarily a bad thing looked at economically? They certainly cause people to reassess what they should be doing economically and seek more optimum ways of doing things.  They cause a considerable amount of personal pain in the the short term, and certainly more than is desirable, but to achieve a pain free economy requires placing a national economy in a torpor that enables more energetic economies to grow faster.

That's more of a philosophical question. Empirically, people will always behave as if crashes, deflation and depression are necessarily bad, especially the latter two. The people who live through them generally seem to feel that way. And frankly, given what else happened the last time one occurred on a worldwide scale, I'm not particularly keen on finding out. What are you thinking of on "a pain free economy requires placing a national economy in a torpor that enables more energetic economies to grow faster."?

I would argue that crashes and depressions are a necessary and inevitable part of the business cycle. Governments can do little things to alter them slightly, but it's generally best to let them come and go. The only reason that I would argue for any kind of government reaction at all is to stave off popular demands for greater activism (i.e., socialism).

What do you think of things like unemployment insurance and bank deposit insurance?

Also, your second point is pretty much what FDR did; at a time when communist sympathies were at their all time peak in the US, FDR made modest reforms to capitalism which protected and preserved the basic system. In other countries, you saw more radical changes arising out of the slump, worst of all in Germany and Japan.

Yeah, I have a mixed reaction to FDR. I don't like what he did, but I'll admit that it staved off even worse possibilities.

I'm not sold on unemployment insurance. I think if people saved more, then much of the need for it would be reduced.

I don't like the idea of bank deposit insurance either. But if we had had it in some limited capacity in the late 1920s, then much of the worst of the Great Depression may have been muted. Maybe we could have avoided the New Deal, or at least the extent to which it was promulgated.

There is absolutly no point at which in my case we could have saved enough to sustain us through this period. My dad didn't even get his highest paying job, $17.00 an hour till mid 2006 after a period of Unemployement from 2005-2006. There wouldn't have been enough time to save plus we had to move twice in 2007 cause of sky high rent the first time and sky high and wildly fluctuating electric bills the second time. An by Mid 2008 he was unemployed again, thanks to high tranportation costs to ship the equiptment to his place of work for him to repair and poor fiscal management by the company.

Bank deposit insurance is a wonderfull program that helps maintain faith in the banking system. In my opinion a larger one should be created just for the investment banks on the one hand to avoid collapses like Lehman and on the other reducing the need for bailouts of companies like AIG. Companies would be allowed to fail and the deposits would be guarrenteed so no panic would ensue like happened in September after Lehman. Dozens of small banks have failed around the country, yet because of FDIC there has been no great panic because of it. The other beauty is the banks themselves would pay for it through premiums.