To make high-quality research more accessible and easier to explore.

Fields:
116 results ✕ Clear filters

A Note on the Origins of Index Numbers

The Review of Economics and Statistics 1966 48(1), 108
Tacitus believed that the chief office of history is to prevent virtuous actions from being forgotten. That these few pages perform this office depends on the self-evident proposition that actions in support of economic knowledge are, in their nature, virtuous. In the history of economic thought the lineage of specific current doctrine or method at times takes on the tenuousness of a finely frayed thread that frustrates all efforts to distinguish the fibers comprising it. It often happens, in that circumstance, that the thread is knotted at some point short of its ultimate wanderings by a tacit agreement to recognize one or a few persons as the originators of the method or doctrine in question. When that happens, earlier efforts fall beyond the bounds of present memory. On occasion, however, it becomes possible to retie the knot somewhat farther back in the past. That is the function of the present note. currently accepted view 1 holds that the first recorded index number appeared in the work of G. R. Carli, an Italian who used a modified form of the simple average of relatives index number in 1764.2 This view probably originated with Wesley Mitchell, who named Carli as the inventor of the index number.3 In point of fact, this honor might be placed nearly a century earlier than Carli's effort, and certainly 25 years before it, depending on how strictly one chooses to define the term index number. If we give the term the broad meaning of a method or device which allows one to measure changes in aggregate price levels, we must consider a small book published by Rice Vaughan in the year 1675.4 Vaughan, an Englishman, was concerned with the rise in prices which had occurred in his native land over the preceding century. He wished to separate the influence on this price rise of the debasement of currency trom the intiuence of the heavy influx of gold and silver into Spain from the East and West Indies. In order to undertake this task, he required a measure of the general price rise which had occurred in that country. Vaughan relied on historic records of the wages of labor for his standard of measurement of price changes. Two considerations prompted his use of wages as a surrogate variable. First, labor carries with it a constant resultance of the Prices of all other things which are necessary for a Man's life. . Second, records of wages were more accessible than price data since statutes were readily available which always direct [ed] the rate of Labourers and Servants to be made with a regard of Prices of Victuals, Apparel, and other things necessary to their use. 6 Vaughan accordingly compared statutes setting wage rates for such labor as threshing grain and carpentry in the reign of Edward III with similar statutes of the period in which he wrote. On the assumption that these statutes reflected the costs to the laborer of his provisions, they served as ready-made index numbers. conclusion supported by these comparisons was that prices had risen to six or eight times their level of a century earlier.7 Those readers who insist that an index number must make explicit use of the prices to be measured are asked to consider the work of another Englishman of a slightly later period. In 1707, William Fleetwood, Bishop of Ely, published a defense of the fellows of a certain whose annual income from inheritances or pensions ran to more than five pounds.8 When the college was founded in the fifteenth century, its founders stipulated that a fellowship could be granted only to those students whose annual income from such sources was not in excess of that amount. A student of Fleetwood's acquaintance whose fellowship was in jeopardy appealed to the bishop. It was the student's contention that, in view of the past record of rising costs, an interpretation in the spirit of the regulation, rather than the letter, was more appropriate. student was perspicacious in his choice of * author is Assistant Professor of Economics at the University of Missouri. 1See, for example, John E. Freund and Frank J. Williams, Elementary Business Statistics: Modern Approach (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1964), 77. 2Del Valore e della Proporzione de' Metalli Monetati con i generi in Italia prima delle Scoperte dell' Indie col confronto del Valore e della Proporzione de' Tempi nostri, in Custodi, Scrittori Italiani de Economia Politica, Parte Moderna, XIII, 297-366. 'Wesley C. Mitchell, The Making and Using of Index Numbers, Bulletin of the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics, 284 (Oct. 1921), 7. 'Rice Vaughan, A Discourse of Coin and Coinage (London: Th. Dawks, 1675). 5 Ibid., 107. 6 Ibid., 108. 7Ibid., 117-124. 8 William Fleetwood, Chronicon Preciosum: or, an Account of English Money, the Price of Corn, and Other Commodities, for the last 600 Years (London: Charles Harper, 1707).

