THEORIES OF GROWTH 67 lation, growth, distribution and demand begins to grow. This is the point of departure of Harris's book. Harris believes that within the Kcynesian school it was Harrod who first became conscious of the inherent instability of capitalism and tried to extend Keyncsian analysis through the incorporation of this feature of capitalist accumulation. Uncertainty is fundamental to capitalism and given that investment is a function of expectations which are a function of this "uncertainty" there is inherent to capitalism a certain instability of investment. Apart from this the fact that the saving and investment decisions are made by different groups of "people59 who follow different, if not contradictory, signals and that technical progress and population growth may not have any trade-off relationship and more importantly that"... there is no mechanism to bring these elements into appropriate relationship with each other, (Harrod) sees the process of expansion as being inherently unstable. In particular, Harrod goes on to show that, the economy does'not actually maintain an equilibrium of steady growth but might proceed by a series of investment booms interrupted by slumps or relapse into a state of complete stagnation" (p 30). With Harrod as the point of departure, "modern growth theory", as Harris terms post-Keynesian and neo-classical growth theories, developed arguments to prove Harrod wrong. Both believed Harrod's model to be too restrictive in its assumptions and too narrow in its conception. While the post-Keynesians—notably Kaldor and Pasinetti—believed that through an alteration in income distribution it was possible to match the warranted and actual and even natural growth rates, the "neo-classicals" believed that the system was still more flexible and that even the capital/ labour ratios were alterable since capital was malleable (like "jelly", "clay" or mecano sets). In fact in the latter conception "Golden Age" was more than a mythical state, it was a goal to be attained. Method of Analysis Having spread out the "state of the debate"as it were in the section entitled "Historical Perspective5", Harris proceeds in Part II to develop a scheme of analysis using the linear model of production discussing a number of theoretical problems that have cropped up, like the wage-profit relation, choice of techniques of production, the role of different savings assumptions, the meaning ofHarrod's antinomy between the warranted and the natural rates of growth, and the significance of the "golden rule of