Month: February 2018

Categories
Bibliography Harvard Suggested Reading

Harvard. Debate Briefs on International Trade Policy, ca. 1886-96

 

Print from 1897 by J. S. Pughe in Punch. shows Uncle Sam sitting in a wooden tub labeled “Dingley Bill”, rowing with oars labeled “Monopoly” in a small pool labeled “Home Market” near a sign that states “Republican Goose Pond”. The title of the prints is “A self-evident fact” with the caption “Uncle Sam Say! I want you fellows to distinctly understand that I’m not racing with you!” Beyond the pond are several large steam ships, labeled “France, Germany, Italy, England, [and] Austria” steaming ahead of Uncle Sam. While Uncle Sam protects the home market through tariffs, European nations are expanding their global markets. (Library of Congress)

The inspiration for today’s posting comes from the announcement in late January, 2018 by U.S. President Donald J. Trump that steep tariffs would be imposed on washing machines and solar panels imported into the United States.

Below you will find transcriptions for Harvard University debating briefs on tariffs, subsidies and international trade from the last decade of the 19th century. While economics as a science has shown some considerable progress since that time, zombie ideas are resilient and continue to stalk the face of the earth in original and mutated strains. The literature cited in the briefs is taken largely from the popular periodical literature of the time or government and Congressional publications that conscientious scholars of the history of economics really need to be familiar with. Such stuff is not yet quite so neatly sorted and indexed for our purposes as to facilitate entry into flow of actual policy debates outside the academic realm. The collection of Harvard student debating briefs used here is really a treasure chest (Pandora’s box?) waiting to be opened, filled with good, bad, and ugly arguments regarding international commercial policy.

Also thanks to another of Trump’s policy initiatives, Economics in the Rear-view Mirror has provided transcriptions of analogous old debating briefs on the subject of immigration into the U.S.

The eight debate topics concerning international trade policy were:

Resolved, That the time has now come when the policy of protection should be abandoned by the United States.

Resolved, That a high protective tariff raises wages.

Resolved, That it would be to the advantage of the United States to establish complete commercial reciprocity between the United States and Canada.

Resolved, That foreign-built ships should be admitted to American registry free of duty.

Resolved, That the United States should establish a system of shipping subsidies.

Resolved, That sugar should be admitted free of duty.

Resolved, That a system of sugar bounties is contrary to good public policy.

Resolved, That a system of duties on wool and woollens is undesirable.

 

_________________________________

Briefs for Debate on Current Political, Economic, and Social Topics.

Edited by
W. Du Bois Brookings, A.B. of the Harvard Law School
And
Ralph Curtis Ringwalt, A.B.
Assistant in Rhetoric in Columbia University

With an introduction by Albert Bushnell Hart, Ph.D.
Professor of Harvard University.
(1908)

[From the Preface:]

“The basis of the work has been a collection of some two hundred briefs prepared during the past ten years [ca. 1886-96] by students in Harvard University, under the direction of instructors. Of these briefs the most useful and interesting have been selected; the material has been carefully worked over, and the bibliographies enlarged and verified….

…” the brief is a steady training in the most difficult part of reasoning; in putting together things that belong together; in discovering connections and relations; in subordinating the less important matters. The making of a brief is an intellectual exercise like the study of a disease by a physician, of a case by a lawyer, of a sermon by a minister, of a financial report by a president of a corporation. It is a bit of the practical work of life.

_________________________________

PROTECTION AND FREE TRADE.

Question: ‘Resolved, That the time has now come when the policy of protection should be abandoned by the United States.’

Brief for the Affirmative.

General references:

Frédéric Bastiat, Sophisms of the Protectionists; W. M. Grosvenor, Does Protection Protect?; Henry George, Protection or Free Trade; J. S. Mill, Principles of Political Economy, II., Bk. V., Chap. x., § 1; article on Protection in Tariff Reform Series, IV., No. 12, p. 2 (September 30, 1891); Lalor’s Cyclopædia, II., 289; Nation, XXVIII., 161 (March 6, 1879); XXIX., 338 (November 20, 1879); XXXIV., 288 (April 6, 1882) ; LXXVI., 118 (February 8, 1883); J. G. Carlisle in Congressional Record, 1891-1892, p. 6910 (July 29, 1892); D. A. Wells in Forum, XIV., 697 (February, 1893); F. A. Walker in Quarterly Journal of Economics, IV., 245 (April, 1890); Edward Atkinson in Popular Science Monthly, XXXVII., 433 (August, 1890); Senator Vest in North American Review, Vol. 155, p. 401 (October, 1892); Harper’s Weekly, XXXVIII., 819 (September 1, 1894).

  1. Protection is unsound in theory:

J. S. Mill, Principles of Political Economy, II., 532. — (a) It shuts out what is ours by nature: Sophisms of the Protectionists, pp. 73-80. — (b) It raises unnatural obstacles to intercourse: Sophisms of the Protectionists, pp. 84-85. — (c) It can only raise prices by diminishing the quantity of goods for sale: Sophisms of the Protectionists, pp. 7, 17. — (d) It endangers the interests it aims to promote: Nation, XXXVI., 118. — (e) It may transfer but not increase capital: Sophisms of the Protectionists, p. 93. — (f) The doctrine of protection for revenue is inconsistent: J. S. Mill, Principles of Political Economy, II., 538. — (g) It is anti-social: Sophisms of the Protectionists, pp. 15, 127; Nation, XXXVI., 118; XXXVIII., 161.

  1. Protection is unsound in general practice.

(a) It makes capital and labor less efficient: J. S. Mill, Principles of Political Economy, II., 532, 539. — (b) It hurts our carrying trade: Nation, XXXVI., 118. — (c) It closes against us many of the world’s best markets: J. S. Mill, Principles of Political Economy, II., 537; Nation, XXVIII., 161; XXXVI., 118.

  1. Protection is not beneficial to any class.

(a) It raises prices to consumers: Popular Science Monthly, XXXVII., 433. — (b) It does not raise the wages of laborers: Congressional Record, 1891-1892, pp. 6910-6917; Popular Science Monthly, XXXVII., 433. — (c) It hurts farmers: Nineteenth Century, XXXII., 733 (November, 1892). — (d) It hurts the community by shutting off foreign markets: North American Review, Vol. 155, p. 401. — (e) It increases the cost of materials. — (f) It does not help us against pauper labor: Popular Science Monthly, XXXVII., 433. — (g) It does not benefit the majority: Nation, LV., 299 (October 20, 1892). — (h) Infant industries are not permanently aided: Quarterly Journal of Economics, IV., 245.

  1. Protection tends to run to extremes.

(a) It perverts taxation from its proper uses: Forum, XIV., 51 (September, 1892). — (b) It creates dangerous precedents: Ibid. — (c) Industries seek permanent protection: Nation. LV., 252 (October 6, 1892). — (d) It creates monopolies.

Brief for the Negative.

General references:

S.N. Patten, The Economic Basis of Protection; H. M. Hoyt, Protection versus Free Trade; Congressional Record, 1889-1890, p. 4248 (May 7, 1890); 1891-1892, p. 6746 (July 26, 1892); J. G. Blaine in North American Review, Vol. 150, p. 27 (January, 1890); William McKinley in North American Review, Vol. 150, p. 740 (June, 1890); R. E. Thompson, Social Science and National Economy, pp. 243-278; Lalor’s Cyclopædia, III., 413; Van Buren Denslow, Principles of Economic Philosophy, Chaps. xiii., xiv., xv., xvi.

  1. The policy of protection is sound in principle.

(a) It enables a country to fix the terms of exchange in foreign trade. — (1) Foreign demand for our commodities is necessarily great. — (2) Protection lessens our demand for foreign commodities. — (b) Protection is the best means of increasing the consumer’s rent.

  1. The policy of protection has proved beneficial in practice.

(a) Without it no country has secured a symmetrical development of its industries: Social Science and National Economy, p. 267. — (b) Every period of protection in the United States has been followed by great material prosperity.

  1. Protection secures a home market for commodities incapable of transportation abroad:

E.E. Hale, Tom Torrey’s Tariff Talks. — (a) It enhances values, especially the value of land: J. R. Dodge, How Protection Protects the Farmer.

  1. A protective tariff does not raise prices.

(a) The establishment of a new industry has invariably been followed by lower prices: Congressional Record, 1889-1890, p. 4248.—. (1) Steel rails.—(2) Glass and earthen ware.—(3) Wool.— (4) Tin-plate.

_________________________________

THE TARIFF AND WAGES.

Question: ‘Resolved, That a high protective tariff raises wages.’

Brief for the Affirmative.

General references:

S. N. Patten, The Economic Basis of Protection, pp. 54-80; Lee Meriwether, ‘How Workingmen Live in Europe and America,’ in Harper’s Magazine, LXXIV., 780 (April, 1887); R. P. Porter, Bread Winners Abroad (People’s Library), Chaps. xvi., xxviii., xlix., li., liii., lvi., lxvi., lxvii., lxxxiv., civ.; Van Buren Denslow, Principles of Economic Philosophy, pp. 623-627.

  1. A high protective tariff raises wages theoretically.

(a) It causes more employers to compete for the hire of labor.—(1) By increasing the number of occupations and enterprises that can be carried on: R. E. Thompson, Social Science and National Economy, p. 248; Principles of Economic Philosophy, pp. 623-624. (b) It increases the amount of money available for the compensation of labor.—(1) By increasing the profits of manufacturers: Principles of Economic Philosophy, pp. 626-627. (c) It enables laborers to share in the natural resources of the country.—(1) By preventing competition with cheap foreign labor: The Economic Basis of Protection, pp. 64-70.

