3,673 works, 150 years of economic thought. Each one summarized and searchable, with cited passages inside.
Economic variables may move together, but how can that dependence enter a stochastic model rather than appear only as a correlation after estimation? Gerhard Tintner and R. Narayanan answer by allowing events to change several variables simultaneously: shared increments become the source of covariance. Their compact article connects this mathematical construction to post-war United States gross national product and private consumer expenditures, culminating in a joint uncertainty ellipse for a 1965 forecast. The distinctive payoff is a concrete link between assumptions about shared events and the shape of forecast uncertainty. Readers can also examine the limits of that link: the constant-parameter application permits only upward increments, while the supplied observations include declines. The model offers a tractable account of interdependent trends, not a causal explanation of output and consumption.
A growing population need not supply more work. In this 1968 article, Gerhard Tintner and Yves Aureille examine that tension in France’s postwar demographic revival, separating the number of workers from the hours they contribute. Their accounting method distinguishes employment growth from changes in sectoral composition and working time: movement out of agriculture, with its longer hours, can reduce total labour input even as employment expands. They propose a quality-adjusted measure of labour services, while acknowledging that available French statistics permit only a simpler calculation of hours. Their conditional projection of declining labour input in 1965–70 gives the methodological problem a concrete edge. Readers can discover why schooling, retirement, holidays, and occupational shifts complicate any direct inference from demographic growth to labour supply.
A development plan that promises higher average income need not offer greater security against disappointing results. Gerhard Tintner and N. S. Raghavan make this tension explicit by introducing uncertain productive returns into the Mahalanobis two-sector planning model for India. Rather than calculate a single income target, they estimate distributions of terminal national income and compare how investment allocations alter expected performance, low-income thresholds, and relative variability. Their tested policies show why these measures cannot be treated as interchangeable: an allocation preferred for its average return may lose its appeal when stability becomes the priority. The article offers a concrete encounter with planning as a choice among risk criteria, while openly acknowledging the limitations of its aggregated model, independence assumption, and rough numerical approximations.
How can an econometric model guide policy when the statistics needed to build it are missing? Gerhard Tintner, Isabella Consigliere, and José T. M. Carneiro confront this problem in their 1970 article, published in parallel Portuguese and English texts. Using Brazilian data for 1952–1964, they construct a compact Keynesian system to estimate how spending, wages, and population affect output, consumption, prices, and employment together. The revealing tension lies between policy ambition and restrictive assumptions: without capital-stock data, production depends on labor alone, and higher wages yield declines in real output and employment that the authors themselves question. Readers can trace both the appeal of simultaneous policy responses and the dependence of those responses on proxy data, theoretical choices, and what the model leaves out.
Wage restraint may increase employment eventually while deepening unemployment first. Peter Rosner, Gerhard Tintner, Andreas Wörgötter, and Gabriele Wörgötter make this tension central to their analysis of a small open economy. Their modified Dornbusch model treats restraint as slower wage and price growth without shifting income from wages to profits. Under fixed exchange rates, reduced inflation raises real interest rates before improved competitiveness can stimulate demand; under flexible rates, the initial currency movement makes the transition less predictable. Yet the model’s eventual employment gains are the same under either regime. The article offers a precise way to distinguish a policy’s destination from the costs of reaching it—and to understand why demand support and coordinated policy matter when wage adjustment promises recovery but initially worsens recession.
A wage increase cannot be assessed through wages alone: its effects on prices, employment, and production depend on the accompanying policy choices. In this 1977 article, Guillermo L. Gómez M. and Gerhard Tintner build an aggregate model of Colombia that combines Keynesian consumption relationships with neoclassical production and labor demand. Their estimates make the case for coordinating investment, public expenditure, and trade policy rather than treating economic targets separately. Yet the practical ambition encounters unreliable data, restrictive assumptions, and the unresolved choice of a welfare objective. Readers can examine both the numerical trade-offs the authors identify and their refusal to turn modeled wage effects into a mechanical recommendation for wage freezes—a concrete encounter between econometric calculation and political feasibility.