5a
Th^ose few units which survive for good continue to grow; on the
other end of. the scale new entrants/enlarge the total sample
of firms or wealthy' dynasties. The continuance of the steady am
state with unchanged distribution is accompanied by a steadily
growing size of the sample whidh produces ever larger firms,
wealth holdings etc. These large units always existed potentially
but could not be realised a± as long as the sample was too small;
with the growth of the economy such potential sizes become actual
and in consequence the largest units represent a greater and greater
shaa*e of the total although the theoretical distribution is
unchanged. With the finite life and the stable population
of Champernowne 1 s model this peculiar form of growing inequality
M
would not arise.
Further developments
We may consider the following stages in the treatment of the
income distribution:
I. Champernowne 1 s Model.
II. Rutherford^ model /I9/. He treated person’s life-times explicitly.
III. The above models are open to criticism]* on two grounds:
First, income is not very suitable as a state variable
for a Markov process. It does not embody the "influence