I. Accelerator: an exogenous parameter or an endogenous variable, 325. — II. The unreasonableness of the assumption of a constant accelerator in the light of the theory of the firm, 327. — III. The inelastic supply of capital to individual firms checks the operation of the acceleration principle and tends to make the rate of investment a function of the level of income rather than a function of the rate of change of income during the upswing, 331. — IV. Accelerator and the time dimension of investment, 335. — V. Significance of time dimension of investment in the explanation of the appearance of excess capacity and downturn, 339.

I. Introduction, 214. — II. Time series comparisons, 222. — III. Regional comparisons, 228. — IV. Cracking and recycling data, 230. — V. Conclusions, 235.

I. Introduction, 400. — II. Cracking yield coefl&cients: general approach, 401. — III. Yield data: individual processes, 404. — IV. Yield coefficients and actual prices, 408. — V. Conclusions, 415.

I. The concentration-profits hypothesis, 294. — II. Industry definition, measure of concentration, and selection of sample, 297. — III. Character and limitations of profit data, 305. — IV. Calculation of accounting profit rates, 310. — V. Association of industry profit rates and concentration, 311. — VI. Association of firm profit rates and industry concentration, 317. — VII. Association of profit rates with other determinants, 321. — VIII. Summary, 323.

INC,CE the war there has been a constantly wider use of national income and product accounts as a framework for discussions of economic policy. standard treatment of international transactions in these accounts has confused many laymen, while its further development in the tables on The Nation's Economic Budget, which appeared first in the President's Economic Report itself (and now appear in the accompanying ElConomic Review by the Council of Economic Advisers), is even less clear. Beyond this, the foreign investment component of the gross national product presents a puzzling problem to those who wish to adjust the components of the national expenditure series for price changes or to make seasonal adjustments in the quarterly data. This article attempts to deal with some of the questions raised by the present treatment and to offer some positive suggestions, in the hope of stimulating further discussion. third part of the article attempts to explain how the concepts of receipts, expenditures, and particularly the net item excess of receipts or expenditures shown in The Nation's Economic Budget tables for the different sectors of the economy have actually been applied to international transactions.

S. F. James, I. F. Pearce; The Factor Price Equalisation Myth 1, The Review of Economic Studies, Volume 19, Issue 2, 1 January 1951, Pages 111–120, https:/

Abstract The question of the distinction between operating income and capital gains was raised at the recent meetings of the American Accounting Association. Capital gains or losses are a manifestation of imperfect income measurement and result because of the requirement of modern business for periodic computation of net profit or loss. Capital gains or losses are composites of imperfect estimates of depreciation, imperfect allocations of costs, imperfect separation of capital and revenue expenditures, disregard of or imperfect adjustment for price level changes. While there is no distinction in theory between capital gains and operating income, there is a legal distinction for income tax purposes. The legal distinction is important since the tax on capital gains is less. The maintenance of the real capital of an enterprise in the face of a rising price level requires the continual upward adjustment of owners' permanent equity accounts as long term assets are consumed. This is necessary in order to restore to the business real purchasing power equivalent to that used up.