Tape 8 - untitled

Download
- Rights
- Limited Re-Use
  CC BY-NC 4.0
  More Rights Info
- Files (1)
- MP3
- Please be patient with media downloads. They are often large files.
Share

Embed Code
<iframe src='//idn.duke.edu/ark:/87924/r47p8tw0r?embed=true' height='125px' width='100%' frameborder='0' marginwidth='0' marginheight='0' scrolling='no' allowfullscreen></iframe>
Permalink

https://idn.duke.edu/ark:/87924/r47p8tw0r
Skip to Item Info

Loading the media player...

Files for this Item

Transcript

Transcripts may contain inaccuracies.

-	Hello and welcome to another in a series	0:02
	of weekly commentaries on the current economic scene	0:03
	produced and recorded	0:06
	by Instructional Dynamics Incorporated.	0:07
	Our guest again this week,	0:10
	the first week of the new year,	0:11
	is one of this country's leading economists,	0:13
	Professor Paul Samuelson	0:15
	of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.	0:16
	Around the turn of each year comes the time	0:20
	for annual forecasts.	0:22
	Professor Samuelson, do you have any words of wisdom	0:23
	at this area, in this time?	0:26
-	I'm glad you asked.	0:29
	I just happen so to speak to have my music with me	0:30
	because for more than a decade,	0:34
	I've been writing for the Financial Times of London	0:36
	giving it on each New Year's Day	0:40
	the outlook for the American Economy	0:42
	for the next year.	0:44
	Considering the imprecision of economic forecasting,	0:47
	as I look back to calculate	0:50
	my own batting average,	0:52
	the results don't seem to have been too bad.	0:54
	But considering how nice it would be	0:58
	to be able to pinpoint trouble	1:00
	before it arises, I could certainly wish	1:01
	that my batting average were a good deal better.	1:04
	I don't suppose many of my listeners	1:08
	are avid readers of the Financial Times.	1:11
	So, let me take a couple of minutes	1:14
	to read out the highlights	1:16
	of this year's annual horoscope	1:17
	as I see it for English readers.	1:23
	I begin with the fashionable forecast.	1:30
	Our experts generally expect the first half of 1969	1:33
	to be a period of slow growth	1:37
	for the American economy.	1:38
	Instead of the 10% annual rate of growth	1:40
	of Gross National Product,	1:43
	that's expressed in current dollars	1:45
	which has characterized the first half of 1968,	1:47
	the majority opinion here seems	1:51
	to call for less than a 5% rate of increase	1:52
	in the first two quarters of 1969.	1:57
	Now, that's the fashionable forecast	2:00
	as it was a month or two ago	2:03
	and still in some quarters.	2:06
	If this typical Washington, New York	2:08
	and Wharton School forecast turns out right,	2:11
	I think we'll see the following.	2:14
	First real output will stagnate this winter and spring.	2:17
	Second, unemployment will float upward	2:20
	from its incredibly low October level of 3.3%	2:22
	floating upwards to say 4.5%	2:26
	or in that general vicinity.	2:30
	Third, corporate profits will sag.	2:33
	Fourth, the general rate of price inflation	2:36
	will drop from its present perhaps 4.5% annual rate	2:40
	to a less uncomfortable 3% annual rate.	2:43
	And fifth, with less overheating,	2:47
	our surplus of exports over imports	2:50
	will at long last begin to improve	2:52
	from its sad 1968 state.	2:55
	And finally, interest rates	2:58
	which have been at record high levels	3:00
	will according to this standard forecast recede a bit	3:03
	thereby providing a solid platform	3:06
	for a healthy pace of the housing construction	3:09
	so desperately needed	3:11
	now that the post-war baby crop	3:13
	is forming families of its own.	3:15
	Well, what are we to think of this?	3:19
	I think there's everything in this outlook	3:21
	to gladden the hearts of President-Elect Nixon's new team.	3:23
	For the story even has a happy ending.	3:26
	After a not very painful investment in sobriety,	3:30
	the American economy will by mid-year	3:34
	according to this forecast,	3:36
	be back on a trend of vigorous growth and expansion.	3:38
	There's only one fault	3:42
	to be found with this fashionable forecast.	3:43
	And that is I cannot believe it.	3:47
	Now, it's not that I like to be different.	3:50
	On the contrary, experience has taught me	3:52
	that when the crowd is most united,	3:54
