Professors Lucas and Rapping are right in calling my earlier comment on their work misleading. I should not have written that in their model a change in real GNP cannot change unemployment. As they point out it can, provided that it changes wages and prices. This in no way alters my view that the model is unrealistic. In a more realistic model, a fall in real GNP would increase unemployment even if prices and wages were unchanged or continued to rise. To find an example of this we need look back no further than 1969-70. The more interesting part of the present paper is the data on wages and prices during the Great Depression. The Lucas-Rapping model fits the early years of the depression because both money wages and money prices fell. However, they do not examine the real wage movements implied by the series they present. When we do so, we discover that real wages rose from 1928 to 1933 for those workers lucky enough to remain employed the same number of hours. This conclusion holds whether we compare current wages and prices (cols. 2 and 4 of table 1) or "normal" wages and prices (cols. 3 and 5). This suggests that although the model fits the early years of the Great Depression, the interpretation placed on it is open to serious doubt. Would unemployed workers prolong their period of search because current money wages are below "normal" money wages even when current real wages are rising? To answer "yes" implies that workers suffer from money illusion much more severely than even Keynes suggested.