Since an investment in human capital yields a return through time spent in the labor market, it may also yield a return through time spent in productive activities outside the labor market. This paper explores a framework in which these "nonmarket" returns may be analyzed. The model is implemented empirically to test implications pertaining to the partial effect of formal schooling on expenditure patterns and to estimate the magnitude of the nonmarket return to an investment in education.

Intelligent corporate financial planning has been necessary for as long as the corporate form of business enterprise has existed. Only in recent years, however, have computer technology and academic theorizing been harnessed to meet this practical need. Without wishing to minimize the impact and value of these efforts on the practice of corporate finance, we do think there are grounds for believing that the new finance “tools” have been less than maximally effective. In this article we contrast typical financial modeling theory in order to interpret the gap between the two. Then we describe a financial policy model whose characteristics might be expected to be more acceptable in practice. Finally, we discuss the implications of the theory/practice gap and our experience with this model for future scholarly activities in the modeling of financial policies.

This paper examines the possible explanations for the changes in output, capital, and labor input of a sample of manufacturing plants over a number of years. Apart from the scale of operation, these changes could be attributed to three causes: technology diffusion, substitution, and improvements in X-efficiency. The empirical findings indicate that a diffusion model modified to incorporate X-efficiency improvements provides the best explanation. This suggests the need for a new approach to the specification of production

Reviews the book "A Survey of Basic Accounting," by R.F. Salmonson, Roger H. Hermanson and James Don Edwards.

The article reviews the book "Corporate Financial Reporting: The Issues, the Objectives and Some New Proposals," edited by Alfred Rappaport and Lawrence Revsine.

The article discusses the use of a numerical problem calling for comparative income statements and the teaching of the conceptual difference between direct and absorption costing models. It is often difficult to find a parsimonious way to introduce the student to the conceptual differences between direct and absorption costing. This is particularly true when the student is introduced first to absorption costing where the fixed overhead rate and the variable overhead rate are subsumed in the total overhead rate. Where the students have been accustomed to thinking symbolically, it is much easier to introduce these two models simultaneously. Mathematically the two components in the volume variance are not independent, and the fact that the dollar measure of the volume variance is meaningless without further analysis is clearly highlighted. This approach has been useful where the students have had a minimal introduction to algebraic logic. Its sole purpose is to clarify two relatively simple models and their impacts upon income.

[The economic theory of individual choice most frequently assumes that individual preferences are weak orders; this implies, among other things, a virtually perfect discriminating power on the part of individual decision makers. R. D. Luce's theory of semiorders generalizes the weak order concept to allow imperfect discrimination when choices are close. This paper examines the demand implications of the semiorder axioms and states conditions on demand that are necessary and sufficient for the revealed ordering to be a semiorder.]