pstau001145001.wav
Loading the media player...
Transcript
Transcripts may contain inaccuracies.
- | Welcome once again as MIT Professor Paul Samuelson | 0:03 |
discusses the current economic scene. | 0:06 | |
This series is produced by | 0:08 | |
Instructional Dynamics Incorporated. | 0:09 | |
This program was recorded May 7th. | 0:12 | |
- | This is a very exciting time to be following | 0:14 |
the course of the American economy. | 0:18 | |
We've had the first quarter numbers, | 0:21 | |
I commented very briefly on them | 0:24 | |
last time. | 0:27 | |
Shortly after the new numbers come out, | 0:29 | |
the way vultures go to carrion, | 0:33 | |
the computer experts begin to grind out | 0:37 | |
the new forecasts based upon | 0:41 | |
the new benchmarks of the new numbers. | 0:44 | |
And so today I can begin to tell you | 0:46 | |
what wasn't available to me at the last recording, | 0:49 | |
how the various forecasters have reacted | 0:53 | |
to the rather surprising new first quarter numbers. | 0:56 | |
All of this reminds us of the wisdom involved | 1:02 | |
in that folk saying, | 1:06 | |
if you must forecast, forecast frequently. | 1:08 | |
I just learned from an article in one of the newspapers | 1:12 | |
that that particular aphorism | 1:17 | |
is attributed to Marcus Nadler. | 1:19 | |
Well, more power to him. | 1:21 | |
I'd rather be | 1:25 | |
changing my mind and not stay wrong, | 1:28 | |
in that sense be right, | 1:32 | |
than to stick with a earlier wrong number. | 1:33 | |
By and large I have to say that | 1:39 | |
the forecasters have not lost their nerve | 1:42 | |
as a result of the | 1:46 | |
surprising and disappointing first quarter numbers. | 1:49 | |
You might have thought that with | 1:53 | |
5.8% rate of decline in the first quarter | 1:57 | |
and with a worse rate of inflation, | 2:00 | |
that those people who were inclined | 2:02 | |
rather towards believing in a recession, | 2:04 | |
who ordinarily position in that regard | 2:08 | |
without taking into account any oil-break cuts | 2:12 | |
that they would be now | 2:16 | |
feeling more certain about their recession estimate. | 2:19 | |
But if I look at the actual forecast, | 2:22 | |
the new forecast of Albert Summers of the Conference Board. | 2:25 | |
It doesn't appear to me that | 2:28 | |
he is essentially more pessimistic than he was | 2:30 | |
before he knew the first quarter numbers. | 2:33 | |
On the contrary, he's more like the rest of the crowd now | 2:35 | |
than he was previously. | 2:40 | |
I noticed that Chase Econometrics which for once | 2:44 | |
Wasn't on the nose, well nobody was on the nose | 2:49 | |
in the first quarter forecast but | 2:53 | |
it was a bit farther this time from the preliminary | 2:55 | |
commerce estimates than the people I suppose | 3:00 | |
that Chase Econometrics typically watches | 3:05 | |
people like Otto Eckstein | 3:09 | |
and DRI | 3:11 | |
and Alan Greenspan. | 3:13 | |
Well they were just a bit closer this time | 3:16 | |
than Chase Econometrics was. | 3:19 | |
Now that doesn't mean anything of course | 3:21 | |
because it's your batting average over a long time | 3:23 | |
that counts and also, | 3:25 | |
all three that I've just mentioned | 3:27 | |
are very much in the ballpark | 3:29 | |
and particularly in the ballpark | 3:32 | |
in comparison with the general run of forecasters. | 3:34 | |
But it's interesting that | 3:38 | |
Michael Evans in his discussions of the first quarter | 3:41 | |
and what it means for forecasts to come | 3:45 | |
has expressed the opinion that this time | 3:48 | |
the original estimate of the commerce department | 3:52 | |
may simply be wrong. | 3:56 | |
Now it's a mug's game of course, | 3:58 | |
every time your forecast isn't realized for you to say | 4:02 | |
well I'm right and the figures are wrong, dammit. | 4:06 | |
But that is not what I understand to be said here. | 4:09 | |
There's a reasoned argument as to why | 4:14 | |
the figures may be several billion dollars too low. | 4:17 | |
And before we... | 4:22 | |
Disregard that as sort of sour grapes, | 4:27 | |
I want to call your attention | 4:31 | |
to a very interesting phenomenon that's been noticed | 4:33 | |
by people who follow the techniques of forecasting. | 4:35 | |