  1. A high protective tariff raises wages practically.

(a) In the United States, which furnishes the best example of a protective tariff, money wages are higher than in Europe.— (1) This is shown by the opinions of writers: Principles of Economic Philosophy, p. 527; Bread Winners Abroad; Consular Reports of the United States, No. 40, p. 304 (April, 1884). —(2) It is shown by the opinions of manufacturers: John Roach in International Review, XIII., 455 (November, 1882); J. M. Swank, Our Bessemer Steel Industry, p. 23; letters from the National Association of Wool Manufacturers and the Titus Sheard Co. in Congressional Record, 1891-1892, p. 6751 (July 26, 1892). (b) Wages have risen in other countries under a protective system. — (1) In Germany: Principles of Economic Philosophy, pp. 523-524; Consular Reports of the United States, No. 42, pp. 12, 13, 15 (June, 1884).—(2) In Canada: Principles of Economic Philosophy, pp. 666-668. (c) Real wages are higher in the United States than in Europe.—(1) An American workman can save more than a European: Consular Reports of the United States, No. 40, p. 304.—(2) His standard of living is higher: Harper’s Magazine, LXXIV., 780.

Brief for the Negative.

General references:

F. W. Taussig in Forum, VI., 167 (October, 1888); W. G. Sumner in North American Review, Vol. 136, p. 270 (March, 1883); J. Schoenhof, The Economy of High Wages, pp. 175-193; J. Schoenhof, Wages and Trade; ‘Labor, Wages, and Tariff,’ Tariff Reform Series, II., No. 21 (January 15, 1890); ‘Labor and the Tariff,’ Tariff Reform Series, I., No. 12, p. 2 (October 10, 1888).

  1. Arguments based on comparisons of wages in different countries are untrustworthy.

(a) Such comparisons prove too much: D. A. Wells, Practical Economics, p. 137. — (b) There is no uniform rate in any country. — (c) There are many local causes which must necessarily make wages higher in one country than in another. — (1) Natural advantages: D. A. Wells, The Relation of the Tariff to Wages, p. 2. — (2) Standing army service: Ibid. — (3) The question of unoccupied land: North American Review, Vol. 136, p. 270.

  1. Careful use of statistics shows that wages are relatively higher under a low tariff.

(a) The high rate of wages in the United States is determined by unprotected industries.— (1) There are more laborers connected with unprotected than with protected industries: J. L. Laughlin’s edition of J. S. Mill, Principles of Political Economy, p. 619. — (b) Wages in certain protected industries in the United States are lower than wages in the same industries in England. — (c) In protected industries in which wages are higher than abroad, they were higher before the existence of a protective tariff: Nation, XLVII., 327 (October 25, 1888). — (d) New South Wales is more prosperous than Victoria: Fortnightly Review, XXXVII., 369 (March, 1882).

  1. A protective tariff lowers wages by diminishing the amount of capital to be distributed for wages.

(a) The general productiveness of industry is less: Practical Economics, p. 135.— — (1) The effect of limiting the sale of commodities to a domestic market is evil: Practical Economics, p. 139. — (b) The proportion in which that produced is divided is less favorable to labor.—(1) The producer requires the same ratio of profit, while the number of laborers among whom the smaller wage-fund is divided is as large as before: North American Review, Vol. 136, p. 270.

  1. Real wages are less.

(a) The tariff increases the price of commodities and puts them out of the reach of the poorer classes: North American Review, Vol. 136, p. 270.

_________________________________

RECIPROCITY WITH CANADA.

Question: ‘Resolved, That it would be to the advantage of the United States to establish complete commercial reciprocity between the United States and Canada.’

Brief for the Affirmative.

General references:

Goldwin Smith, Canada and the Canadian Question, pp. 281-301; Handbook of Commercial Union (Toronto, 1888); Century, XVI., 236 (June, 1889); Forum, VI., 241 (November, 1888) ; VII., 361 (June, 1889); New Englander, LIII., 1 (July, 1890); North American Review, Vol. 148, p. 54 (January, 1889); Vol. 151, p. 212 (August, 1890); Vol. 139, p. 42 (July, 1884); Harper’s Magazine, LXXVIII., 520 (March, 1889).

  1. Greater freedom of trade between the United States and Canada is desirable.

(a) It would furnish the United States with much needed raw materials: Century, XVI., 236. — (1) Coal, iron, and other mineral products are extensive and easily accessible to the northern and middle states: Handbook of Commercial Union, pp. 72-85; North American Review, Vol. 139, p. 42. — (2) Agricultural products. — (b) It would open to us a large and convenient market for our manufactures: Handbook of Commercial Union, p. 249. — (c) Closer commercial relations would remove much of the present ill feeling, and international disputes would be avoided.

  1. Reciprocity would be advantageous economically.

(a) It would open up a great field for the investment of American capital: Handbook of Commercial Union, p. 247. — (b) It would do away with the enormous expense of maintaining an unnatural customs line four thousand miles long. — (c) By the settlement of the fishery question it would give our fishermen valuable privileges.

  1. Reciprocity is practical:

Handbook of Commercial Union, p. 111. — (a) Great Britain would not raise serious objections: Handbook of Commercial Union, p. 101 .— (1) English investments in Canada would be benefited by commercial prosperity. — (2) Greater commercial activity would establish confederation on a firm basis and give assurance that Canada would remain a part of the British domain. — (b) The loyalty of Canadians would not be affected. — (1) The common tariff would not discriminate against England. — (c) A common tariff could be agreed upon. — (1) The present policy of the United States is toward a reduction of tariffs, while that of Canada is toward an increase. — (2) Canada would be willing to make concessions, such as the adjustment of internal revenue. — (d) The reciprocity treaty of 1854 was a commercial success. — (1) Trade rose from seven millions to twenty: Encyclopedia Britannica, IV., 766. — (2) The abrogation of the treaty was due to national animosity caused by acts of the English during the civil war.

 

Brief for the Negative.

General references:

James Douglas, Canadian Independence, Annexation, and British Imperial Federation; Forum, VI., 451 (January, 1889); J. N. Larned, Report to the Secretary of the Treasury on the State of Trade Between the United States and British Possessions in North America, January 28, 1871; Penn Monthly, V., 529 (July, 1874); Congressional Globe, 1864-1865, pp. 229-233 (January 12, 1865).

  1. Complete commercial reciprocity is impracticable.

(a) The commercial policies of Great Britain and the United States are conflicting. — (b) A common tariff could not be decided upon without detriment to one country. — (c) Internal revenue stands in the way.—(1) Excise taxes and internal revenue would have to be made equal; but excise is necessary to Canada, while it is not unlikely that we shall do away with our internal revenue: Forum, VI., 451.

  1. Complete reciprocity would be contrary to good public policy.

(a) It would result in loss of revenue. — (b) In case of war with Great Britain the frontier would be in a bad condition, and our whole tariff system would be torn asunder.

  1. Complete reciprocity would be economically disastrous.

(a) American and Canadian products are not supplementary, but competitory. — (b) Cheaper wages and cheaper raw material would be an inducement for our capital to move to Canada, and would also lower wages in the United States. — (c) We should lose much through emigration to Canada. — (d) It would give Canada the benefit of the market which we hav

e built up for ourselves by protection: Penn Monthly, V., 531.

  1. Historically, reciprocity with Canada has proved injurious.

(a) The United States tried commercial reciprocity with Canada in 1854, but abrogated the treaty in 1866.

_________________________________

FREE SHIPS.

Question: ‘Resolved, That foreign-built ships should be admitted to American registry free of duty.’

Brief for the Affirmative.

General references:

D. A. Wells, The Decay of Our Ocean Mercantile Marine; John Codman, Free Ships; J.D.J. Kelly, The Question of Ships; North American Review, Vol. 142, p. 478 (May, 1886); House Reports, 1889-1890, No. 1210, Minority Report; 1882-1883, No. 1827, Views of the Minority; 1891-1892, No. 966; 1887-1888, No. 1874; Congressional Record, 1890-1891, p. 1044 (January 8, 1891); Congressional Globe, 1871-1872, Part 3, p. 2241 (April 6, 1872).

  1. A change in our navigation laws is necessary.

(a) Under their restrictions American shipping has suffered. — (1) Through heavy duties on ships. — (b) Though heavily protected, the ship-building industry has not thrived. — (1) The cost of labor is too great. — (c) American capital has been forced abroad. — (d) The present provision for the limited admission of foreign ships is inadequate. — (e) The development of inventive genius is prevented.

  1. Free ships furnish the only practicable remedy:

The Question of Ships, Chap. v. — (a) They enable Americans to compete on equal terms for world’s commerce. — (1) Ships can be bought at the lowest price. — (b) Carrying trade should not be sacrificed to ship-building.—(1) It employs fifty times as many men: The Question of Ships, p. 31. — (c) American ship-building would not be seriously affected.— (1) Only iron ships are concerned. — (d) The success of the plan is well illustrated by Germany’s policy.

  1. Subsidizing schemes are impracticable and inefficient:

The Question of Ships, Chap. iv. — (a) Subsidies large enough to be efficient would be too great a tax on the people. — (1) The cost of building ships is one-third greater than in England: John Codman, Free Ships. — (b) They must be permanent. — (c) They have already been unsuccessfully tried in the United States. — (d) They have failed in France. — (1) Ship-building has not been built up in ten years’ trial. — (e) England’s supremacy is not due to subsidizing: The Decay of Our Ocean Mercantile Marine, pp. 29-45. — (1) No payments are made to sailing vessels. — (2) Compensation is given only for carrying mails, and for building according to admiralty requirements.

