In a recent article in this Review, David lIevhari and Don Patinkin (hereafter noted L-P) develop an equilibrium growth model for a simple economy in which money is treated as a productive factor, entering an aggregate production function. In their policy section, they are unable to determine the effects of an increase in the exogenously determined rate of inflation on the equilibrium capital and real-balance intensities. They are also unable to establish whether or not steady-state equilibrium is stable. The purpose of this note is to extend their dynamic analysis and to show that 1) the effects of a change in the rate of inflation are more or less predictable, and 2) steady-state equilibrium can be expected to be stable. The L-P model can be briefly summarized. Assume a growing neoclassical economy where Y = G(K, M/P, N), and where Y, K, M/P, and N represent real output, the stock of physical capital, the real money stock, and the labor force, respectively. Assume further that G is linear homogeneous and twice continuously differentiable. The function can therefore be written y = g(k, m), where y, k, and m are Y/N, K/N, and M/PN, respectively. Assume g is wellbehaved such that gi > 0, gii 0. Let the labor force grow at some exogenously determined exponential rate n. Money is costlessly produced by the government and injected into the economy via transfer payments to the public. In order to avoid stability problems noted by Miguel Sidrauski, it is assumed that the rate of nominal expansion is altered by the government in order to maintain a constant target rate of inflation.' The rate of nominal expansion is u = DM/M, where D denotes the time derivative of the variable which follows it. The rate of inflation is p = DP/P. It follows that D(M/P) = (u p)M/P. From this and the labor force growth assumption, it follows that the rate of growth of the real per capita money stock is

ABSTRACT: The effect of focusing examination questions on students' individual weaknesses was measured. Two sections of students in an elementary accounting course were taught in the same manner. However, the examinations of one section of students were modified. On the second through sixth examinations each student received a sampling of items that he or she had answered incorrectly on prior examinations in addition to those test items covering new material, The other section was tested only on the material presented subsequent to the previous examination. Both sections received a common final examination. Data analysis revealed significantly better performance on the post-test by the section of students whose examinations had included review questions focusing on their individual weaknesses.

Reviews the book "Basic Cost Accounting Concepts," by Henry R. Anderson and Mitchell H. Raiborn.

Reviews the book "Internal Audit of the Budget Process," by Richard S. Savich.