Very often I'm told this | 4:40 | |
by my colleague Franco Modigliani who | 4:42 | |
is the... | 4:46 | |
First among equals in the, | 4:48 | |
what used to be called the FRB-MIT PENN Model | 4:51 | |
and now is the called I believe the | 4:54 | |
MIT-PENN Social Science Research Council Model. | 4:57 | |
I'm told by him that very often their model | 5:02 | |
isn't exactly right when the first estimates come out. | 5:06 | |
But it's surprising how the first estimates, | 5:11 | |
when they come to be revised, | 5:13 | |
and they almost always are revised, | 5:15 | |
tend usually, not always, to be revised | 5:17 | |
in the direction of what the model said. | 5:20 | |
So it may be that | 5:24 | |
when all this is economic history and when we look back | 5:28 | |
that the third shall be first, | 5:32 | |
and that the first quarter which was surprisingly weak | 5:35 | |
wasn't quite as weak as | 5:42 | |
the preliminary estimates seem to suggest. | 5:44 | |
I wanna report though that if I look at the different | 5:49 | |
models they still... | 5:54 | |
By and large all unchanged, they still by and large | 5:58 | |
cluster around almost no change in the second quarter. | 6:02 | |
On the one hand somebody like Doctor Eckstein | 6:07 | |
of Data Resources Incorporated looks for | 6:10 | |
positive numbers of some significance | 6:13 | |
in the second quarter, the current quarter. | 6:16 | |
And Chase looks for still a very small negative, | 6:22 | |
but you can find the mob pretty much clustered | 6:25 | |
within that same interval. | 6:29 | |
And that's not much different from before. | 6:32 | |
Now what's more important and what I'd like to | 6:35 | |
talk about today because it's what | 6:37 | |
is in the minds of everybody. | 6:39 | |
The experts have not significantly been changing | 6:42 | |
their estimates of inflation | 6:48 | |
in the fourth quarter of the year. | 6:51 | |
Now that's deceptive because there is a slight tendency | 6:55 | |
for them to be edging up as you get nearer and nearer | 6:59 | |
to that date and as you have been | 7:01 | |
disappointed in | 7:04 | |
your price forecast | 7:06 | |
you begin to adjust your next forecast in the direction | 7:08 | |
of the reality you've just experienced. | 7:12 | |
But by and large you will find more people | 7:15 | |
who think that the price inflation will be around | 7:19 | |
6.5% to 7% in the fourth quarter of the year | 7:23 | |
than you will find who think that price inflation | 7:27 | |
will be double-digit numbers like 10% or 11%, | 7:31 | |
like that which was experienced in the first quarter. | 7:36 | |
Or even than | 7:39 | |
8% or 9%. | 7:42 | |
So we still have the split between | 7:45 | |
the great... | 7:48 | |
Lay public, the man in the street, | 7:51 | |
the man in Main Street, the man in Wall Street, | 7:55 | |
and the man on Capitol Hill, | 7:58 | |
and on Pennsylvania Avenue. | 8:02 | |
Split between all of them and the experts | 8:04 | |
because there's still prevail throughout the land, | 8:07 | |
an abiding concern about double-digit inflation. | 8:11 | |
And so we have to ask ourselves | 8:17 | |
could it be that this time | 8:20 | |
the heart has reasons that reason doesn't know | 8:24 | |
and that the instinct of | 8:27 | |
the non-economist is more nearly correct. | 8:30 | |
It's that problem that I wanna address myself. | 8:35 | |
Related to it is the question | 8:39 | |
of what we ought to be doing about the situation. | 8:41 | |
And of course the number one question, | 8:45 | |
well there two questions really, | 8:47 | |
and these are both matters of hot debate. | 8:49 | |
First, how much should the rate of growth | 8:52 | |
of the money supply be | 8:55 | |
contrived, engineered or permitted by the Federal Reserve | 8:58 | |
in view of what we can expect ahead? | 9:03 | |
And secondly, what should the budgetary posture be? | 9:07 | |
And in particular, in this last fiscal policy connection, | 9:11 | |
ought there to be some kind of a tax cut? | 9:15 | |
A tax cut in part at least perhaps | 9:20 | |
to counter | 9:23 | |
the weakness that is in the economy. | 9:25 | |
These are all related matters. | 9:30 | |
Before I discuss the policy | 9:33 | |