Brief for the Negative.

General references:

W. W. Bates, American Marine; C. S. Hill, History of American Shipping; H. Hall, American Navigation; North American Review, Vol. 148, p. 687 (June, 1889); Vol. 154, p. 76 (January, 1892); Vol. 158, p. 433 (April, 1894); House Reports, 1891-1892, No. 966, Views of the Minority; 1887-1888, No. 1874, Views of the Minority, p. 10; 1882-1883, No. 1827; 1869-1870, No. 28; Nelson Dingley, Jr., in Congressional Record, 1890-1891, p. 997 (January 7, 1891).

  1. The lack of free registry was not responsible for the decline in American shipping.

(a) Under the present laws our merchant marine reached its height. — (b) The decline was due to other causes. — (1) To the destruction of commerce by English-built cruisers: American Marine, Chap. ix. — (2) To the commercial depression following war. — (3) To mechanical changes. — (x) From wood to iron. — (y) From sail to steam.

  1. Free registry offers no material advantages.

(a) American capital now invests in foreign-built ships. — (1) ‘Whitewashed’ sales: American Navigation, p. 75. — (b) The advantage of flying American flag would be subject to abuse.

  1. Free registry involves grave evils.

(a) Economic. — (1) It would annihilate ship-building in the United States. — (2) It would withdraw millions of capital from the country. — (b) National. — (1) It would cripple us in time of war. — (x) We should have no trained workmen. — (y) We should have no shipyards to build in an emergency.

  1. There are better alternatives than free registry.

(a) The removal of duties on materials. — (b) Sufficient mail subsidies to American-built ships: American Navigation, p. 77. — (c) A change in taxation from the principal invested in ships to net profits.

_________________________________

SHIPPING SUBSIDIES.

Question: ‘Resolved, That the United States should establish a system of shipping subsidies.’

Brief for the Affirmative.

General references:

W. W. Bates, American Marine; House Reports, 1889-1890, No. 1210; C. S. Hill, History of American Shipping; House Reports, 1888-1889, No. 4162, Views of the Minority, p. 5; Congressional Record, 1890-1891, p. 997 (January 7, 1891), p. 3355 (February 26, 1891); Statement of Captain W. W. Bates in House Reports, 1889-1890, No. 1210, p. 220; Overland Monthly, I., 462 (May, 1883); H. Hall, American Navigation.

  1. The merchant marine of the United States is at present in a deplorable condition and ought to be built up:

House Reports, 1889-1890, No. 1210, pp. i-vi. — (a) A national marine is of the greatest importance to the wealth and the commercial prosperity of a nation: Lalor’s Cyclopædia, II., 987; J.D.J. Kelly, The Question of Ships, p. 108. — (1) It is essential to naval power. — (2) To the development of resources. — (3) To national unity and individualism. — (b) The United States has the necessary qualifications for the marine industry: The Question of Ships, Chap. i.; American Navigation, Chap. ii. — (1) In 1856 the United States merchant marine was the most extensive in the world. — (2) Our extensive sea-coast naturally fosters a maritime spirit. — (3) We have abundant natural resources. — (4) Extensive commerce. — (5) Great ship-building interests.

  1. The subsidy system is a desirable means of building up the marine.

(a) It is preferable to the policy of free ships. — (1) Such a policy would destroy our ship-building industry: American Navigation, Chap. vii. — (b) Subsidies given to vessels for mail service would greatly encourage commerce. — (1) By insuring regular service: American Navigation, p. 77; Congressional Record, 1885-1886, p. 4009 (April 30, 1886). — (c) Vessels subsidized could be put under contract to serve the United States in case of war: American Navigation, pp. 83-86. — (d) It is an economical system. — (1) The total payments would not exceed $5,000,000 per annum. — (2) The earnings of the foreign mail service, which amount to $10,000,000 per annum, could fittingly be used for subsidies: Congressional Record, 1889-1890, p. 6996 (July 7, 1890).

  1. Subsidies are necessary.

(a) The cost of American ships and their running expenses are greater than those of foreign vessels. — (b) The high subsidies given to foreign lines make it impossible for American lines to compete without like subsidies.

  1. Subsidies have proved successful in practice:

American Marine, pp. 325-327. — (a) We have tried such a system and found it effective: W. S. Lindsay, Merchant Shipping, IV., 194-228. — (b) Nearly all foreign nations maintain shipping subsidies: Congressional Record, 1890-1891, pp. 3359-3362 (February 26, 1891). — (c) They have been successful in France: House Reports, 1889-1890, No. 1210, pp. ix-xv. — (d) Great Britain, the foremost maritime country, has steadily adhered to a system of bounties: Congressional Record, 1890-1891, pp. 1001-1003 (January 7, 1891).

Brief for the Negative.

General references:

House Reports, 1889-1890, No. 1210, Minority Report, p. xxxix.; D.A. Wells, Our Merchant Marine; D.A. Wells, The Decay of Our Ocean Mercantile Marine; John Codman, Free Ships; John Codman, Shipping Subsidies and Bounties; Congressional Record, 1890-1891, pp. 3348, 3368, 3383 (February 26, 1891); 1889-1890, p. 6959 (July 3, 1890); House Reports, 1888-1889, No. 4162; J. D. J. Kelly, The Question of Ships.

  1. Subsidies are politically objectionable.

(a) They have proved and always will prove inducements to corrupt legislation. — (b) They create and foster a privileged class at the expense of the whole people: Our Merchant Marine, p. 141; Free Ships, p. 15. — (c) The practice would establish a bad precedent: House Reports, 1889-1890, No. 1210, pp. xl., xlii.

  1. Subsidies are economically objectionable:

Congressional Record, 1890-1891, p. 3352. — (a) They are merely temporizing measures: The Decay of Our Ocean Mercantile Marine, p. 25. — (b) They would be a tremendous cost: House Reports, 1888-1889, No. 4162, p. 4. — (c) They would not contribute to the general prosperity of the country: House Reports, 1888-1889, No. 4162, pp. 2-3. — (1) They would not benefit commerce. — (x) Foreign vessels now carry as cheaply as it can be done. — (2) They would benefit one industry at the expense of others. — (3) As profit would come wholly from subsidies, shippers would become uneconomical and the advantages of competition would be lost.

  1. There is no truth in the statement that shipping subsidies have built up merchant marines.

(a) Great Britain does not subsidize her vessels: The Decay of Our Ocean Mercantile Marine, p. 29; House Reports, 1889-1890, No. 1210, pp. xlii., 1. — (1) British mail subsidies are for actual service rendered as shown by the exacting rules and penalties for non-performance of contracts. — (b) The French system has not been successful: House Reports, 1888-1889, No. 4162, p. 3; 1889-1890, No. 1210, pp. 1-lx. — (c) Our own experience has been unfavorable. — (1) The Collins line in 1847: Congressional Record, 1890-1891, p. 3386.

  1. The best remedy for American shipping is free ships:

Our Merchant Marine, pp. 95-128; North American Review, Vol. 142, pp. 481-484 (May, 1886). — (a) Free ships would at least allow Americans to compete on equal terms for the commerce of the world.

 

_________________________________

FREE SUGAR.

Question: ‘Resolved, That sugar should be admitted free of duty.’

Brief for the Affirmative.

General references:

‘Sugar and the Tariff,’ Tariff Reform Series, III., No. 12, p. 174 (July 30, 1890); Harper’s Weekly, XXXVIII., 602 (June 30, 1894), 771 (August 18, 1894), 819 (September 1, 1894); Nation, LIX., 74 (August 2, 1894), 112 (August 16, 1894); Congressional Record, 1889-1890, p. 10,631 (September 27, 1890).

  1. The question of protection does not enter.

(a) We produce only ten per cent, of the sugar we use: Princeton Review, VI., 322 (November, 1880). (b) The established industry can be more economically protected by bounties.

  1. The tariff is a burden on the poor.

(a) The poor man must pay more in proportion to his ability than the rich: C. D. Wright in Seventeenth Annual Report of Massachusetts Bureau of Statistics of Labor, p. 266; W. O. Atwater in American Public Health Association, XV., 208. — (1) Carbohydrates are necessary to life. — (2) Sugar is the most economical carbohydrate. — (3) The laboring man consumes the greatest proportion of this constituent: American Public Health Association, XV., 216.

  1. The sugar tariff is a check to the country’s development.

(a) It discourages industries in which sugar is a raw material. — (1) The preserving industry. — (2) The condensed milk industry. — (3) The refining industry. — (b) It injures foreign commerce. — (1) With Brazil and Cuba. — (2) Germany has retaliated for our tariff by putting a tax on American beef: Harper’s Weekly, XXXVIII., 1058 (November 10, 1894).

  1. Sugar taxes are a great source of corruption.

(a) They enable importers to defraud the government by manipulating the grades of sugar. — (b) They give rise to political corruption such as has disgraced the Senate. — (1) By fostering the sugar trust: Nation, LVIII., 440 (June 14, 1894); LIX., 71, 93, 112; Harper’s Weekly, XXXVIII., 602, 771, 819; Tariff Reform Series, VII., No. 2, p. 28 (July 1, 1894).

  1. The sugar tax is not necessary for revenue.

(a) If the revenues fall short, the deficiency can be made up better by replacing the higher taxes on malt liquors and tobacco.

Brief for the Negative.

