What are differences between Keynesian and Chicago economic theories in explaining the depression?

Chicago microeconomics and Keynesian school of thought have been in economic conflict for some decades, trying to prove dominance in the United States economy. Both Chicago and Keynesian theories play significant roles on different occasions in the US economy.

In the economic cycle, there are four phases (i) Expansion phase, (ii) Peak phase, (iii) Recession, and (iv) Depression. The first two falls under Chicago school, and the last two accompanies Keynesian theory. Thus why none among-est the two ever dominated the American economy.

Chicago economics advocates free-market operations where the neoclassical believes that free-market evenly distribute resources and create employment on its means. In respect to (expansion and peak phases), implementation of the Chicago theory best suits in this stage. Due to an increase in production, consumer demand, employment, and high-income rates, the economy offers a perfect chance for investment.

Centrally, the Keynesian view is mostly utilized in times of crisis to stabilize the economic disaster. Whereby, the Keynesian's school advice on increasing government expenditure to trigger products demand and safeguard job posts.