	it tends to be least wrong.	3:57
	Only amateurs strain to be novel and provocative	3:59
	hoping that lightning may strike	4:03
	to justify their perverse prognostications	4:05
	and thereby bringing to them	4:08
	the extra kudos that comes from being seen	4:10
	to be in exclusive possession of the truth.	4:12
	I am skeptical about the so-called fashionable forecast	4:17
	for other reasons.	4:20
	Just as the ink is drying on its print outs,	4:23
	I think events have made it obsolescent.	4:25
	That is one of the troubles	4:28
	with elaborate econometric forecasts.	4:29
	Their period of gestation is long	4:33
	and it is not easy to change them.	4:35
	Back-of-the-envelope forecasts, on the other hand,	4:37
	and this is their characteristic defect	4:41
	can be altered on the spur of an impulse.	4:44
	I don't think that Dr. Paul McCracken,	4:48
	the newly designated chairman of the Nixon Council	4:50
	of Economic Advisers believes that this date	4:53
	in the standard forecast outlined above	4:56
	and I would make book	4:59
	that the outgoing Johnson economists	5:00
	are themselves reformulating their GNP projections.	5:02
	The simple truth is this,	5:08
	at year's end, the American economy	5:10
	has not yet shown that retardation of growth	5:13
	which most of us had thought	5:16
	would be the consequence of last July's 10% surtax	5:18
	and fiscal restraint.	5:22
	It has shown a decline from beginning of the year levels	5:25
	but it hasn't shown as large a decline	5:29
	as had been forecast in most of the models.	5:32
	Money GNP in the final quarter of this last year	5:35
	must I believe have still been growing	5:40
	at a whopping seven to 8% annual rate.	5:42
	This is down but little from earlier exuberance	5:46
	and it means that inflationary fears still abound.	5:49
	This explains the recent December increase	5:53
	in the Federal Reserve discount rate	5:57
	to a level of 5.5%.	5:59
	I'll say more about that later.	6:02
	Clearly a sobering reappraisal	6:04
	is now going on.	6:06
	One can only guess what its outcome will be.	6:08
	Some experts will argue	6:11
	that delay of weakness	6:13
	means only that it will come later with a vengeance.	6:14
	Others will reverse the reasoning	6:19
	and will infer from current strength future strength.	6:22
	At the moment, I incline towards this last view.	6:26
	The momentum of the unusually strong last quarter	6:30
	of 1968 seems most likely to require upward revision	6:33
	of the earlier expectation	6:39
	that the first quarter of 1969	6:41
	will show negligible real growth.	6:43
	I've jotted down on the back of my envelope a table.	6:48
	This gives rough guesses of GNP	6:53
	for the coming year	6:56
	and if some of you want to get a pencil,	6:58
	and write down these numbers,	7:01
	here they are.	7:05
	I wanna warn that although I've given single numbers,	7:08
	these single numbers are merely shorthand	7:10
	for a probable range	7:13
	thus I've put down for my GNP	7:16
	for 1969 924 billion.	7:20
	That's about a seven and 1/3% growth	7:25
	in money GNP expressed in current prices.	7:28
	Now, I don't want you to think	7:33
	that I believe that I can pinpoint the growth of GNP	7:35
	to within a 1/3 of a percent	7:39
	and you should think of seven and 1/3% growth	7:41
	as merely shorthand for a probable range	7:44
	of say six to 9%.	7:48
	Well, with that caveat let me read off some of the numbers.	7:51
	The Gross National Product in 1967,	7:57
	not this last year but the year before that	8:01
	was 790 billion	8:05
	and it grew in 1968 according to my estimate,	8:07
	we still have to estimate 1968 to 861 billion.	8:11
	That's an increase in money terms of eight and 1/3%,	8:17
	more by the way than most people had forecast	8:23
	at the beginning of 1968.	8:27
	How much of that increase in money terms	8:31
	is due to inflation?	8:34
	I would guess that at most	8:37
	we had in 1968 a 4.5% increase in real growth.	8:41
	The difference between eight and 1/3%	8:47
	and 4.5% being the measure	8:49
	of overall price inflation.	8:52
	Now, what about the coming year?	8:57
	I've jotted down 924 billion,	9:01
	that's an increase over 861 billion	9:05
	of seven and 1/3%.	9:07
	How much of that will be real?	9:10
	I suspect that not more than 4%, if that.	9:13
	The difference being three and 1/3% for price inflation.	9:20