General references:

Congressional Record, 1893-1894, Appendix, p. 1178 (August 13, 1894), p. 634 (January 23, 1894); 1889-1890, Appendix, p. 437 (May 20, 1890); Harper’s Weekly, XXXVIII., 218 (March 10, 1894); Tariff Hearings Before the Committee on Ways and Means, 1893, pp. 505, 520, 542.

  1. A tax on sugar is a just way of raising revenue:

Congressional Record, 1893-1894, Appendix, p. 1182. — (a) It is evenly distributed: Ibid. — (1) It reaches consumers in proportion to their incomes. — (2) Sugar is to a great extent an article of voluntary consumption.

  1. It is a desirable way of raising revenue.

(a) It is the only tax which furnishes a steady, reliable revenue, capable of computation beforehand. — (b) It is an easy tax to collect. — (c) Precedent has established sugar as a fitting article for taxation: D. A. Wells in Princeton Review, VI., 323 (November, 1880); Congressional Record, 1893-1894, Appendix, pp. 1180-1186. — (1) It has heretofore furnished one-fourth of the total revenue: D. A. Wells, The Sugar Industry of the United States and the Tariff, p. 9.

  1. The tax is necessary to encourage the American sugar industry:

Congressional Record, 1893-1894, Appendix, p. 632. — (a) The beet and sugar industries are difficult to establish. — (1) They require a large outlay of capital at the beginning. — (2) The return on the investment is small. — (3) The industries are still experimental. — (b) American producers require a special protective tax to offset the large bounties which foreign countries pay to their producers.

  1. The objections to the tax are unsound.

(a) The sugar-refining trust would remain even if sugar were admitted free. — (1) As nearly all of the sugar admitted to the United States is raw, it would still have to pass through the refineries. — (b) The frauds against the government, due to the manipulation of grades, are not an inherent result of the tax.

_________________________________

SUGAR BOUNTIES.

Question: ‘Resolved, That a system of sugar bounties is contrary to good public policy.’

Brief for the Affirmative.

General references:

D. A. Wells, Recent Economic Changes, pp. 295-309; Lalor’s Cyclopædia, II., 99; Fortnightly Review, XLII, 638 (November, 1884) ; Nation, XLV., 164 (September 1, 1887); XLII, 420 (May 20, 1886); Congressional Record, 1889-1890, pp. 10,712-10,716 (September 30, 1890), Appendix, p. 391.

  1. The bounty system is unconstitutional.

(a) It is legislation in favor of a class: Nation, XLVII., 24 (July 12, 1888); Congressional Record, 1889-1890, pp. 10,712-10,716, Appendix, p. 391; Loan Association v. Topeka, 120 Wallace, 663-664.

  1. The bounty system is burdensome on the people:

Nation, XLIV., 484 (June 9, 1887). — (a) The people are compelled to pay the bounty: Fortnightly Review, XLII., 638. — (b) They are compelled to pay the highest cost of production for sugar: Fortnightly Review, XLII., 638. — (c) They are compelled to pay for the expensive system of administration.

  1. The bounty system gives rise to fraud.

(a) It places a great amount of money and patronage in the hands of political parties: Congressional Record, 1889-1890, Appendix, p. 391. — (b) The intricate system of bounty payments enables producers to defraud the government: Recent Economic Changes, pp. 295-298.

  1. The bounty system is injurious to commerce.

(a) It deranges prices. — (1) The producer is led to disregard the law of supply and demand: Fortnightly Review, XLII., 638. — (b) It makes foreign exchange uncertain: Nation, XLV., 164. — (1) By causing alternate over-production and under-production: Recent Economic Changes, pp. 295-309. — (c) It enables producers to control the markets.

  1. The bounty system is unnecessary for the development of the industry.

(a) The United States has as good facilities for raising beets as any other country. — (b) The sugar industry is not an infant industry.

  1. The bounty system has proved a failure in Europe:

Nation, XLVI., 45 (January 19, 1888); Recent Economic Changes, pp. 295-309; Lalor’s Cyclopædia, II., 99. — (a) The beet-sugar industry was fostered at the expense of cane sugar: Nation, XLV., 164. — (b) International complications arose: Saturday Review, LXIV., 142 (July 30, 1887), 847 (December 24, 1887).

Brief for the Negative.

General references:

Essay on ‘Industry and Commerce’ in Works of Alexander Hamilton, III., 366; Congressional Record, 1889-1890, p. 4266 (May 7, 1890); Senators Allison and Sherman in Congressional Record, 1888-1889, pp. 888-895 (January 17, 1889).

  1. The sugar industry is highly desirable.

(a) The importance of sugar as a food is constantly increasing: Congressional Record, 1889-1890, p. 4266. — (b) The industry will be national, not sectional: Congressional Record, 1888-1889, p. 892; 1889-1890, p. 4515 (May 10, 1890). — (c) Beets do not exhaust the soil: Congressional Record, 1889-1890, p. 4266.

  1. The sugar industry would bring general economic advantages.

(a) It would keep at home money now sent abroad in payment for sugar. — (b) Capital greatly exceeding the amount of the bounty would be invested in the industry. — (c) The industry would create a new and a large demand for labor, both agricultural and mechanical.

  1. The bounty system is the best means of establishing the sugar industry.

(a) Protective duties are inadequate. — (1) Bounties paid by foreign countries tend to counteract our tariff. — (2) In the past import duties have failed. — (b) Bounties are necessary to tide the industry over the critical time of beginning: Congressional Record, 1889-1890, p. 4515. — (1) Establishment is difficult and expensive. — (2) There is small inducement for capital. — (3) Beet and sorghum sugar industries are more or less experimental. — (c) Bounties have been successful in establishing industries abroad. — (1) Beet-sugar industry in Germany: Congressional Record, 1889-1890, pp. 4266, 4431 (May 9, 1890).

  1. The bounty system is constitutional.

(a) The bounty is extended to anyone who is willing to undertake the production of sugar: American Law Register and Review, XXXI., 289 (May, 1892).

_________________________________

DUTIES ON WOOL AND WOOLLENS.

Question: ‘Resolved, That a system of duties on wool and woollens is undesirable.’

Brief for the Affirmative.

General references:

F. W. Taussig in Quarterly Journal of Economics, VIII., 1 (October, 1893); North American Review, Vol. 154, p. 133 (February, 1892); ‘Wool and Tariff,’ Tariff Reform Series, III., No. 19, p. 342 (November 15, 1890); ‘The Wool Question,’ Tariff Reform Series (Report of Ways and Means Committee on the Springer Bill), V., No. 1, p. 1 (March 15, 1892).

  1. Duties on wool and woollens have failed to bring beneficient results.

(a) Wool-growing has not prospered. — (1) The United States cannot raise grades of wool that will compare in quality with the better grades of foreign countries. — (x) Owing to climate: Quarterly Journal of Economics, VIII., 18. — (b) Woollen manufacturers produce only the cheapest grades of woollens. — (c) Under the tariff American producers have succeeded in producing but a small quantity of woollens in comparison with foreign importations: Quarterly Journal of Economics, VIII., 28-29; Tariff Reform Series, III., No. 19, p. 359.

  1. The removal of duties on wool does not hurt woolgrowers.

(a) The grades of wool raised by American growers are not subject to foreign competition. — (1) In these grades the American producer has an equal advantage with foreign producers: Quarterly Journal of Economics, VIII., 5-20.

  1. Free woollens are not injurious to manufacturers.

(a) They do not injure the production of cheap grades of woollens for the American market. — (1) The American manufacturer, owing to the greater efficiency of his machinery and the small necessity for hand labor, can compete on equal terms in these grades.

  1. The removal of duties on wool is a benefit to manufacturers.

(a) It enables them to engage in the manufacture of finer grades of woollens: Quarterly Journal of Economics, VIII., 32-33. — (1) By giving them free raw material of finer grades. — (b) It gives them a larger assortment of wools from which to select their grades: Congressional Record, 1887-1888, pp. 6519-6530 (July 19, 1888). (c) It enlarges their trade with South America: Nation, XLVI., 500 (June 21, 1888).

  1. Duties are unjust to consumers.

(a) They require them to pay a high price for woolens which are not made in America. — (1) This is shown by the constant increase in the importations of the finer grades of woollens in spite of the high tariff.

Brief for the Negative.

General references:

Bulletin of National Association of Wool Manufacturers, XVIII., 1888, Nos. 2, 3; XXII., 268 (September, 1892); XXIII., 275 (December, 1893); XXII., 1 (March, 1892); XXL, 333 (December, 1891); XXII., 115 (June, 1892); W. D. Lewis, Our Sheep and the Tariff (Publications of the University of Pennsylvania), Chaps. i., vii.; Congressional Record, 1893-1894, Appendix, pp. 1064, 1172.

  1. Duties on wool are necessary to protect the sheep-raising industry:

Our Sheep and the Tariff, Chap. vii. — (a) Foreign competition is especially active in this industry. — (1) Australia and the Argentine Republic have superior natural advantages.

  1. Duties on woollens are necessary to protect manufacturers:

Bulletin of National Association of Wool Manufacturers, XXII., 133. — (a) Foreign manufacturers have an advantage in cheap labor. (b) Foreign manufacturers have as good machinery as manufacturers in the United States. — (1) American machinery is used extensively abroad. — (c) The return on investments in the United States is less than it is abroad. — (1) A larger capital is required to produce an equivalent amount of woollens: Bulletin of National Association of Wool Manufacturers, XXII., 136.

