The pattern of financing investment is changing in Brazil. During the 70’s it was based on the classical pattern that prevails in the early stages of development, that is, on state and external fi-nancing. But, in the second part of the 70’s this pattern breaks down as the public sector looser its sa-vings capacity. In the second part of the 80’s, the public sector is supposed to recover partially its saving capacity, while the private sector assumes an increasing role in investment.

In contrast with usual exegesis found in the literature, Kalecki’s profit model has been estima-ted using U.S. annual data between 1947-1985. Assuming one-year investment lag, Kalecki’s model explains 96% of the variation in real gross U.S. profits in the period analyzed. According to the estimated profit multiplier, one billion 1982 dollars increase in real gross investment (augmented by the government and external deficits) would increase real gross profits by 1.1 billion dollars and capitalist consumption by 63.3 million dollars. However, thc estimated profit multiplier is fairly low when compared with Kalecki’s own estimate for the U.S. during the Great Depression.

This article presents a review of literature and debates on quantity equations and monetary theory. There follows the outlines of a general critique on the concept of velocity of circulation of money and the inconsistency of the neoclassical assumptions. It ends up by concluding that quan-tity equations are not important to the development of a monetary theory.

Transnationalization of productive, commercial, technological and financial processes which occurs through transnational corporations has produced a specific economic, social, political and cultural space which is distinct from national space. The contemporary world economy, marked by countless ongoing technical and economic processes which configure the third industrial revolu-tion, can be defined by the interactions between national and transnational space, neither of which can bc said to be disappearing. The lines of force created by the conflictual interactions between the transnational oligarchy and the various national oligarchies are photographed m this study from the national angle and a: three moments since 1950. The outcome is a set of typologies clas-sifying countries on which information was available in 1960, 1970 and 1981.

This paper reviews the different elements suggesting the existence of a crisis in the economic science. In particular it is examined the possibility or impossibility of coexistence of different para-digms in Economics; is it possible the synthesis of different paradigms? why yes or why no? Also, it is reviewed the recent methodology discussion related to the lack of relevance and lack of expla-nation of Reality of present formal and esoteric theoretic models; modern formal theory is more interested in optimizing than in explaining. How did we arrive to this state of affairs and what to do about it. Latin America faces urgent economic problems, therefore relevance should be the main focus of most economic research.

This article suggests a Government policy for improving the Brazilian income distribution which relies on the application of a formulae that makes increases of productivity be shared accor-ding to the relative wages of workers. In a context in which short-term constraints — specially the inflation — are not as important as they were until recently and structural problems tend to be the main aim of Government policy, the conclusions of this article are that a better income distribu-tion can be obtained if the economy continues to grow at sufficient high rates and that this could happen provoking losses on the earnings of some income classes.

This paper discusses the dividend policy and its effects on the relationship and dependency between managers and shareowners. By the way, starting from the classic economist’s view about the split of surplus between profits and interests, and from Hilferding’s view of dividends as a specific form of earning yield from property-capital, analyses some studies of finance economists about the importance of dividends policy. It concludes with a remark about The advantages yielded by the shareowners who own the majority of capital.