	I think that makes me something of an optimist	9:25
	to believe that we will go	9:28
	from a rate of price inflation	9:29
	of over 4% to three and 1/3%	9:32
	but I'm giving you my best judgment forecast.	9:36
	What does this mean for unemployment?	9:42
	Unemployment in 1967 as a percentage	9:44
	of the civilian labor force was 3.8%.	9:47
	In 1968 according to my estimate	9:51
	on the basis of incomplete figures,	9:54
	the average for the year will be something like 3.6%.	9:56
	I think that unemployment figure's gonna grow	10:01
	but I've jotted down 3.9% for 1969.	10:03
	At the maximum,	10:09
	unemployment may be a little bit above 4%	10:12
	but I don't think much more than that	10:15
	and the average for the year, about 3.9%.	10:17
	What about corporate profits pre tax?	10:22
	No, I think we're most interested in after tax profits,	10:27
	so let me make a guess on the after-tax profit figure.	10:30
	It was 48 billion in 1967.	10:34
	According to my guess on the basis of incomplete returns	10:38
	for 1968, that might be 51 billion,	10:41
	maybe a shade under 51 billion.	10:45
	I envisage for 1969 an increase	10:48
	to about 53 billion.	10:52
	That's about a 4% increase in corporate after-tax profits.	10:57
	And again, I may be on the optimistic side	11:02
	in making that estimate.	11:06
	I should say that my estimate	11:07
	is based primarily upon the supposition	11:10
	that the surcharge will not be removed	11:14
	on July 1st.	11:21
	You remember that during the campaign,	11:23
	Candidate Nixon expressed a hope	11:27
	that the surtax could be removed.	11:30
	Most recently his new Secretary of Commerce,	11:33
	departing perhaps slightly from script	11:37
	and from instructions that no statements	11:40
	are to be made about future policy,	11:43
	Maurice Stans nevertheless expressed the hope	11:46
	that the surcharge could be removed.	11:49
	He's now put off the date	11:52
	for total removal to 18 months	11:54
	but hopes that a start can be made by half	11:58
	of it's being wiped out on its July 1st schedule.	12:01
	I think if my forecast turns out to be right,	12:06
	Mr. Nixon is unlikely to be following his advice.	12:11
	Well, let's comment on the analytic issues raised	12:17
	by this forecast	12:20
	and I am still quoting very freely	12:22
	from my Financial Times piece afterwards.	12:27
	I'll try to put a gloss on this	12:30
	and give some second thoughts.	12:32
	The forecast that I have presented	12:35
	is rather more expansionary	12:36
	than what was earlier fashionable.	12:38
	I may say I think it's more expansionary	12:40
	than is now fashionable.	12:43
	I'm ahead of the crowd in making this forecast.	12:45
	Not that you can't find another straggler	12:49
	who's ahead of the crowd	12:51
	but this is where I think the crowd	12:53
	is gonna be in another month.	12:56
	Of course I'm undertaking risk in saying that.	12:58
	It may turn out that I'm off base	13:02
	but why is the forecast turned out	13:06
	to be more expansionary than was earlier fashionable?	13:10
	Is this a sign that fiscal restraint	13:13
	just does not work?	13:15
	Has the strength of demand since mid-year	13:17
	confirmed the monetarist view of my colleague,	13:20
	Milton Friedman, and of the Chicago School	13:25
	that as far as aggregate demand is concerned,	13:29
	it is money alone that can be assigned a predictable impact.	13:32
	Now, mind you, Professor Friedman has made very clear	13:39
	that he doesn't say that money alone	13:43
	is important for all things.	13:44
	Interest rates are affected by fiscal policy	13:48
	in his view.	13:51
	In his view, the share of the National Product	13:52
	that goes to government	13:56
	and is taken away from the private sector	13:58
	is affected by that	14:00
	and in his view,	14:02
	nobody can predict the strength of aggregate demand	14:04
	with any accuracy	14:09
	because there is a great deal of noise in the signal	14:10
	but I think I've fairly represent	14:14
	the view that I've heard him express in these tapes	14:17
	and print that he tends to denigrate the role	14:20
	of fiscal policy	14:29
	as a predictable element	14:30
	in affecting predictably the level of aggregate demand	14:34
	once you have allowed separately	14:38
	for the effect of the rate of growth	14:42