  1. The history of the United States shows that duties have been successful in building up the wool and woollen industries:

Bulletin of National Association of Wool Manufacturers, XVIII., 234. — (a) The production of wool has greatly increased since the system was begun. — (b) The woollen industry is four times as large as in 1860: Bulletin of National Association of Wool Manufacturers, XXII., 3. — (c) Under periods of high protection the industries have been most prosperous.

  1. The duties have benefited the consumers:

Bulletin of National Association of Wool Manufacturers, XXII., 119. (a) They have reduced the price of woollens to less than half what it was thirty years ago. — (1) By causing active competition and rapid improvements in machinery: Bulletin of National Association of Wool Manufacturers, XXII., 119.

 

Source: W. Du Bois Brookings and Ralph Curtis Ringwalt, eds., Briefs for Debate on Current Political, Economic, and Social Topics. New York: Longmans, Green, and Co., 1908, pp. 96-117.

Image Source:  Cartoon by John S. Pughe published in Puck , September 15, 1897. Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Division Washington, D.C. 20540.

Categories
Economics Programs Fields M.I.T.

M.I.T. Graduate Economics Program Brochure, 1961

 

 

 

Robert Solow served as the graduate registration officer of the Department of Economics and Social Science at M.I.T. perhaps even as late as when the graduate program brochure (transcribed below) was printed in 1961. Since Solow went down to Washington to serve as a senior staff economist on the Council of Economic Advisers in 1961, it seems likely that the brochure would have been drafted sometime before John F. Kennedy’s inauguration. This brochure is striking in many ways, e.g. its 100% informational content, presumably reflecting significant authorship/editor responsibilities of Robert Solow.

Five cherry-picked quotes from the brochure I found particularly sweet:

“The M.I.T. program does not concentrate on mathematical economics”
[It’s not what you say, it’s what they hear.]

“The department welcomes applications from qualified women”
[Apparently in the DNA of the department since World War II nearly emptied the pool of qualified male applicants.]

“The purpose of the minor program is to broaden the interests or capacities of the student in other areas than those of his major intellectual objective. While some latitude is allowed in particular cases, the spirit of this purpose is always held in view.”
[As opposed to the commandment “Thou shalt stay in thy lane”.]

“Students who are prepared for graduate work in economics are almost never deficient in humanities. Similarly, deficiencies in science are infrequent; but candidates are frequently admitted without preparation in calculus.”
[You go to war with the army you have.]

“In judging promise, special weight is naturally given to letters of recommendation from economists known to members of the department. The difficulty of evaluating records in foreign institutions and of judging foreign references constitutes a serious but no impassable barrier for foreign applicants.”
[Signal extraction problem vs. the problem of old boy networks]

Incidentally, neither “microeconomics” nor “macroeconomics” appear in the document at all. The preferred terms seen here in the brochure are “price and allocation theory” and “income analysis”.

____________________________________

The Graduate Program in Economics

School of Humanities and Social Science
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
[1961]

This brochure has been prepared especially for students who may enter the graduate program in economics at M.I.T. Its purpose is to answer a number of questions which have been recurrently raised about the program and to add to the information which is given in the M.I.T. catalogue.

 

Highlights of the M.I.T. Graduate Program in Economics

  1. The program is almost entirely for doctoral candidates. The master’s degree at M.I.T. is given in either economics and engineering or economics and science; it requires the equivalent of the M.I.T. undergraduate content in engineering or science.
  2. The M.I.T. program does not concentrate on mathematical economics. All students are required to have and use a minimum of mathematics. Students who enter without calculus may make up their deficiency in the first term with a one-semester subject (Mathematics for Economists—14.101), given in our own department. Most of the work in most fields, however, is nonmathematical.
  3. The program is limited in size. Approximately twenty-five students are admitted in any year; sixty or so students are in residence at one time. The department has more than thirty faculty members, twenty of whom have a major responsibility in the graduate program.
  4. The department welcomes applications from qualified women.
  5. All applicants are urged to take the Graduate Record Examination no later than during the January preceding the September in which they wish to enter. They should take the quantitative and verbal aptitude tests as well as the test in economics (Write to the Graduate Record Examinations, educational Testing service, 20 Nassau Street, Princeton, New Jersey, for information on these examinations. Students in western states should write to 4640 Hollywood Boulevard, Los Angeles 27, California.)
  6. Visits to the M.I.T. Campus are helpful both to the candidate and to the departmental admissions committee. Appointments are desirable but are not generally essential, since members of the committee are likely to be available.
  7. The department would like each applicant to submit a statement (one or two pages) explaining his interest in economics. An informal questionnaire is provided for general guidance.
  8. Admission in February is granted only on an exceptional basis, because many subjects given in the spring are continuations of work given in the fall. In any event, fellowship assistance is given only as a consequence of the annual March competition, for students entering in the following September.
  9. Fellowships and scholarships in amounts up to $3250 are available for entering graduate students.
  10. Winners of outside fellowships are welcome to use them at M.I.T. It is entirely appropriate to apply for a Woodrow Wilson, G.E., A.A.U.W., National Science Foundation, or other outside fellowship at the same time that one applies to M.I.T. As a rule, M.I.T. learns of the outside award prior to making its own announcements.
  11. Liberal second-year fellowships are available both to students entering with fellowships and to those who enter without financial assistance. Awards are made on the basis of first-year performance.
  12. Teaching assistantships are ordinarily available for third-year students only, although some second-year students may do a small amount of teaching. Assistantships are not available to entering students unless they have had prior graduate study and teaching experience elsewhere.
  13. I.T. these are written in residence. Following an Institute rule, theses are prepared in residence except where the special requirements of the subject, such as field work, dictate otherwise. All theses are written in residence.
  14. For further information, write the Graduate Registration Office of the Department of Economic and Social Science, Professor Robert M. Solow.

 

S.M. in Economics and Engineering or Economics and Science

The department offers a Master of Science degree only in the combined fields of economics and engineering or economics and science. This degree is available primarily to students whose undergraduate work was in either engineering or science. Its purpose is to enable scientists and engineers, and in particular graduates of the undergraduate Courses in Economics and Engineering or Science (Course XIV) at M.I.T., to carry their economics training to the graduate level in order to equip them more fully for work in industry or government.

 

Ph.D. Degree

Ph.D. degrees are awarded in economics (including industrial relations) and in political science. In addition, candidates occasionally work for a doctorate in two or more fields—for example, economics and mathematics, economics and operations research, or economics and regional planning. These candidates are examined by special committees, on which members of the Department of Economics and Social Science serve jointly with members of the other departments concerned. Most of the graduate work in the department is directed towards the doctor’s degree. This pamphlet deals exclusively with the Ph.D. in economics; a separate bulletin describing graduate work in political science is available on request.

There are four departmental requirements for the Ph.D. degree: the passing of a general examination in a number of approved fields within the area of economics and social science; the satisfactory completion of a “minor” program in another department; demonstration of ability to read two foreign languages of significance in economics; and preparation and defense of a dissertation.

 

Major Program and General Examinations

Work taken in the Department of Economics and Social Science for the doctorate in economics is divided—broadly speaking—into two separate options: economics and industrial relations. But there is considerable overlap between the two.

All students in both options are examined five fields. Among the fields presently available are the following: economic theory, advanced economic theory, monetary and fiscal economics, industrial organization, economic development, international economics, economics of innovation, labor economics and labor relations, personnel administration, human relations in industry, statistical theory and method, and economic history. Each student selects one field as having primary importance for this professional career; ordinarily this is the field in which he writes his dissertation, though exceptions may be made. The remaining four fields are designated secondary fields. One of the five fields must be economic theory.

Students are also required to have at least a minimum knowledge of statistics and economic history. This minimum is presently interpreted to mean one semester of work in each at the graduate level. Candidates who present statistics or economic history as a primary or secondary field normally take two or three semester subjects in the field and automatically satisfy the requirements in that area.

Students may qualify in one of the secondary fields through course work only, provided that they receive a mark of B or better in two subjects. Students are examined in writing in the remaining four fields during an eight-day period (Monday, Wednesday, Friday, and Monday). The theory examination is four hours long (divided roughly between microeconomics and macroeconomics), while the other three are each three hours long.

Following these written examinations, the student takes a two-hour oral examination which covers theory, his primary field, and one secondary field.

 

Foreign Languages

Doctoral candidates must show reading knowledge of two foreign languages; the standard set is the ability to read works of scientific interest at a relatively slow pace. Acceptable languages are German, French, Russian, or any other language which has a literature in economics or which will advance the educational program planned by the individual student. Students are examined by the Department of Modern Languages.

Students whose language preparation has been limited may take subjects which prepare specifically for the language examinations. Students with no previous training in a language frequently are able to attain the necessary minimum proficiency during a single semester of fairly intensive study. Others, who have already had some introduction to a language, often pass the requirement at some time before the end of the semester.

 

Minor Program

Every candidate for the doctor’s degree at M.I.T. must complete a program in a minor field in another department of the Institute. This program consists of a minimum of 24 units, which ordinarily implies three one-semester subjects. The choice of the minor field is made by the student, with the approval of the Department of Economics and Social Science. The content of the program within the other department is a matter for that department’s determination. Satisfactory completion of a minor is ordinarily contingent upon an average rating of 3.5 (in effect, a minimum of two B’s and a C). The normal standard is that the minor work shall be beyond the level required of M.I.T. undergraduates. Students who have done advanced undergraduate work in some field other than economics may often use it to meet part of the minor requirement.

