Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The capital controversy: A Cambridge, Massachusetts View of Cambridge, England

  • Published:
De Economist Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

Six issues are raised. First, what determines the distributive shares? Second, could propensities to consume wages and profits differ in a neoclassical model? Third, how is the equality of savings and investment established? Fourth, does the neoclassical model have an investment function? Fifth, will the neoclassical one-good parable do, or is it necessary to deal with heterogeneous capital? Sixth, if necessary, could the neoclassical model be generalized to do so in a meaningful and an operational way? The answer to the last question is that it can, and the article suggests how.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bergström, V., ‘Industriell utveckling, industrins kapitallbildning och finanspolitiken,’ inSvensk finanspolitik i teori och praktik, edited by E. Lundberg, Stockholm, 1971.

  • Brems, H.,Labor, Capital, and Growth, Lexington, Mass., Toronto, London, 1973.

  • Brems, H., ‘Er ørkonomisk vœkst blevet umoderne?,’Nationaløkonomisk Tidsskrift, CXII (1974), pp. 230–248.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graham, F. D., ‘The Theory of International Value Re-Examined,’Quarterly Journal of Economics, XXXVIII (1923), pp. 54–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kravis, I. B., ‘Relative Income Shares in Fact and Theory,’American Economic Review, IL (1959, pp. 917–949.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. Hans Brems
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

Professor of Economics, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, visiting professor at the universities of Copenhagen and Lund, spring of 1975.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Brems, H. The capital controversy: A Cambridge, Massachusetts View of Cambridge, England. De Economist 123, 369–384 (1975). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02115744

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02115744

Keywords

Search

Navigation