[sourcery]

Tight money in 1930s was hardly the answer (and yes, the money was excessively tight, that was Freidman's point and it has not been refuted), so why think it would work here?

Not so at all. See:

• America's Great Depression (Murray Rothbard's refutation of Friedman)
• Macro Seduction (Friedman's recantation)
• Economic Profit vs. Accounting Profit (explanation of what the Austrians mean by "real savings")

[WOSG]

I am sorry but your are taking an off-the-cuff comment from Friedman at 91 on a general point, whereas I was speaking specifically of 1930s situation. Monetary policy is not be-all-end-all in anyone's book. I am merely arguing the notion that we call monetary policy "loose" when real credit volumes are drastically shrinking. for example, Japan has had real deflation and near-zero interest rates - loose or tight?

from the FT Friedman article: After a long pause, he agrees: "You form a philosophy at a certain stage and for the rest of your life it dominates. On the big issues of policy I don't think there is anything I've changed my mind about."

Anyway, thanks for the links.