issue and try to weigh for you the pros and cons | 9:36 | |
and discuss the probabilities | 9:40 | |
and where the bulk of those probabilities lie. | 9:42 | |
I ought to mention that we've had | 9:45 | |
some more numbers | 9:48 | |
since the first quarter numbers came in. | 9:51 | |
In particular we have had the good news | 9:54 | |
that unemployment dropped for the second time in a row. | 9:59 | |
You'll recall it had been | 10:03 | |
four and six tenths percent, that's low for this | 10:06 | |
last business cycle expansion | 10:11 | |
and it had been climbing | 10:13 | |
and it actually took a jump to 5.2% earlier in the year but | 10:15 | |
it came down to 5.1% and now is down to 5.0%. | 10:22 | |
I think there's no doubt that this goin' take | 10:28 | |
a good deal of esteem out of the movement for a tax cut. | 10:30 | |
And so | 10:36 | |
those members of the administration who | 10:38 | |
oppose a tax cut, | 10:43 | |
I'm thinking of people like | 10:46 | |
outgoing Treasury Secretary Shultz | 10:48 | |
will find that the new unemployment numbers | 10:51 | |
provide them with defensive ammunition for their position. | 10:56 | |
The same thing I think will be true of those who are | 11:02 | |
urging upon the Federal Reserve a tight... | 11:07 | |
Money policy. | 11:11 | |
I have in mind here people like the so-called | 11:14 | |
Shadow Open Market Committee which meets at intervals. | 11:18 | |
I don't think they can afford to meet | 11:22 | |
at three-week intervals like the genuine | 11:24 | |
Open Market Committee but since they generally | 11:27 | |
after meeting and consulting all the omens and... | 11:30 | |
Symptoms, come out with the same recommendation, 5.5%, | 11:37 | |
it doesn't really hurt us that we get those recommendations | 11:42 | |
maybe only three months rather than every three weeks. | 11:45 | |
Particularly since the Federal Reserve doesn't particularly | 11:50 | |
seem to follow their recommended policies. | 11:53 | |
While those who think that the money supply | 11:59 | |
must be allowed to grow at 9% or more... | 12:03 | |
Because... | 12:09 | |
The rate of price increase is something | 12:11 | |
which you must ride along with. | 12:15 | |
They will find their argument weakened | 12:18 | |
by the lower unemployment numbers. | 12:21 | |
I know that if you pore over that unemployed... | 12:25 | |
Unemployment number, you can... | 12:29 | |
Argue in different directions, for example | 12:33 | |
part of the drop in the unemployment percentage rate | 12:35 | |
may have been to due to a... | 12:39 | |
Reduction in the labor force, | 12:44 | |
the numbers seeking work, and maybe that reduction | 12:47 | |
in the labor force, those seeking work, | 12:50 | |
has been a little bit | 12:52 | |
more than one would've predicted | 12:54 | |
on the basis of past experience | 12:57 | |
for a period in the business cycle | 12:59 | |
just like the present one. | 13:02 | |
However from the standpoint of pressure on Congress, | 13:06 | |
these niceties don't, I think matter. | 13:13 | |
You have had... | 13:16 | |
Senator Kennedy recommend a tax cut. | 13:18 | |
You've had Senator Mondale of Minnesota | 13:21 | |
recommend a tax cut, now there's not much | 13:24 | |
news in that, these are two liberal senators | 13:27 | |
if they're not both gonna run for the presidency, | 13:32 | |
certainly it must be said that both of them | 13:35 | |
have the presidency in the back of their minds. | 13:38 | |
But more significantly, | 13:43 | |
you've had some noises by speaker Albert, | 13:45 | |
not a flaming liberal, | 13:48 | |
not a left-wing Democrat, | 13:53 | |
speaking in favor of a tax cut. | 13:57 | |
And you've had some similar... | 14:01 | |
Remarks by Senator Mansfield, | 14:04 | |
the majority leader in the Senate in the same direction. | 14:08 | |
Mansfield again is a middle of the road person. | 14:12 | |
And there's even been talk although I will only believe it | 14:15 | |
when I hear it with my own ears | 14:18 | |
that chairman of the House Ways Means Committee, | 14:21 | |
Wilbur Mills was beginning to look with slightly more favor | 14:25 | |
on some kind of tax reduction. | 14:30 | |
Well again, it's one thing if the unemployment numbers | 14:34 | |
had been marching up 5.2%, 5.3%, | 14:38 | |
