[roenxi]

> And Keynes got to contrast the U.K.'s monetary policy with France's moderately inflationary policy. France made it through the Great Depression relatively unscathed.

That is reducing a comparison of the French and English economies down to 1 variable. It is unlikely (nay, practically impossible) that inflationary vs. deflationary policy was the biggest difference between the two.

It is like saying inflation policy was the biggest difference between Japan and the US in the 90s. One of those countries had natural resources, favourable demographics and a fire-hose of migration. The other had limited resources, unfavourable demographics and migration-hostile policies. Their legal systems and approach to corporations was completely different. There are a large number of important variables when comparing the two. Monetary policy is important but not the be-all and end-all.

One is going to be better than the other, but 'Country A did X and did well, B did Y and did badly' isn't an argument. There is too much going on.

[wahern]

That's just one example. The Pulitzer Prize winning history book, "Lords of Finance: The Bankers Who Broke the World", has many other examples and goes into much greater depth. Of course, there are many more dimensions to 20th century economics than just inflation/deflation. Indeed, a driver of deflation in Europe was the gold standard, as the U.S. was a very large net exporter to Europe (kinda like China today) and accumulated a surplus of gold reserves (offsetting American deflationary policy), stoking deflation in the net importer countries as there was less gold to back British and French currencies.