	of the money supply.	14:45
	Well, I don't think that events of the last six months	14:47
	have led me to buy this particular view.	14:56
	Neither those facts nor	15:05
	and this is what I give very great weight to,	15:08
	plausible reasoning can in my opinion support such a view.	15:10
	If it had not been for the fiscal restraint	15:15
	that we did get in July,	15:17
	I believe we would have had more overheating	15:19
	in the last part of 1968 than we actually did have.	15:22
	Now, I realize that's a non-operational statement.	15:27
	No one will ever be able to prove	15:30
	the truth or falsity of this assertion	15:32
	but it does summarize my best judgment	15:35
	and it leaves me to make a prediction.	15:38
	It leads me to the prediction	15:41
	that President Nixon will not find himself asking	15:42
	for removal of the tax surcharge next July.	15:46
	According to Friedman's theories	15:50
	as I understand them,	15:53
	no appreciable change in the inflationary situation	15:54
	would result from removing the tax surcharge	15:58
	when it expires.	16:00
	That is with the proviso that the Federal Reserve	16:02
	does what Dr. Friedman thinks it should do.	16:04
	And hence in the pursuit of the philosophical goal	16:08
	that Dr. Friedman has	16:12
	of getting down government use of resources,	16:13
	the tax surcharge should be allowed to die.	16:16
	Now, although I understand that Dr. Friedman	16:20
	is one of Nixon's valued advisors,	16:22
	I confidently predict that this is one matter	16:26
	in which his testimony will not be accepted.	16:29
	Now, let me be clear.	16:35
	I do attribute some of the recent strength	16:37
	in the economy to the mid-year spurt in the money supply.	16:39
	And some of next year's strength	16:43
	I think may well be a heritage	16:45
	of recent rapid money growth.	16:47
	But in my judgment, most of the strength of the economy	16:52
	simply represents the kind of error in forecasting	16:56
	that we know all methods of production are subject to.	17:00
	Thus the consumer dropped his saving rate	17:05
	more than had been expected.	17:08
	That is the consumer's prerogative	17:10
	and there's no necessity	17:12
	to infer from this that whatever is taken from him	17:14
	in extra taxes will forevermore come directly out	17:17
	of saving 100%.	17:21
	Now, plant equipment expending has also turned strong.	17:24
	Also housing.	17:28
	Could these unforeseen elements of strength	17:30
	all be coincidences?	17:32
	Maybe.	17:35
	But I distrust coincidences.	17:37
	And it is always possible	17:39
	and I think more likely explanation	17:43
	that they're reflections of an underlying shift	17:45
	toward inflationary expectations.	17:48
	Men like Arthur Burns have for years been talking	17:52
	about inflationary sentiment	17:55
	as being rampant in the land.	17:57
	And for years frankly I could find	17:59
	little operational meaning	18:01
	to those assertions except possibly	18:03
	in the unpopularity in bonds	18:06
	at moderate yields	18:08
	but perhaps finally the Burns School	18:10
	has come into season.	18:12
	When machinery and housing costs are seen to be soaring,	18:14
	why wait to order and build?	18:17
	There's another possible explanation	18:20
	for the upward revision of spending plans.	18:23
	I'm referring now to the McGraw-Hill survey	18:26
	to the Lionel Edie survey,	18:29
	to the Pierre Winfray survey	18:31
	and finally to the official survey	18:34
	by the Department of Commerce	18:36
	and the SEC on plant and equipment expenditure intentions	18:38
	of business which were revised upward	18:42
	in recent months.	18:45
	I may say that I think that those expectations	18:47
	on the part of businessmen are too optimistic	18:51
	and will be frustrated	18:54
	but I do think that they are a Gallup poll view	18:55
	into the minds of our business community	19:00
	and should be given a great deal of very careful attention.	19:03
	Well, in my judgment,	19:09
	an explanation for that is that Wall Street	19:11
	and business managers have been very pleasantly surprised	19:13
	that fiscal restraint did not bite in	19:17
	as they had feared it might.	19:20
	And sometimes their memories and attention spans	19:22
	are very short.	19:26
	And so, a number of people in the financial community	19:28
	have been getting convinced	19:31
