Search

On September 24, 1949, Frank D. Graham, Walker Professor of International Finance at Princeton University, at Princeton, New Jersey, died from a fall at Palmer Stadium at the close of the Princeton-Lafayette football game. During the last two decades of his life, Graham was concerned with some of the most difficult problems of recent times--unemployment, monetary stability, and international peace and prosperity. To these formidable tasks he brought an acute intellect, a deep love of truth, great courage in his convictions, and a warm concern for human welfare. Born of American parents in Halifax, Nova Scotia, on January 1, 1890, Graham received an A.B. in 1913 and an as in 1915 from Dalhousie University, and then an A.M. in 1917 and a Ph.D. in 1920 from Harvard University. Graham wrote his doctor's thesis on "International Trade Under Depreciated Paper: United States, 1862-79." Even in this early study, he was too independent and an original thinker. Graham's great critical and analytical powers developed early. Coming to Princeton University as an assistant professor in 1921, he was by the late twenties one of the outstanding graduate teachers on the Princeton campus.

In his celebrated study of "The structure of U.S. foreign trade," Wassily Leontief came to the surprising conclusion that the U.S. specializes in labor-intensive lines of production. It would thus seem that this country resorts to foreign trade in order to economize its capital and dispose of its surplus labor. Since the U.S. is known to have a far higher capital/labor ratio than its trading partners, this finding contradicts the basic Ohlin model which explains international trade in terms of relative factor endowments. Under it a country would export those products which are intensive in its relatively abundant resource and import those which are intensive in its relatively scarce resource. A wealth of statistical and theoretical material has been published in the past decade in an attempt to reconcile the empirical finding with the Heckscher-Ohlin theorem. This paper is devoted to an empirical examination of Leontief's hypothesis concerning the superiority of U.S. labor. The problem does not easily lend itself to statistical measurement because of the difficulty of isolating the quality of labor from other factors affecting productivity.

The object of this paper is to consider the international implications of national policies aimed at maintaining high and stable levels of employment. It is now widely realized that such policies are not only compatible with, but actually prerequisite to, a large and steady flow of world trade. Substantial progress has been made since the end of the war in setting up the framework for a new international system of monetary and trading relations. The two Bretton Woods institutions are ready to start operations, and a conference just concluded in London, England, has produced a draft charter for an international trade organization. This is a good time to inquire how this new system can be operated so as to agree rather than conflict with the domestic objective of stability at full employment. Foreign trade fluctuations may continually necessitate relative shifts in the structure of prices and production, but should not compel any country to depart from the general norm of domestic stability.

Estimates of regional employment multipliers provide a rough but useful means of assessing the total employment impact of gains or losses in region's export activity. In this paper a partially disaggregated economic base multiplier model is described, whereby it is possible, under certain conditions to derive differential multiplier estimates for distinct sectors of export activity. Then the model is applied to a case study of the Portsmouth, New Hampshire, economy, where a large military manufacturing installation, a non manufacturing defense base, and private export industries are distinguished as in dependent export activities. Differential multipliers for these three export sectors are estimated. The relative magnitudes of the differential multipliers derived in this case study may be of interest to planners in many United States communities which must face the challenge of defense closings and reductions. In a national economy with a high degree of regional specialization the income level or growth of a particular region is dependent on its ability to export goods and services to other regions. Economic base analysis stresses the distinction between "export" activities, which are considered to be exogenously determined, and non-export activities, which are the endogenous component of total economic activity.

This article discusses various articles on the U.S. import demand, which were published in the May 1, 1953 issue of the journal "American Economic Review." Both economists, Hans P. Neisser and Arnold C. Harberger have pointed out the difference between the consumption function and the import function and that imports are the difference between total demand and domestic supply. In the exposition of Harberger imports play a peculiar marginal role: imports are called in for assistance only if and when total demand must be readily satisfied by domestic output. The result is a high volatility of imports near the full employment level and a squeeze play on foreign producers when domestic resources unemployed. Harberger's observations regarding the interplay of domestic production and the demand for imports are nevertheless important because they show the limitations of the concept of the marginal propensity to import. These limitations are probably less important for the U.S. than for any other country.

