Page:Walter Renton Ingalls - Current Economic Affairs (1924).pdf/19

Rh correct. What Anderson and myself were doing, however, carried no weight, not even among economists and engineers, outside of the very small circle who knew us personally. Even among economists, bankers and business men, if they paid any attention to our work, the idea was probably that we were merely guessing and that our guesses were no better than those of anybody else. I introduce these personal references to illustrate the importance of organized study as a preliminary to general acceptance. It remained for the National Bureau of Economic Research to take up this study and produce authoritative results. The National Bureau is now better known as the reporter of the national income than it is by its corporate title. It reviewed the national income for a period of 10 years backward. It substantially confirmed Anderson’s estimates for the years previous to 1916 and checked with mine for 1916, but whereas Anderson and I were unheard voices in the wilderness the Bureau could speak with the authority of collective investigation. The Bureau was able to speak with unusual authority, owing to its unique organization, which requires the findings of its research staff to be reviewed and approved by a large board of directors, comprising all colors of economic thought. Thus, its income studies were approved and accepted by the representatives of such widely different viewpoints as those of the nominees of the American Engineering Council, the American Bankers Association and the American Federation of Labor. As a member of this board I am able to say moreover that its examinations are in no wise perfunctory and I know that the research staff has a very wholesome respect for the board of directors.