5.5%, 5.7% by let's say the middle of the summer. | 14:43 | |
And | 14:50 | |
one could... | 14:51 | |
Expect that | 14:53 | |
by election time, | 14:54 | |
November 1974, they might well be at the dangerous, | 14:57 | |
politically dangerous 6% level. | 15:03 | |
Well that may still happen, | 15:06 | |
but it hasn't yet materialized. | 15:09 | |
Well so, you must factor into the political equation | 15:12 | |
and I may say into the policy, economic equation | 15:16 | |
what's been happening to the unemployment rate. | 15:21 | |
That's point number one. | 15:26 | |
Point number two, we've had new information | 15:28 | |
on businessmans intentions to invest in plant and equipment. | 15:33 | |
I'm referring now to the latest McGrath Hill private survey. | 15:38 | |
This is a very respected survey, very much watched | 15:43 | |
and it interpolates between the official | 15:46 | |
Office of Business Economics SCC | 15:49 | |
governmental survey of businessmans intentions. | 15:52 | |
And this is certainly on the expansionary side. | 15:55 | |
The number now is something like 19% | 15:59 | |
increase in plant and equipment expenditure for the year | 16:04 | |
over the previous year. | 16:07 | |
I seem to recall that the last government figure, | 16:10 | |
which perhaps was only modestly below | 16:12 | |
the previous McGrath Hill figure | 16:15 | |
was more in the range of about 13%. | 16:17 | |
Of course these are money numbers and when you deflate them | 16:20 | |
by the increase in cost of construction, | 16:24 | |
you don't get real increases of this magnitude. | 16:26 | |
But if you were to have businessmen | 16:29 | |
trying to get 19% increase | 16:32 | |
and if they succeeded in getting let's say only 14%, | 16:35 | |
but the shortfall was due to supply reasons | 16:41 | |
then I doubt that the deflator would be so high | 16:44 | |
that you could conclude that there'd been no real increase. | 16:46 | |
Those who are apprehensive about a serious recession | 16:53 | |
and about a dangerous problem of unemployment | 16:59 | |
will not find the new plant and equipment investment figures | 17:02 | |
particularly buttressing their case. | 17:07 | |
Now let me... | 17:12 | |
Go then into the | 17:16 | |
policy debate. | 17:18 | |
First, most people and I mean now | 17:24 | |
most economists are very diverse methodology, | 17:28 | |
a very diverse philosophical and political opinions. | 17:32 | |
I'm not of the two-digit price inflation school. | 17:37 | |
They don't deny that in case of | 17:44 | |
a crop failure, | 17:48 | |
a serious crop failure that we could be | 17:50 | |
off to the races again with respect to food. | 17:52 | |
And they don't deny that labor is restive. | 17:55 | |
So that collective bargaining agreements | 17:59 | |
could begin to escalate in their escalated demands. | 18:02 | |
But when they put all these elements together, | 18:08 | |
they feel that this present time | 18:12 | |
is the spring of our discontent | 18:14 | |
and that if we can just hang on | 18:17 | |
things are gonna get a bit better. | 18:18 | |
For example, | 18:21 | |
a monetarist who believes that the long-run trend of prices | 18:23 | |
is determined primarily by the long-run trend | 18:29 | |
of the money supply... | 18:32 | |
Will find | 18:35 | |
that | 18:37 | |
a 9% trend in the money supply... | 18:38 | |
Which is what we've been having since early 1971 despite | 18:44 | |
what Federal Reserve spokesmen seem to say about their goal. | 18:48 | |
That increase in the money supply would correspond | 18:54 | |
to about a 6% increase in the price level, | 18:58 | |
not the current 11% increase which we've been observing. | 19:05 | |
And so by... | 19:10 | |
Monetarist lines of reasoning | 19:12 | |
when we get over the bulge | 19:15 | |
that results from the cessation of price controls, | 19:20 | |
it's a 6% level to which we'll return. | 19:25 | |
Now of course a monetarist looking at | 19:27 | |
the way the world's been going politically in the last | 19:31 | |
two decades might well be of the opinion | 19:36 | |
that we're losing our Puritan ethic more and more | 19:40 | |
and if 6% price increase is what's indicated | 19:44 | |
by recent behavior since '71, | 19:49 | |