Students in economics have met the minor requirement in such fields as mathematics, industrial management, history, international relations, other social sciences, literature, city planning, chemistry, and electrical engineering. Subjects taken in the minor program must not duplicate work which may be offered for one of the five fields in economics. A minor program in history may include only one term of economic history, since two terms would qualify the student to offer it as a field in economics. Similarly, students minoring in industrial management may not concentrate in such areas as personnel administration. The purpose of the minor program is to broaden the interests or capacities of the student in other areas than those of his major intellectual objective. While some latitude is allowed in particular cases, the spirit of this purpose is always held in view.

 

Courses at Harvard

Students regularly enrolled at M.I.T. are permitted to take a limited number of subjects at Harvard University—about two miles distant in Cambridge—on an exchange basis, without paying extra tuition. Such subjects may be taken as a part of the minor program. Fields for the major program other than those described above may sometimes be offered on the basis of work at Harvard.

 

Residence Requirements

The minimum residence requirement for the Ph.D. degree, including thesis, is the equivalent of one and one-half full-time academic years. No specific number of subjects is required for the general examinations. In general, however, it is recommended that students have at least the equivalent of three semesters of work at the graduate level for the primary field; four semesters in economic theory; and two semesters in each of the other fields. Work on the graduate level at other institutions is considered in meeting these broad approximations of the requisite preparation. Since there are no formal course requirements, there is no occasion to have graduate credits from other schools transferred.

A full-time student is expect to take the equivalent of five subjects each semester for credit; this may include one “reading subject,” in which the student will broaden his reading in his regular subjects. A half-time student is permitted to take approximately three subjects, and a third-time student two subjects. Auditing of additional subjects is permitted as an overload.

 

Dissertation and Special Examination

The Institute requires that all dissertations be prepared in residence, during which period tuition must be paid. Field work may be necessary to gather material; but the analysis of this material must take place at the Institute, under supervision of the instructor in charge of the dissertation. In some cases the writing of the final, polished version of the thesis may be completed elsewhere.

As in other institutions, the dissertation is expected to make a contribution to knowledge in the subject. Shortly after each candidate has submitted his thesis, he is examined on its subject. This examination is oral, conducted by a committee generally consisting of three faculty members, and usually is one hour in length.

 

Total Program of Course Work

The typical student comes to the Institute directly from college with no previous graduate study, having a deficiency in one subject and the ability to pass the reading examination in one language. He can usually prepare for the general examinations in four semesters (two academic years) taking five subjects in each, divided as follows:

 

In the Department of Economics Economic theory—four subjects
One primary field—three subjects
Three secondary fields—six subjects
Statistics—one subject
In other departments Deficiency—one subject
Language—one subject
Minor—three subjects
Total: Twenty subjects
[sic, total of the above is nineteen]

This program is only illustrative, of course, and a wide number of variations are to be expected. Additional work may be required because of additional deficiencies or lack of language preparation. The number of subjects may be reduced by absence of deficiencies, by better preparation in languages, by postponing one or more requirements (such as a part of the minor) until after the general examinations, or by incorporating economic history and/or statistics as primary or secondary fields.

 

Time Required for the Ph.D. Degree

A student entering the program with only a bachelor’s degree may expect to receive the Ph.D. degree in three years under optimum conditions. This will entail taking the general examination in May of the second year and completing a satisfactory dissertation in two semesters of full-time work thereafter. Normally, however, somewhat more time is needed, either in summer work or in some part of a fourth year. Students may need this additional time for more extensive preparation before the general examination, for the thesis, or (in the ordinary case) because teaching duties prevent full-time progress as a student. Many students who plan to enter the teaching profession take advantage of the opportunity to teach part-time at M.I.T. Teaching assistantships are available for students who have passed their general examinations, and occasionally for second-year students.

General examinations are given in the department at the beginning of each semester—in September and February—an again in May. Defense of the dissertation is arranged individually at any time.

Students enrolling in the Ph.D. program with a master’s degree from another institution, based on one or more years of residence at that institution, are urged to take their general examinations earlier than May of their second year at M.I.T. It is not usual, however, for a student to be able to transfer between institutions without some loss of time.

 

Summer School

The department does not offer any subjects at the graduate level during the summer session. However, students may enroll during the summer for thesis credits, for which tuition must be paid. Scholarships are only rarely available for payment of summer school tuition.

 

Admission

To be admitted into the program, a student must hold a bachelor’s degree from an accredited college or university. To be admitted without deficiencies, he must have taken one year of college mathematics, including at least one semester of calculus; one year of college science; and a minimum of three years of college work in the humanities and social sciences. While an undergraduate degree in economics is not indispensable, students are expected to have done a considerable amount of undergraduate work in this field. Students who are prepared for graduate work in economics are almost never deficient in humanities. Similarly, deficiencies in science are infrequent; but candidates are frequently admitted without preparation in calculus.

 

Special Students

Special students, taking from one to five subjects, may be admitted to the Institute and to the department from time to time under special circumstances. Admission of special students automatically lapses each semester; application for re-admission, in the case of students wishing to continue course work, must have the approval of the instructor concerned and the department.

 

Deficiencies

Students who, upon admission, are deficient in mathematics may make up this deficiency by taking a special one-semester subject offered by the Department of Economics—Mathematics for economists (14.101.) Since calculus is required for some of the work in economic theory and statistics, students entering with a deficiency in this area are required to make it up as soon as possible. Though this is not specifically recommended, some students may be able to make up a deficiency in calculus by studying at a summer school prior to fall enrollment at the Institute.

 

Fellowships, Scholarships, and Financial Assistance

Fellowships and scholarships are awarded on a competitive basis only. First-year awards are made on April 1 for the academic year beginning in the following September. Second-year and subsequent departmental awards are made in June. No academic assistance is available for students applying after April 1, or (until the following September) for those entering in February.

Fellowships cover the tuition fee of $1500 and some cash payment toward living expenses. A fellowship of $3200 will thus include $1500 tuition and $1700 cash. The cash award is paid in two equal installments, at the beginning of each semester.

The total of fellowship assistance varies from year to year. There are several name fellowships: the Goodyear, varying from $3000 to $3500; the United States Steel, at about $3100 for each of two years (awarded every other year); the RAND Corporation Fellowship in Mathematical Economics, varying from $3000 to $3500; the Hicks, for students of industrial relations, ranging from $2000 to $3000; and the Center for International Studies Fellowship in Economic Development, ranging from $3000 to $3500; In addition to these, the Institute awards Whitney Fellowships ($3000 in 1961), open only to first-year graduate students coming from outside M.I.T., upon recommendation of the department; and the department has limited funds with which it makes scholarship and fellowship awards varying from $1500 to $3000.

In offering scholarships and fellowships, the department takes into account a variety of factors; academic achievement, career promise, and need. In judging promise, special weight is naturally given to letters of recommendation from economists known to members of the department. The difficulty of evaluating records in foreign institutions and of judging foreign references constitutes a serious but no impassable barrier for foreign applicants.

In general, outside fellowships are financially better than all but a few of the department’s awards. Applicants are therefore urged to seek Woodrow Wilson, Danforth, National Science Foundation, and similar fellowships for use at M.I.T., if they think they stand a good chance of success in the national competition.

Students who perform effectively in their first year are assured of financial support needed to finish the degree. Part of this takes the form of fellowships, in amounts somewhat lower than first-year awards; the rest consists of teaching and research assistantships and instructorships. The half-time teaching assistantship covers the half-time tuition fee of $1000 and pays $180 a month for nine months—a total of $2620. The half-time instructorship, which is reserved for students who have demonstrated effective teaching as an assistant, pays the same tuition and $235 monthly–$3115 for the academic year. The few research assistants appointed each year receive a higher rate of pay than teaching assistants but pay their own tuition. They have the advantage, however, of working on a subject related to their thesis. The department is occasionally able to obtain assistantships for applicants in other parts of the Institute, such as the School of Industrial Management or the Operations Research Group.

Third-year students are also encouraged to compete for outside assistance in supporting their thesis research, such as the Ford Foundation Doctoral Dissertation Awards, the Social Science Research Council Fellowships, and Fulbright Awards.

 

The Faculty in Economics and Industrial Relations

Morris A. Adelman, Professor of Economics
Ph.D. Harvard 1948
Industrial organization, government regulation

Albert K. Ando, Assistant Professor of Economics
Ph.D. Carnegie Institute of Technology 1959
Statistics and econometrics, economic fluctuations

Francis M. Bator, Associate Professor of Economics
Ph.D. M.I.T. 1956
Price and allocation theory, income analysis, economic growth

Robert L. Bishop, Professor of Economics, in charge of the department
Ph.D. Harvard 1949
Price and distribution theory, industrial organization, history of economic thought

E. Cary Brown, Professor of Economics
Ph.D. Harvard 1948
Public finance, income analysis, fiscal economics

Evsey D. Domar, Professor of Economics
Ph.D. Harvard 1947
Income analysis, economic growth, Soviet economics, fiscal economics

Robert Evans, Jr., Assistant Professor of Industrial Relations
Ph.D. Chicago 1959
Labor economics, industrial relations

Franklin M. Fisher, Assistant Professor of Economics
Ph.D. Harvard 1960
Econometrics, price and allocation theory

Harold A. Freeman, Professor of Statistics
S.B. M.I.T. 1931
Statistical theory, experimental design probability methods

Ralph E. Freeman, Professor of Economics, Emeritus; Lecturer
A.M. McMaster 1914, B. Litt. Oxford 1919
Monetary economics

Everett E. Hagen, Professor of Economics
Ph.D. Wisconsin 1941
Economic development, income analysis

Ralph C. James, Jr., Assistant Professor of Insutrial Relations
Ph.D. Cornell 1957
Labor economics, industrial relations

