Boom and Bust vs Steady Growth

On Bob Murphy’s Facebook Page I asked:

Austrian economics decries the boom-bust cycle caused by central banks and governments interfering with free markets.

For moral reasons, I support free markets, but am curious if there is any evidence that having boom-bust cycles results in greater long term economic growth than would a steady growth scenario?

From a consequentialist view, is economic intervention bad because it prolongs the periods of boom, and bust, rather than affecting the long term trend?

Bob suggested reading about ┬áMises’ idea of capital consumption.