with our increasingly loose moral fiber | 19:52 | |
with respect to the money supply | 19:56 | |
then there may well be an acceleration | 19:59 | |
for the next few years in the rate of growth of money supply | 20:03 | |
and therefore an acceleration of prices | 20:06 | |
beyond 6% but that's in the womb of the future | 20:10 | |
and isn't indicated for the next year or two. | 20:13 | |
Let me, I mentioned to you a very interesting | 20:19 | |
memorandum, actually a speech that was given by | 20:24 | |
Professor Robert J. Gordon of Northwestern University. | 20:27 | |
I think was a speech given before a business group. | 20:31 | |
Well it was a Conference Board group in Chicago. | 20:33 | |
Professor Gordon is one of the ablest young | 20:37 | |
general business cycle economists. | 20:43 | |
He's in his 30s and any of you who have been reading | 20:47 | |
Brookings Papers will see at very frequent | 20:52 | |
periodic intervals discussions by him | 20:55 | |
of how to account for what's been happening to wages | 20:58 | |
and what's been happening to prices. | 21:01 | |
He has recently taken a good hard look | 21:03 | |
at the policy problem. | 21:07 | |
I believe he started out with the view that... | 21:10 | |
There was something to be said for | 21:17 | |
not accommodating... | 21:20 | |
The economy in its expansion in the last half of the year. | 21:23 | |
By a concomitant increase in the money supply | 21:29 | |
at a rate higher than the long-run level. | 21:33 | |
But much to his own surprise, | 21:37 | |
when he came to analyze the consequences of that position, | 21:40 | |
he found himself converted to the opposite viewpoint. | 21:44 | |
Here's how his argument goes: | 21:49 | |
First, he says he cannot find... | 21:51 | |
That the control programs had any particular | 21:56 | |
downward effects upon wages. | 21:59 | |
This is a bit surprising 'cause most of us | 22:03 | |
have thought that the control program | 22:05 | |
if anything had effects upon wages | 22:07 | |
and didn't have effects on prices. | 22:09 | |
But his finding | 22:11 | |
is interesting because it's the opposite of that. | 22:13 | |
It is that prices are 2% or 3% lower today | 22:16 | |
than they would've been without the control program | 22:21 | |
but wages seemed to be about the same given everything else. | 22:23 | |
The result is he feels | 22:26 | |
that prices now that we have gotten rid of the controls | 22:29 | |
are gonna want to get back that 3%. | 22:32 | |
And so for the rest of 1974 and for part of 1975, | 22:36 | |
he has built into his price equation some catch up. | 22:42 | |
This is bad news in a way because it means | 22:46 | |
that the 5% or 6% which is the base-load | 22:51 | |
rate of price increase | 22:54 | |
is going to be delayed because of the catch up period. | 22:57 | |
This is aside from... | 23:01 | |
A bad harvest. | 23:05 | |
He... | 23:07 | |
Does not take that into account in this particular exercise. | 23:09 | |
And so he says now, suppose that the Federal Reserve | 23:14 | |
does what people have been urging upon it. | 23:17 | |
Suppose that out of its concern for double-digit inflation | 23:20 | |
or for that matter, out of a more rational concern perhaps | 23:24 | |
for 7% or 8% or 9% price inflation, | 23:29 | |
it maintains a rather stiff posture with respect | 23:32 | |
to the money supply. | 23:37 | |
What will consequence be? | 23:40 | |
As he works out and here I think I wouldn't myself | 23:42 | |
put the greatest weight as he works out | 23:47 | |
the velocity multipliers that | 23:50 | |
one might use to translate this into real output. | 23:54 | |
This results in a rather anemic expansion | 23:58 | |
in comparison with what most of the forecasters | 24:01 | |
are predicting going into 1975 | 24:04 | |
and what most of the policy goal people | 24:08 | |
are saying is a policy goal. | 24:10 | |
In particular he quotes, as we all do, | 24:12 | |
the Council of Economic Advisor's own policy goal | 24:15 | |
with respect to real output. | 24:18 | |
He says they'll never make it | 24:22 | |
without the tighter... | 24:23 | |
Monetary policy. | 24:26 | |
As a result unemployment will be on the rise. | 24:30 | |
It may be 5% now but if one can believe Gordon's exercise | 24:34 | |