	that that there will be continued expansion ahead	19:34
	at an uncontrolled rate	19:38
	and this leads them into actions	19:40
	that make their own prophecy partially self-fulfilling.	19:42
	Then there's another factor that I think is very important.	19:48
	All the analysts seems to be agreed	19:52
	that after at most a quarter or two of hesitation,	19:55
	the American economy will again be off to the races.	19:58
	Now, Wall Street knows that,	20:02
	bankers know that, professors know that,	20:04
	business executives know that.	20:09
	If that is to be known	20:12
	and if it is to be regarded as true,	20:13
	I think it's rather rational of businessmen	20:16
	to look beyond the valley	20:18
	of that first quarter or two of next year's weakness	20:20
	and to budget very boldly.	20:24
	Well, finally, I've left politics out of my discussion	20:28
	up 'til now	20:32
	since there's more to macroeconomics	20:34
	than the quantity equation of exchange,	20:36
	MV equals PQ,	20:39
	this is a very serious omission on my part.	20:41
	Part of the exuberance in the Dow Jones Index	20:44
	I suspect I have to trace to the Nixon victory	20:47
	and to the prospect of that victory.	20:51
	Let's make no mistake about it.	20:54
	Ours is still a class society.	20:56
	And it does warm the cockles of the heart	20:58
	of our business community generally	21:02
	to have the Republicans back in the White House	21:04
	and best of all, to have a Republican Administration	21:07
	that may be following the Democratic new economics.	21:10
	That's like a license to sin.	21:15
	I don't think it's been lost on the money market	21:17
	that Richard Nixon has turned out to be moderate	21:20
	and centrist in his appointments and announcements	21:23
	exiling conservative Maurice Stans	21:26
	to the innocuous Commerce Department	21:29
	was seen as a straw in the wind	21:32
	by the brokerage community.	21:34
	I think the American people too	21:37
	have been pleasantly surprised	21:38
	by the man they have elected.	21:40
	If Nixon could pull off peace in Vietnam	21:42
	with or without honor.	21:45
	He might even become a very popular president.	21:47
	Nonetheless, if my rough extrapolations	21:52
	are at algorithm near the mark,	21:56
	Nixon's first year will bring trying problems	21:58
	of economic control.	22:01
	People say we will not have another money crunch.	22:03
	This was written a week or two ago.	22:07
	And this is my reply to that saying.	22:11
	But why might not the same forces	22:15
	that were operating in 1966	22:17
	produce the same uncomfortable effects in 1969?	22:20
	Well, I close my Financial Times piece	22:26
	and you remember I'm writing for a foreign audience.	22:31
	All in all 1969 gives every sign	22:34
	of being a difficult year	22:38
	for the new administration.	22:39
	Out of self-interest we Americans all wish them godspeed	22:41
	on their undertakings.	22:45
	Now, I want to comment upon that forecast	22:47
	and bring it up to date.	22:52
	But before I do so,	22:55
	some of you may be interested in more detail	22:57
	and again, if you have a pencil handy,	23:02
	I suggest that you jot down some numbers.	23:06
	The breakdown of Gross National Product	23:09
	of 924 billion that I forecast	23:12
	is according to my rough estimates,	23:15
	I wanna stress that this is not a machine forecast,	23:17
	it does not follow from equations,	23:20
	it's a so-called judgemental model	23:22
	in which I take into account the rate of growth	23:25
	of the money supply	23:27
	and the latest McGraw-Hill survey	23:29
	and all the things that seem to me to be important.	23:31
	Let me give you the breakdown.	23:35
	Consumption expenditure is 567 billion,	23:36
	government expenditure is 215 billion.	23:40
	That's over the 197 of last year.	23:43
	Private domestic gross investment in total	23:49
	is 139 billion	23:52
	and I've improved our net export figures	23:54
	just a little bit	23:58
	from two billion up to three billion.	23:59
	Now, you may be curious	24:03
	as to the quarterly profile.	24:06
	Here I'm really becoming very bold	24:08
	in making predictions	24:10
	but let me	24:13
	give up all shame and go ahead.	24:17
	The third quarter of the year was 871 billion.	24:20
	My estimate for the fourth quarter is 888 billion.	24:25
