
FOOTNOTES 



1 Plánované hospodářství 2/87. 




2 Plánované hospodářství 8—9/86. 




3 „A
general expression of their creation and use is the fund of
accumulation“. 

4 For example on pages 148 and 152 op. cit. he says that inflation “accelerates the expanded reproduction of growth resources” by which he means, as follows from his preceding presentation, that inflation causes redistribution of national income in favor of accumulation.” 

5 These are mainly the following articles: O.
Sik, A Contribution to an Analysis of Our Economic Development,
Poiticka ekonomie, [3], 1/1966; J. Goldmann and J. Flek, An Economic
Growth Model in Socialism and a Criterion of Planned Management
Effectiveness, [4], Planovane hospodarstvi 3/1996; V. Nachtigal,
Extensiveness and Effectiveness of Czechoslovak Economic
Development, [5], Politicka ekonomie, 4/1966; M. Hajek, M. Toms, The
Production Function and the Economic Growth of Czechoslovakia
19501964, [6], Politicka ekonomie 1/1967 

6 A similar criticism of this law we find in works of Feldman, Dobb, Kalecki and others. See e.g., O. Kyn, Chapters from the History of Economic Thoughts, part III, Theories of Economic Growth, [8], SPN, Prague, 1966. 

7
Collection Theories of Economic Growth and PresentDay Capitalism,
pp. 2324, NCSAV Prague [9] 

8 Michal Kalecki writes in his Outline of the Theory of Growth
of a Socialist Economy [6]. (NPL, Prague.1966) on page 96. about the
process of growth acceleration by raising investment intensiveness:
'In no cease can it be opportune to prolong this process ad
infinitum. In such a case permanent growth of accumulation would
gradually lower the share of consumption to zero, which is absurd...
Sooner or later it will be necessary to stop the growth of
investment intensiveness." 

9 With permanent capital intensive technical progress at
nondecreasing rate of growth, the rate of accumulation need not
grow boundlessly (there could be lim a < 1 for t approaching
infinity ) only if the growth rate of investment intensiveness would
approach sufficiently quickly zero. But then there would exist a
time period after which the rate of change of capital intensiveness
would be less then any arbitrarily small number. This means that in
such a case it is possible to find a period after which the growth
of capital intensiveness will be so minute that technical progress
would be virtually neutral. 

10 The initial efficiency of capital b = 0.5. 

11 Many economists proceed from this opinion, especially those
who use the Cobb—Douglas production function. See e. g. R. M. Solow
A Contribution to the Theory of Economic Growth. Quarterly Journal
of Economics, February 1958, or J.E. Meade, ‘A Neoclassical Theory
of Economic Growth.’ London, Allen and Unwin, 1961 and others. The
Idea of a choice of technique we find even among the models which
are not based explicitly on the Cobb—Douglas production function;
e.g., A. K. Sen. Choice of techniques; Maurice Dobb, An Essay on
Economic Growth and Planning; Nicholas Kaldor, Essays on Economic
Stability and Growth; Joan Robinson Essays in the Theory of
Economic Growth; etc. 

12 The same explanation of the dynamics of the capital coefficient is given by H. Flakierski, see the above quoted collection, p. 143. The falling trend is still more expressive with the marginal capital coefficient in the USA which according to the estimate of W. Fellner, reproduced by H. Flakierski was 5.08 in 1919, 3.30 in 1929, and 1.2 – 1.5 in 1950.  
13 “Productivity trends in the U.S.“ Princeton, 1981. 

14
This indicator is identical with the parameter f in our mathematical
model 

15 Y. Kudrov, G. Spilko: Tempy i proporcii obščestvenogo proizvodstva v SSA, Moskva 1985. 

16
V. Kudrov. G. Spilko, cit. dilo str. 117. 

17 These considerations are taken from the Z. Chrupek’s article.  
18 Z. Chrupek in the quoted collection: Theories of Growth
p. 275. 

19 In a somewhat different form this idea maintained itself for
a long time among Marxist economists as the dogma of the growth of
the organic composition of capital. 

20 This process can clearly be seen in the table, mentioned by
Kendrick, op. cit. p. 121 

Relative factor prices in the U.S.A. (1929 100) 

21 See E. D. Domar, "Depreciation, Renewal and
Growth." seventh essay from “Essays in the Teory of Economic
Growth” Oxford University Press, 1957, and also Oskar Lange. The
teory of Reproduction and Accumulation. NPL 1965. 

22 These relations are very clearly seen in the table on page 110 of the abovequoted work of Oskar Lange .  
23 See e. g. the above quoted article by M. Toms and M. Hajek:
“Determinants of Economic Growth and the Integral Productivity” 

24
See e.g.. the lecture of A. L.Vainshtain at the Econometric congress
in Warsaw 



