George is also fairly &quot;antique&quot; as far as macroeconomists go.  It&#x27;s not too much of an exaggeration that anything from before the ~1950&#x27;s is consider little more than curiosities that illustrate progress of economics thought.<p>For the most comprehensive book on the subject, see <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.amazon.com&#x2F;Modern-Macroeconomics-Origins-Development&#x2F;dp&#x2F;1845422082&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.amazon.com&#x2F;Modern-Macroeconomics-Origins-Developm...</a>