<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"> <HTML><HEAD> <META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1"> <META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1400" name=GENERATOR> <STYLE></STYLE> </HEAD> <BODY bgColor=#ffffff> <DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV> <DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>The Economic Research Service of the USDA produces an abundance of data on the condition of US agricultural production.</DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>I find particularly interesting that table on capital stock 1948-1999 which shows an approximate 50% increase in capital stock for the entire period,  yet a real, and dramatic decline of some 33% between 1983 and 1999.  Now this makes sense to me, given the "overweighted" portion of production value contributed by farms with sales greater than $1,000,000-- the ability of concentrated capital stock to be  smaller in volume, but more "expansive" in output and to  "absorb" greater amounts of manufactured and farm based inputs.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>However, when looking at the DofC BEA NEA tables for investment in and net stock valuation of non-residential, private fixed investments for farms, such valuations show no decline but an increase for the 1983-1999 period.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>I'm having some difficulty reconciling the two, or even finding the paths of divergence.</FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Has somebody encountered the same issue and perhaps found an explanation?</DIV> <DIV>______________________________</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>thanks,</DIV> <DIV>dms</DIV></FONT></DIV></DIV></BODY></HTML>