Epstein Secrets

t Generation Theory I also treat rate of return. This combined free growth theory with insights of Petty in 1662 and William Stanley Jevons in 1871. Petty’s idea was that each generation passes the baton to the next. Our investment horizon is the generation length. Its reciprocal, or one over that perio

the convergence, | argue, is biology selecting tastes that maintain and reproduce us. The idea that we act out the biological imperative is clear in Petty and Malthus, and in the equilibrium wage theory of Adam Smith and David Ricardo, where pay converges to the level preserving the work force. But if]

capital indeed grows more productive with age, or depreciates all at once, seem implausible in each case and cannot begin to explain enough. I think Becker hinted at the answer in 1964. Becker pointed out that job training at the Chapter 2: Fast Forward 1/06/16 14 HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_010954 employers’ exp

next generation theory give more scope and policy implications. But the pay and Y rules have plenty of those, and may be new to the world. Mill and Petty beat me to the others. | have been arguing the pay and Yrules from the time | reversed course from Quesnay’s idea some five years ago. I will rederi

y. Economics and Biology Bioeconomics has meant economics informed by biology. I argued that this describes much or all of classical economics from Petty through Mill, then lapsed when the marginalists preferred to do without any explanations or justifications of tastes, and revived a century later to

of Frank Knight a generation before Schultz. Only the rest is what Schultz called pure consumption eliminated from the economy in satisfying tastes. Becker added in 1964 that this investment must be expected to be recovered with interest, at least when paid by employers in job training. Schultz had also

pression is that this exposure is not yet dangerous. But it needs watching. The best method to estimate aggregate adult human capital separately is Petty’s. It is present value of future human cash flow. That means pay less invested consumption. If] am right, meaning that Farr, Marshall and Kiker are w

if such) where not all surprises. A few ideas met both descriptions. They pay rule, and the equally heretical Y rule, probably count as both although Becker came within a step of getting there first. Depreciation theory is likely to be both. Other possible candidates might include my observation that hold