	That's a good 17 billion increase in the forth quarter	24:29
	and I wouldn't be at all surprised	24:33
	if it were 888.8 more than that even.	24:34
	901 is my figure for the first quarter of next year	24:40
	which is a 13 billion increase.	24:43
	That's a drop from the current quarter.	24:45
	And in the second quarter I put down 914	24:48
	which is another 13 billion.	24:51
	That's again less than we've been experiencing	24:53
	but that's the most restraint that I can see	24:56
	in the pictures and I go to a whopping 933 billion	25:00
	which is a backup to 19 billion	25:05
	for the third quarter	25:08
	and finally, 950 billion for the last quarter	25:09
	of the calendar year	25:15
	which is 17 billion.	25:16
	The increase into the third quarter	25:19
	because of a big increase in government payrolls	25:21
	which is already on the books	25:24
	is the single biggest item.	25:25
	Well, so much for the horoscope for next year.	25:28
	Now, I've used up an awful lot of my time	25:34
	so I can comment only a little bit	25:37
	on the elements that are in my mind	25:39
	in making that forecast.	25:41
	I'll leave over to the next tape	25:44
	further discussion of the really dramatic changes	25:48
	that have been taking place	25:51
	in the money market.	25:53
	I had to make my forecast without knowing	25:55
	about the increase in the discount rate	25:57
	but implicit in my forecast	25:59
	was the belief that the fourth quarter figures	26:01
	were strong and that this was gonna scare	26:04
	the Federal Reserve a lot	26:06
	and that has come to pass.	26:07
	The Federal Reserve has raised the discount rate.	26:10
	The prime rate has gone up now for the second time.	26:13
	I think we are off on our way	26:18
	to another money crunch.	26:21
	It's very interesting that the Federal Reserve	26:23
	did not raise Regulation Q.	26:24
	This means that market rates are beginning to soar	26:28
	above the ceiling rates	26:31
	that the commercial banks are allowed to pay	26:32
	on their time deposits	26:33
	and we'll begin to see a runoff of the CDs of the banks,	26:35
	we'll begin to see disintermediation,	26:40
	we'll begin to see trouble for the savings	26:42
	and loan associations on the coast	26:44
	and at this point	26:46
	I think that the Federal Reserve's gonna have	26:47
	to do something about Regulation Q	26:49
	particularly as it applies to large accounts.	26:53
	I don't think they know what to do.	26:56
	I don't think they've learned anything particularly	26:58
	since 1966, so I'll be saying more about this.	27:00
	My best guess is that they'll use more of the same medicine	27:04
	that was used in 1966,	27:08
	medicine for which they were subject	27:11
	to considerable criticism by the academic community.	27:14
	I guess our time is up.	27:20
	That's enough for now.	27:22
	We certainly will have no shortage of things	27:23
	to talk about next time.	27:25
-	Thank you, Professor Paul Samuelson	27:28
	and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.	27:29
	If you have comments or suggestions	27:32
	for subjects you'd like to hear discussed,	27:34
	please write Instructional Dynamics Incorporated,	27:36
	166 East Superior Street, Chicago, 60611.	27:40

Item Info

Title:

Tape 8 - untitled

Date:

1969

Contributor:

Samuelson, Paul A. (Paul Anthony), 1915-2009

Subject:

Format:

audiocassettes

Language:

English

Digital Collection:

Paul A. Samuelson papers, 1933-2010 and undated

Source Collection:

Paul A. Samuelson papers, 1933-2010

Series:

Economics Cassette Series: Paul Samuelson

Rights:

Limited Re-Use

CC BY-NC 4.0

Rights Note:

This material is made available for research, scholarship, and private study. Copyright in this material has not been transferred to Duke University. For reuses of this material beyond those permitted by fair use or otherwise allowed under the Copyright Act, please see our page on copyright and citations: https://library.duke.edu/rubenstein/research/citations-and-permissions.

Identifier:

RL10082-CS-0008
ref2155_uxi
samuelsonpaul
duke:325031
pstau001008
ark:/87924/r47p8tw0r
5689c884-237b-4daa-acca-c4e6d024a001

Permalink:

https://idn.duke.edu/ark:/87924/r47p8tw0r

Sponsor:

Sponsor this Digital Collection

Tape 8 - untitled

Transcript

Item Info

Economists' Papers Archive

More Info & Options