Charles P. Kindleberger, Professor of Economics
Ph.D. Columbia 1937
International economics, monetary theory and policy

Edwin Kuh, Associate Professor of Economics
Ph.D. Harvard 1955
Econometrics, income analysis

Max F. Millikan, Professor of Economics
Ph.D. Yale 1941
Economic development, income analysis

Charles A. Myers, Professor of Industrial Relations
Ph.D. Chicago 1939
Labor economics, industrial relations

Paul Pigors, Professor of Industrial Relations
Ph.D. Harvard 1927
Personnel administration, industrial relations

Paul N. Rosenstein-Rodan, Professor of Economics
Dr.Rer.Pol. Vienna 1925
Economic development

Walt W. Rostow, Professor of Economic History
Ph.D. Yale 1940
Economic history, economic growth

Paul A. Samuelson, Professor of Economics
Ph.D. Harvard 1941
Price and allocation theory, income analysis, monetary theory and policy

Abraham J. Siegel, Associate Professor of Industrial Relations
M.A. Columbia 1949
Labor economics, industrial relations

Robert M. Solow, Professor of Economics
Ph.D. Harvard 1951
Price and allocation theory, income analysis, econometrics

 

Graduate Subjects

Price and allocation theory

14.121, 122 Economic Analysis
14.123 Advanced Economic Theory
14.132 Schools of Economic Thought
14.151 Mathematical Approach to Economics

 

Income analysis

14.451 Theory of Income and Employment
14.452 Economic Growth and Fluctuations

 

Economic history and economic development

14.161,162 Economic History
14.171 Theory of Economic Growth
14.172 Research Seminar in Economic Development
14.182 Capitalism, Socialism, and Growth

 

Economics of industry

14.271 Problems in Industrial Economics
14.272 Government Regulation of Industry

 

Statistics and econometrics

14.371,372 Statistical Theory
14.374 Design and Analysis of Scientific Experiments
14.381 Statistical Method
14.382 Economic Statistics
14.391 Research Seminar in Economics
15.032 Sampling of Human Populations1

 

Monetary and fiscal economics

14.461,462 Monetary Economics
14.471 Fiscal Economics
14.472 Seminar in Fiscal and Monetary Policy

 

International economics

14.581,582 International Economics
14.584 Seminar in International Economic Theory

 

Industrial relations

14.671 Problems in Labor Economics
14.672 Public Policy on Labor Relations
14.674 The Labor Movement: Theories and Histories
14.681,14.682 Seminar in Personnel Administration
14.691,692 Research Seminar in Industrial Relations
14.693 Collective Bargaining and Union-Management Cooperation
14.694 Seminar in Union-Management Cooperation

1School of Industrial Management

 

[Production Credits]

Editorial service by the M.I.T. Office of Publications. Design by Brigitte Hanf. Typesetting by the Lew A. Cummings Company, Inc., Manchester, New Hampshire, and The Composing Room, Inc., New York. Production by the Lew A. Cummings Company, Inc. January, 1961.

 

Source: MIT Archives, Department of Economics Records, Box 2, Folder “Department Brochures”.

Image Source: MIT beaver mascot, Tim,  from Technology Review in 1914.

Categories
Economists Harvard History of Economics Northwestern

Harvard. Economics Ph.D. alumnus Homer Bews Vanderblue, 1915

 

Homer Bews Vanderblue (Harvard Ph.D., 1915) won his academic spurs for work on the economics of railroads. He went on to become the Dean of the School of Commerce at Northwestern. Before leaving for Northwestern in 1939 he donated his personal collection of Adam Smith materials to the Harvard Business School’s Baker Library.

_______________________

Homer Bews Vanderblue’s Ph.D. exams at Harvard

General Examination in Economics, Monday, May 11, 1914.
Committee: Professors Taussig (chairman), Turner, Sprague, Day, and Dr. Copeland.
Academic History: Northwestern University, 1907-12; Harvard Graduate School, 1912—. A.B., Northwestern, 1911; A.M. ibid., 1912. Assistant in Economics, Harvard, 1913—.
General Subjects: 1. Economic Theory and its History. 2. Statistics. 3. History of American Institutions since 1789. 4. Economic History since 1750. 5. Commercial Organization. 6. Transportation.
Special Subject: Transportation.
Thesis Subject: “Railroad Valuation.” (With Professor F. W. Taussig and Mr. E. J. Rich.)

Source: Harvard University Archives. Harvard University, Examinations for the Ph.D. (HUC 7000.70), Folder “Examinations for the Ph.D., 1913-14”.

Note:  Thesis published as Railroad Valuation, Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1917.  It was awarded second prize ($500) in Class A of the Hart, Schaffner & Marx competition.

_______________________

From the 1941 Harvard Business School Yearbook

Homer Bews Vanderblue
Honorary Curator of Early Economic Literature

Degrees: A.B., 1911; A.M., 1912, Northwestern University; Ph.D., 1915 Harvard University.

History in Brief: Instructor in Economics, Harvard College, 1914-15; Assistant Professor, Associate Professor and Professor of Transportation, Northwestern University, 1915-22; Research Director, Denver Civic and Commercial Association, 1920-21; Economist and Director, Harvard University Committee on Economic Research, 1922-29; Professor of Business Economics, 1922-29; Vice President, Tri-Continental Corporation, New York City, 1929-37; Member, Library Committee, College of William and Mary since 1936; Member, Committee on Economic Bibliography, British Academy since 1937; Honorary Curator of Early Economic Literature since 1936; Dean of College of Commerce, Northwestern University since 1939.

Source: Harvard University, The Harvard Business School Yearbook, 1941, page 37.

_______________________

Death notice from Harvard College President’s Annual Report

Homer Bews Vanderblue, Honorary Curator of Early Economic Literature in the Baker Library, died on July 12, 1952, in his sixty-fourth year. His first appointment at the University was as Assistant in Economics and Proctor in 1913-14. He became Instructor in Economics in 1914-15. Until 1922, he taught at Northwestern University as Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, and Professor of Transportation. From 1922 until his resignation in 1929, he was Professor of Business Economics, and from 1936 until his death he filled the post of Honorary Curator of Early Economic Literature in the Baker Library. He returned to Northwestern as Professor of Business Economics and Dean of the School of Commerce (1939-49).

 

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College and reports of departments, 1951-52, pp. 49-50.

_______________________

Vanderblue as Head of Northwestern’s School of Commerce

Homer Vanderblue becomes the fifth dean of the School of Commerce. Vanderblue proves to be a successful academic and administrative leader, keeping the school functioning during the resource shortages associated with World War II when most business schools curtailed their operations or suspended instruction entirely.

Under Dean Vanderblue, the school shifts away from technical specialization toward a broader managerial education. To accomplish this shift—which would take years to complete—Vanderblue introduces the “rotating chairs” system for academic department heads, thus sidestepping department rigidity. He recruits faculty sympathetic to his goals and ideals of “liberal business education.”

Vanderblue also works to bridge the fiscal gap between what the school generates for the university and what it earns to meet its expenses. Among other things, Vanderblue proposes raising faculty salaries, which had declined during the depression, and constructing new buildings in Evanston and Chicago. Vanderblue admits that to retain the best faculty, he has to draw upon loyalty to Northwestern by “playing on the ‘I love Evanston’ key” to retain the best senior professors, something he is able to do in many cases.

Dean Vanderblue retires due to ill health in 1949.

 

Source: Northwestern University, Webpage: “Kellogg School History: 1938-1947.”

_______________________

Adam Smith—Vanderblue Collection

Baker Library has brought together one of the most comprehensive collections of the works of Adam Smith in the world, with a special focus on The Wealth of Nations. This collection contains virtually all published editions in English of this work, The Theory of Moral Sentiments, and Essays on Philosophical Subjects as well as translations into Chinese, French, Russian, and numerous other languages. Further, it holds many of Smith’s other published materials, manuscript letters, and several volumes from Smith’s own library. Harvard Business School Professor Homer B. Vanderblue donated the collection in 1939.

Source: https://www.library.hbs.edu/Find/Collections-Archives/Special-Collections/Collections/European-Economic-History-Philosophy-Kress-Collection/Adam-Smith-Vanderblue-Collection

Image Source: Homer Bews Vanderblue from the 1946 volume of the Northwestern University yearbook Syllabus. Colorized by Economics in the Rear-view Mirror.

Categories
Economic History Economists Harvard

Harvard. Ph.D. Economics Alumnus, Arthur Harrison Cole

 

Many Harvard Ph.D.’s in economics went on to careers across the Charles River at the Harvard Business School. The economic historian, Arthur Harrison Cole, is best known as having been the Librarian of the Business School’s Baker Library and also the executive director of the Research Center in Entrepreneurial History at the Business School. 

Arthur Harrison Cole’s doctoral examination fields can be found at this post. His dissertation is included in this list of Harvard economics Ph.D.’s through 1926.