Measuring Real Net Output: A Proposed Index

The Review of Economics and Statistics 1966 48(4), 419
HE absence of any observable flow of net in the world argues for exclusive adherence to an income-originating interpretation of the value added by particular industries or sectors. Yet, the merit of the quest for a net production measure cannot be gainsaid. The notion of splitting up gross national product into the constituent contributions made by individual sectors of the economy carries persistent appeal despite the fact that the finalgoods and services produced by many industries never actually enter the physical flow of GNP. It has motivated recent efforts by the Office of Business Economics at the Department of Commerce to construct a set of accounts showing measures of the physical volume of the gross national product originating in the various industries of the Nation, which in principle aggregate to the physical volume of obtained by deflating final expenditures.' This appeal is, of course, buttressed by the same conventions against double-counting that underlie the current dollar GNP concept. Paralleling the concern with the total economy's capacity to produce 'goods and services to satisfy final demand, there is an abiding reluctance to attribute the results of the application of factor services at all the preceding production stages to that activity which happens to come last in the sequence of fabrication. Hesitancy on thispoint is reinforced by the 'knowledge that the degree of integration varies among industries at any moment in time, as well as over the course of time within individual industries. Given variations of the latter kind, a disinclination to accept the movements of an actual physical series as an indication of the contribution made to GNP by the industry in auestion is thoroughlv reasonable. What is wanted is a measure which excludes the contribution made to the given industry's physical by inputs purchased from other industries. A measure of real net output in that sense would be entirely meaningful. Having reaffirmed the usefulness of the theoretical notion of net commodity output, it is all the more necessary to acknowledge that during an earlier exercise in conceptual tub cleaning undertaken by the writer,2 the proverbial baby seemed to slip out along with the bath water. On that occasion it was shown that the residual, or double-deflation approach to the ideal index of net output suggested by Fabricant and Geary leads to an unfamiliar and rather harrowing index number problemone which manifests itself in the appearance of negative value added estimates.3 The index number problem in question will arise even in the absence of aggregation, because the relative product and materials prices pertaining to a given industry at a specified date reflect a particular technological nexus (between the quantity of input and output) which need not be appropriate to the production conditions prevailing at some other date. Eschewing resort to the Fabricant-Geary formula, and all the difficulties of interpretation associated with the index numbers it

Employment and Industrialization in Developing Countries

Quarterly Journal of Economics 1966 80(1), 88
I. Introduction, 88. — II. Growth of manufacturing production and employment, 90. — III. Problem of maximizing the output from capital in developing countries, 93. — IV. The effective supply of labor and capital-intensive techniques of production, 97. — V. No drastic rule to introduce the latest labor-saving techniques of advanced industrial countries, 102. — VI. Conclusion, 104.

Corporate Stock Reacquisitions.

The Accounting Review 1966 41(2), 312-317
Abstract The growth of stock reacquisitions in the past three or four years has created the need to examine the relevant ethical principles. The law provides certain minimum standards of ethical conduct, but the conscientious executive is interested in doing more than the minimum required by the law. Adequate accounting disclosure is an important consideration in such financial transactions. Our inquiry indicates that disclosures of corporate stock reacquisitions in the financial press have not been common. Executives should give more consideration to the public relations aspect of such an important activity, if only to quell speculative rumors when a sizable amount of funds is involved. The increase in stock reacquisition indicates a greater awareness of the possible financial consequences. Ethical considerations should receive the same attention. These include not only adequate disclosure, but also the avoidance of conflict-of-interest situations, and a careful evaluation of the method of repurchase in relation to the amount of stock to be reacquired.

Significance of Prospective Income Data.

The Accounting Review 1966 41(2), 275-282
Abstract The measurement of net income is a perplexing problem because it is hard to find a single acceptable meaning that will form the basis for the development of a theory of income measurement. But accountants themselves are partly to blame for confusion. They are often distracted in their practice by preconceived notions of income, taxable income, economic income, and cash flow. It is not surprising those interpretations of accounting reports by the investing public are varied and confusing. The purpose of this article is to present a case for a new approach to corporate reports of income. This approach will be tested by observations of its' impact on depreciation accounting and by its' implications in the resolution of certain important practical accounting problems. Certain accounting principles will be developed for the purpose of measuring prospective income, but their final significance rests on their validity in the measurement of income on a historical basis. This approach permits the use of the present structure of accounting theory for all those expenses and revenues that would be matched the same way in the dimension of expectations as in the dimension of fact.