{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.032873806998939555, 'fraction_numerical': 0.009544008483563097, 'mean_word_length': 5.251655629139073, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The System of National Accounts and Alternative Economic Perspectives

Brent Moulton and Nicole Mayerhauser (2015) point out that, for more than 50 years, economists have featured the concept of human capital in their models of labor, growth, productivity, and distribution of income. The authors recommend the addition to the System of National Accounts (SNA) of supplemental person-level accounts: i.e., a System of Person Accounts (SPA). They see this as the best way of recognizing the processes of human capital creation as well as related issues of how income is distributed among individuals and families. The authors argue that this change would support three different perspectives from which economic activity can be viewed: (1) a current period outcomes perspective, (2) a risky possibilities perspective, and (3) a resources perspective. Moreover, these gains could be realized without changing the SNA in any substantial respects.