Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The purpose of this note is two‐fold. One is to pay a belated tribute to an old teacher of mine, Allyn Young. The other is a perhaps overly ambitious attempt to supplement the excellent review of growth theory of 1964, by arguing that there is a direct line between neo‐classical growth theory as Young left it in 1928 and present day theorising; a link, I fear, that is not generally recognised. What originality it may possess lies in expanding upon the implications of Young's argument. But in such a wide and important field as growth, a somewhat different synthesis of existing but scattered ideas seems worth attempting.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lauchlin Currie (1981) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: