The Old-Age Reserve Fund is Not "Illusory"

George Buchan Robinson

The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 1945, vol. 60, issue 1, 136-153

Abstract: Dr. Lutz's argument, 136; — I. Important distinctions neglected, 137. — II. Unacceptable distinctions made, 139. — III. Purpose of the fund misunderstood, 142. — IV. Separate entity of the pension program not essential to the argument, 145. — V. Taxation for liquidation of fund is not for social security, 146. — VI. Importance of upholding the Government's credit, 149. — VII. The question of accumulation must be considered on its merits, 151.

Date: 1945
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.2307/1880646 (application/pdf)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:oup:qjecon:v:60:y:1945:i:1:p:136-153.

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
https://academic.oup.com/journals

Access Statistics for this article

The Quarterly Journal of Economics is currently edited by Robert J. Barro, Lawrence F. Katz, Nathan Nunn, Andrei Shleifer and Stefanie Stantcheva

More articles in The Quarterly Journal of Economics from President and Fellows of Harvard College
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Oxford University Press ().