4 edition of Economic growth, capital formation and public policy. found in the catalog.
Published 1961 by Administrator in National Inst. of Administration, Michigan State Univ.
|Statement||National Inst. of Administration, Michigan State Univ.|
|Publishers||National Inst. of Administration, Michigan State Univ.|
|The Physical Object|
|Pagination||xvi, 66 p. :|
|Number of Pages||89|
|2||National Institute of Administration Occasional Papers -- no. 1|
nodata File Size: 10MB.
So if you see housing starts down in the second half of 2006, we know that's going to play out during the first half of 2007. Just as important, economists must come to understand the power and process of technological change in industry.
50 12pages 3644-3662, August.
Over the entire 10-year period, growth in economic output is 0. What are the implications of capital-augmenting technical progress? The Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that U. Consequently, the rate of growth of capital physical and human and technical progress have been found to account for a significant proportion of economic growth by a long line of distinguished economists: Abramovitz 1956Denison 1962a,b; 1967Griliches and Jorgenson, Kendrick 1961, 1973Kuznets 1965, 1966, 1971, 1973 and Solow 1957to name only a few.
Such tax cuts are consistent with the supply-side view that the best way to encourage corporate capital formation is by increasing the after-tax return to investment. For example, as Rezai, Foley, and Taylor 2009 point out, standard economic theory suggests that public investment directed at mitigating greenhouse gas emissions should be debt-financed.
8 percentage point from growth over 2006.
Notice the marked increase between the 1973- 1995 period and the two most recent periods in Chart 1.
All of these trends increase the dependency ratio and make productivity growth even more important to maintaining our standard of living.