IT IS CURious how in scientific disciplines very similar results of investigations into problems appear to emerge at the same time. It is as if the essential reality of a situation comes into increasing conflict with accepted ideas until, at a certain point, reality cannot be gainsaid. From various quarters attacks begin to mount and we begin to wonder why we were so simple-minded as to accept uncritically earlier concepts. Even so, we do not lightly reject these other views because, after all, a good deal of intellectual energy has gone into their formulation and propagation. We wait to be convinced; each new, available piece of research is scanned to see whether it supports the tenets of the old doctrine, or whether it adds to the growing swell of disillusionment. Finally, if we are honest, we are forced to admit that reality has not been explained by our older notions-there are too many discrepancies between facts and theory-and we embrace the new approach. These reflections are engendered upon reading three books published at the end of 1970 or the beginning of 1971.1 All deal with the results of many years of development efforts by developing countries and all are critical of present policies. Broadly speaking, we may say that the LittleScitovsky-Scott book concentrates its criticisms on policies of import-substittiton whilst the ILO and Turnham books focus upon the failure of policies to obviate growing unemployment. Let us look at the Little-Scitovsky-Scott book first. This is an interesting example of what can be achieved by teamwork in economic research. The book was based on researches undertaken in various countries (Brazil, India, Pakistan, Mexico, Philippines, and Taiwan) by those who had extensive knowledge of the countries concerned. Their individual contributions were analyzed by the three authors (who also incorporated material on Argentina). The result is a well-documented multiple casestudy of development, with theoretical iinplications far beyond the particular countries covered.2 Little-Scitovsky-Scott3 concern themselves first with a consideration of the factors which have led to the growth of import-substitution. One factor was the de-

I. Two-party, two-good Pareto optimality, 19. — II. Applications and extensions, 22.

The standard F test for linear restrictions in regression is relevant as a criterion but fails to capture the notion of tradeoff between bias and variance. Average squared distance criteria yield operational tests that are more appropriate, depending upon objectives. In the present paper two alternative criteria are developed. The first allows testing of the hypothesis that the average squared distance of a restricted estimator from the parameter point in k space is less than the average squared distance of the unrestricted, ordinary least squares estimator from the same parameter point. The second sets up a test of betterness of the restricted estimator over the unrestricted estimator of E(Y/X), where betterness is again defined in average squared distance.

Auditing, Sampling plan, Representative sampling, Preventive Sampling

This article discusses the use of probabilities and present value analysis in the taxation of lifetime gifts in the U.S.. Probabilities and present value analysis are used frequently in accounting literature and solutions to accounting problems. In the teaching of tax accounting, however, both the use of probabilities and present value analysis has received limited acknowledgement. Teachers should devise tax problems that will lead students to consider both of these concepts when working tax problems. Assume that a discount rate of 5 percent is adequate and that the property does not appreciate or depreciate during the period of time between the date of gift and date of death of the donor. Further, life expectancy data is obtained from actuarial tables provided by the Treasury Department. But the gift and estate taxes are often not the only tax considerations, for the income tax may be an important variable. If the gift property is income-producing property, there can be a sizeable overall income tax saving if the donee is in a lower income tax bracket than the donor.