The impact factorfrom Web of Science of ‘Quarterly Journal of Economics’ is 6.662, the highestamong other journals so it is considered the most important and relevant,followed by ‘American Economic Review’ and ‘Economic Journal’ with havingimpact factor of 4.026 and 2.
608 respectively. In addition, according to Web ofScience citation, ‘A contribution to theory of economic growth’ has 4464citations, the highest among other articles, therefore it has the highestquality compared to ‘Economic growth and Income Inequality’ and ‘A model ofEconomic Growth’ of having citation of 2251 and 7 accordingly.In differentsocieties, each have distinctive rate of economic growth.
And in “A model ofEconomic Growth” written by Kaldor (1957) examines various model of economicgrowth presenting six basic properties of the model, the working of the model,two stages of capitalism and trend and fluctuation. Established with Keynesiancognition, Kaldor applied this to full employment situation to state thatoutput is restricted by lack of resources rather than by effective demand. Furtheron, for the individual fluctuation of capital/output ratio would depend onknowledge and capital accumulation, which would later lead to entire economy’scapital/output ratio to be constant. Adding on, Kaldor assumed that approach oftechniques depends on accumulation of capital and industrial progress. Withabove assumptions, Kaldor examines on two models of constant working populationand growth of population.
Through these, he has concluded that growth inpopulation will lead to growth in income until the maximum rate of populationreached and alteration of rate of technical progress and lastly, he has emphasizedtaking technological progress as endogenous variable in the long run modelwhich influences variation of the economic growth.Tolook more into close interaction between circulation of income and economicgrowth. The article “Economic Growth and Income Inequality” written by Kuznet(1955), examines the distribution of income in the course of a country’seconomic growth. He looks at family units adjusted for family size and theentire income distribution rather than just segments of it.
He leaves asidecases where the primary earner in a family is either in school or retired. Thecapital gains are excluded from national income. He tries to infer trends insecular income rather than annual levels of income. In Part I, Kuznets findsthat the inequality of income distribution in the UK, US, andGermany narrowed rather than widened. In Part II,Kuznets analyse the reasons why his findings are illogical. Addressing theissue of unequal savings, Kuznets describes potential countervailingforces that could be in play. He demonstrates the various ways a shift out ofagriculture could affect overall inequality.
In part III, he considers trends in inequality in relation to otheraspects of growth. In part IV, Kuznets recognizesthat the growth curve and inequality trends of early developed countries couldinform us about growth and inequality in developing countries. Kuznetsconcludes thearticle with the hope that his work will inspirefurther research, better evidence, and a fuller understanding of economic growth.