The article presents some issues related to international trade and policy. Equilibrium analysis introduces a bias toward calling maladjustments short run. A movement of capital and labor from one industry to another frequently requires a protraded period of time. Assuming full employment a high degree of internal adjustability to external changes, constant costs and given amounts of resources in the trading countries, it follows that changes in demand among trading countries for each other's goods could have only mild results. There are limits of productivity and real income beyond which international trade adjustment through the play of internal forces cannot, in the general interest, be accepted. A war effects the long run and short run economic development. Western Great Britain created the modern world and was in turn remade by it. The internal mobility on which traditional theory is based was itself a product of external trade, including pre-eminently the external movement of capital, labor, and entrepreneurship to produce the goods which comprised the trade. The over-all result has been a changed conception of how world trade stability must be achieved. Instead of adjustment through internal change, there has developed the view that external stability must depend on maintenance of internal stability at full employment in the leading countries, and particularly in the United States.

An easy first step in solving the surplus disposal problem would be stopping all future surplus accumulation. Free markets could do this, by forward pricing in periods of high employment by stringent acreage and output controls or by crop destruction, etc. But the political strength of organized agriculture, the log-rolling skill of its spokesmen, the positive appeal of the parity idea, the negative appeals of subsidies, output limitation, and killing little pigs combine to preclude elimination of surpluses through lower prices or reduced output. Free competition and free trade would restrict the surplus accumulations and decumulations within the dimensions of disaster insurance funds. They would outlaw as monopolistic any accumulations and disposals, at least by individual countries, intended primarily to influence either world or domestic prices. They would equate the domestic prices of agricultural imports and exports with world prices, adjusted for transport costs. If the United States adheres to an international agreement governing the commodity, deliveries of American export quotas to the international commodity authority should not be included in the international sales schedule. In years of disaster or the abatement of disaster at home and abroad, the Federal Agricultural Surplus Corporation must of course be permitted to revise its international sales schedule.

In this industrial age a nation cannot beat its swords into plowshares in a few years; the process takes decades. In order to test this prosperity argument for war, the article examines the job-creating powers of the World War by comparing production during the post-World War period with production in the pre-World War period. The procedure will be to determine, if possible, the rate of growth in the physical volume of production and other measures of the totality of economic activity during the prewar period and extrapolate these prewar rates of growth into the postwar period in order to determine whether the postwar rates of growth have maintained the pre-war pace. The carry-over of wartime stimuli to expansion and investment had petered out; the new and usual peacetime stimuli to investment still awaited the attainment of a favorable international balance of economic and political power, a return of world-wide confidence in the future of domestic and foreign investments. Postwar adjustments and "appeasement" are not a function of time; the time they require is a question of the attitudes and ambitions of rulers as well as the force of events.

The article examines the structural severity of unemployment in the United States after 1957. An index is suggested which is derived from the indexes used to measure concentration in production and in international trade. The author begins with the discussion of some arguments concerning the rationale of the index and some of its properties. Indexes are presented for a number of labor force attributes for the years 1947 to 1964. Severity of structural unemployment became more evident after 1957 only with respect to the age distribution of the labor force. It followed a cyclical pattern in the case of some attributes, but was invariant to the overall level of unemployment in the case of others.

Just as accounting is an indispensable tool for business executives and researchers in finance and management, so also is it becoming more and more important to economists in both industry and government. Over the past thirty years a new branch of accounting has been developed, in which the transactions of a nation rather than a business enterprise are pictured. Data from these accounts are valuable in assessing the overall business picture, the prospects for full employment and prosperity, the strength of foreign markets, the approach of currency convertibility, and a host of other facts vital to businessmen and economists alike. National income accounts appear in courses in income and employment or business cycles, while balance of payments accounting is dealt with in the study of international trade. The present article is intended to point out areas in which accounting departments can be of service to liberal arts students, particularly economics majors, who are learning the social accounts.