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“.
Plánované hospodářstvi 8—9/66, str. 143.

 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 1950-1964, [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 Present-Day Capitalism, pp. 23-24, 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 non-decreasing 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) 
          Year              Labor            Capital 

         1899                 90,7              130,0
         1919                 97.6              108,8
         1929               100,0              100,0
         1937               113,3      
         1948                l05,8                85,2
         1957                124,3               53,9

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 above-quoted 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 .









OK Economics was designed and it is maintained by Oldrich Kyn.
To send me a message, please use one of the following addresses: ---

This website contains the following sections:

General  Economics:

Economic Systems:

Money and Banking:

Past students:

Czech Republic

Kyn’s Publications

 American education

free hit counters
Nutrisystem Diet Coupons