it will be moving up in '75 to 6% | 24:38 | |
and he even can get it up to 6.6% | 24:43 | |
without stretching the pattern of past experience. | 24:46 | |
Now what do you buy | 24:51 | |
for this rather heavy burden? | 24:54 | |
He spells out, he's done that in the Brookings Papers, | 24:56 | |
what the actual human welfare costs are | 25:00 | |
of the increased unemployment. | 25:04 | |
And he says what do you buy? | 25:06 | |
As far as 1974 and 1975, | 25:08 | |
let's say between now and the end of 1975. | 25:11 | |
In Professor Gordon's opinion, | 25:15 | |
and it's an opinion worth listening to, | 25:17 | |
you buy almost nothing. | 25:19 | |
To speak in technical parlance, | 25:22 | |
Professor Gordon believes | 25:25 | |
that the short-run Phillips curve | 25:28 | |
over the next year and a half | 25:31 | |
is practically horizontal. | 25:32 | |
So Arthur Burns is so to speak crucifying mankind, | 25:34 | |
not on a cross of gold but on a cross of a | 25:41 | |
severely limited rate of growth of the money supply | 25:44 | |
with the effect that if you work out | 25:48 | |
the cost and benefit equation | 25:51 | |
there are very few benefits, | 25:53 | |
almost no benefits on the side of inflation, | 25:55 | |
you're gonna get just the increase, | 25:58 | |
the improvement, the abatement in inflation | 25:59 | |
that you were gonna get anyway. | 26:02 | |
But you do get a tremendous loss in real output. | 26:04 | |
Now what are we to think about this? | 26:10 | |
First. | 26:14 | |
I believe that I would want to augment his analysis | 26:16 | |
by analysis of what happens after 1975 | 26:20 | |
because I suppose we would all agree | 26:25 | |
that the initial conditions that you leave for in 1976 | 26:27 | |
are a bit different under one scenario of Gordon, | 26:31 | |
the tight money scenario as against the one | 26:35 | |
which he now advocates which is | 26:37 | |
the accommodating money supply. | 26:38 | |
That's point number one. | 26:41 | |
Point number two, suppose somebody says | 26:42 | |
well if you file this philosophy | 26:44 | |
every time the economy is weak, | 26:46 | |
this is a built-in recipe for secular inflation. | 26:49 | |
I think Professor Gordon would answer | 26:53 | |
in the following way, he would say | 26:56 | |
we've had a once and for all increase in prices | 26:57 | |
due to the OPEC oil monopoly, | 27:01 | |
due to the crop failures, | 27:03 | |
and that it is a better part of wisdom | 27:06 | |
in a mixed economy when you have an exogenously produced | 27:09 | |
jump upward in prices to a new plateau, to a new trend base. | 27:16 | |
The Federal Reserve in that case should be accommodating | 27:23 | |
rather than to try to roll back those particular prices. | 27:26 | |
Now one wants always to look for the | 27:32 | |
weaknesses in any analysis, I think that I would conclude | 27:36 | |
the following. | 27:41 | |
First I think we must realize the imprecision | 27:42 | |
of any econometric estimates. | 27:45 | |
So that although I had no quarrel | 27:47 | |
with Professor Gordon's mean values | 27:49 | |
and I share his concern that you won't do much | 27:54 | |
about inflation but you will do something | 27:57 | |
about creating stagnation, I think that there is | 28:00 | |
a much wider dispersion around those means than | 28:04 | |
most laypeople realize and even than some | 28:08 | |
econometricians realize and if I were Professor Gordon | 28:11 | |
I would emphasize that fact. | 28:14 | |
Secondly I don't have very much confidence | 28:17 | |
in those stability of those short-run money multipliers | 28:20 | |
and I think that the economy could have | 28:24 | |
greater underlying strength than is indicated | 28:29 | |
in the Monte Carlo simulation exercise by Professor Gordon. | 28:32 | |
Nevertheless, it is a reasoned argument | 28:36 | |
which we should ponder over and which we would neglect | 28:39 | |
to our peril. | 28:42 | |
- | If you have any comments or questions | 28:45 |
for Professor Samuelson-- | 28:47 |
File Info
The preservation of the Duke University Libraries Digital Collections and the Duke Digital Repository programs are supported in part by the Lowell and Eileen Aptman Digital Preservation Fund