__________________________

From the Report of the President of Harvard College, 1973-74

Arthur Harrison Cole, who died November 10, 1974 in his 85th year, was Professor of Business Economics, Emeritus and former Librarian of the Baker Library at the School of Business Administration. Called a “pivotal figure” in the growth of the Library, Cole boldly reorganized and reclassified its collections, transforming it into a distinguished, scholarly institution. He presented to the Library the records of the first cotton manufacturing concern in this country which he had discovered in Webster, Massachusetts while a doctoral student. From this experience came his long professional interest in the changing ways of American business. His two-volume work, The American Wool Manufacture (1926), is still an important source book on the subject, and the Research Center in Entrepreneurial History at the School of Business Administration was largely his project — he was executive director from 1948 to 1958. After graduation from Bowdoin College in 1911 Cole received the A.M. and Ph.D. degrees from Harvard in 1913 and 1916. In 1913 he was appointed Assistant in Economics in the Faculty of Arts and Sciences and in 1916 Instructor in Economics and Tutor in the Division of History, Government and Economics. He became an Assistant Professor in 1926 and Associate Professor in 1928. His service at the Business School commenced in 1929 when he was made Administrative Curator of the Baker Library. In 1932 he became Librarian of Baker and in 1933 was elected Professor of Business Economics. His activity in his field continued after his retirement in 1956. He was an editor and a prolific writer who published in many journals. A slight but charming evidence of his editorship was Charleston Goes to Harvard, the diary of a Harvard student from South Carolina during one term in 1831. Cole’s most recent book was The Birth of a New Social Sciences Discipline: The Achievements of the First Generation of American Business Historians, 1893-1974. A room in Baker Library devoted to corporate publications is scheduled to be dedicated to his memory this spring.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College and Reports of Departments, 1973-74, pp. 32-3.

Image Source: Harvard Business School Yearbook 1930-1931, p. 39.

 

Categories
Chicago Exam Questions

Chicago. Price Theory (Econ 300A and B) Exams. Friedman, Winter Quarter, 1947

 

Norman Kaplan’s handwritten  list of readings for Milton Friedman’s price theory courses (Economics 300A and 300B) taught during the winter quarter of 1947 at the University of Chicago has been posted earlier. That winter quarter was the first time Friedman taught Economics 300B and only the second time he taught Economics 300A. In Friedman’s and Kaplan’s papers at Hoover and Chicago, respectively, I have found examination materials from that quarter.  Friedman’s two quarter sequence was not included in the course announcements for 1946-47, so I have included the announcement for 1947-48.    The 1948 course reading assignments have been transcribed as well.

_________________________

Course Announcement

300A,B. Price Theory. A systematic study of the pricing of final products and factors of production under essentially stationary conditions. Covers both perfect competition and such imperfectly competitive conditions as monopolistic competition, oligopoly, and monopoly. 300A deals primarily with the pricing of final products; 300B, with the pricing of factors of production. Prereq: Econ 209 or equiv. and Econ 213 or equiv or consent of instructor.

300A. Aut: MWF 9:30; Win: MWF 10:30; Friedman.
300B. Win: MWF 9:30; Spr: MWF 9:30; Friedman

Source: Announcements. The College and the Divisions, Sessions of 1947-1948.   Vol. XLVII, No. 4 (May 15, 1947), p. 224.

_________________________

PROBLEM FOR ECONOMICS 300A, WINTER 1947

Assume that a comprehensive system of point rationing is superimposed on a money price system. Each consumer is given an equal number of points although money incomes are very unequal. Point prices exist for every commodity for which a money price exists, and a consumer must pay over both points and money to purchase a commodity. To simplify the analysis, assume throughout (1) that the points are dated, (that is, can be used only during a specific period), (2) that fixed and known quantities of various commodities are available each period.

(a) Indicate (on an indifference diagram or in any other manner) how to determine the quantity of each good that an individual would purchase, given money prices, point prices, his money income, and his point income (i) if it is illegal to transfer points from one person to another and consumers conform to this requirement, and (ii) if points may legally be bought and sold for money. In this case, take as given to the individual consumer also the price of points in terms of money.

(b) If the only thing the government fixed were the number of points each individual receives, and it were to allow the money prices, point prices, and price of points in terms of money to be determined on the market, there would not be a unique set of values of these variables that would establish equilibrium, because the number of variables would be greater than the number of conditions. Explain this statement. Suppose the government tries to remove the indeterminacy by assigning values to some variables on the basis of criteria other than clearing the market. How many variables could the government so set and still have a determinate equilibrium? Does it matter which variables the government sets?

(c) It has been argues that every consumer will gain if non-transferable points, case (a) (i), were made freely transferable into money, case (a) (ii). Do you think this correct? Discuss.

 

Mid-Quarter Examination in Economics 300A
Winter, 1947

  1. (20 points) Define briefly:
    1. Indifference curve
    2. Income effect of a change in price
    3. Equilibrium price
    4. Marshallian demand curve
    5. Marginal rate of substitution
  2. (40 points) Indicate whether each of the following statements is true (T), false (F), or uncertain (U), and state briefly the reason for your answer.

A government subsidy of $100 per year to each grower of potatoes enacted after the end of a particular planting season and expected to be continued indefinitely will lower the price of potatoes (which it is assumed cannot be stored)

_____ a. for that season’s crop.

_____ b. in the long run.

During period when general business is improving, both the price and output of steel rise. This means

_____ a. that the income effect of the rise in price is greater than the substitution effect.

_____ b. that the demand for steel is inelastic.

_____ c. that the demand for steel increases with income.

Removal of rent control would

_____ a. reduce the money wages of maids.

_____ b. reduce the price of trailers.

_____ If the removal of rent controls were to lead to a rise in rents, then the total amount paid in rents would decline if the demand for rental housing were elastic and rise if the demand for rental housing were inelastic.

_____ “Since elasticity measures variation in quantity (demanded or offered) divided by variations in a price, the elasticity of demand for anything will be seven times as large for seven similar demanders as it is for one.” (A. C. Pigou)

_____ A rise in the price of coal will reduce the number of “Okies” trying to go to California.

  1. (40 points) Assume that a system of point rationing is superimposed on a price system. Each consumer is given a specified total number of points, point prices are set on various commodities, and a consumer must pay over both points and money to purchase a commodity. For simplicity, assume that there are only two commodities in the system. Indicate (on an indifference diagram or in any other manner), how to determine the quantity of each of the two commodities an individual would purchase, given money prices, point prices, his money income, and his point income.

(a) If it is illegal to transfer points from one person to another and consumers conform to this requirement. In your explanation, distinguish among the various special cases that may arise.

(b) If points may legally be bought and sold for money. In this case, take as given also the price of points in terms of money.

(c) Suppose that a fixed total quantity of each of the two goods is available; that point prices are fixed by the government, money prices are freely determined so as to clear the market; and that in case (a) some consumers are left with points which they cannot spend because they do not have enough money. The legal prohibition against transferring points is now removed, the point prices and the total number of points issued are unchanged, and the price of points in terms of money is determined in the open market. What, if anything, can be said about the price of points in terms of money under these conditions?

 

Source: Hoover Institution Archives. Papers of Milton Friedman. Box 76, Folder 9 “University of Chicago Econ. 300A”.

 

Final Examination 300A
Winter, 1947

Has not been found either in Milton Friedman papers (Hoover Archives) nor at the Norman Kaplan papers (University of Chicago Archives).

 

_________________________

Mid-Quarter Examination in Economics 300B
Winter, 1947

  1. Indicate briefly whether the following statements are correct or incorrect and why.
    1. Economic theorists contend that, under competition, wages are always equal to the marginal product of labor. It seems to follow that if they are right, the simplest way to raise the productivity of labor, and hence to increase the total output of society, is to force employers to pay higher wages.
    2. The value of the marginal product of a laborer employed at the same wage rate is higher if he is employed by a monopolistic firm than if he is employed by a competitive firm. It follows that the monopoly employs labor more efficiently.
    3. A rise in wages will tend to lower the marginal productivity of capital.
    4. The law of diminishing returns is contradicted by the fact that agricultural output of this country has increased tremendously despite a decrease in the proportion of the working population on farms.
  2. Discuss the conditions that may give rise to long-run decreasing cost for an industry. What are the implications of the various conditions for the state of competition in this industry.
  3. Suppose the wage differential between northern and southern laborers of the same grade were eliminated by raising the southern wage rates. Discuss the short- and long-run economic effects, including the effects on employment in the north and south.
  4. A particular industry composed of numerous competing firms each producing a single product has been hiring labor by the hour and is in a position of long-run equilibrium. This industry (and no other) is required, because of a new law, to hire the labor by the year at a guaranteed annual wage equal to the hourly wage prevailing prior to the change times the number of hours in a normal working year. Discuss (1) the short-run effect of this change on (a) the average and marginal cost curve of a typical firm, (b) the output of that firm, (c) the number of man hours of labor employed by that firm; (2) the long-run effects on the number of firms in the industry and the output of the industry.

 

Final Examination in 300B
Winter Quarter, 1947

Part I

  1. The income of farmers from the sale of their products depends on the prices at which the products sell. The general level of agricultural prices, in turn, depends primarily on the income of nonfarm population. But the income of the nonfarm population depends on the prices of nonfarm products which, in turn, depends partly on the income of farmers.
    This kind of analysis is often criticized as circular reasoning and hence as incapable of leading to any useful conclusions. Is this criticism valid? Explain your answer.
  2. Discuss the following quotation from Marshall:

“A useful history of the opposition to machinery is given in Industrial Democracy (by Sidney and Beatrice Webb)…It is combined with the advice (to trade unions) not generally to resist the introduction of machinery, but not to accept lower wages for working on the old methods in order to meet its competition. This is good advice for young men. But it cannot be followed by men who have reached their prime.”

  1. How would you expect prices in local, neighborhood, stores in large cities to compare with prices in the central shopping district (in Chicago, the “loop”)? In your answer, distinguish among different products, and include an evaluation of the statement so often made by neighborhood stores that they can charge lower prices because they pay lower rents.

Part II

  1. There are 100 each of A and B farms. The product schedules of one farm are
Number of laborers Total Product
A Farm B Farm
1 40 40
2 90 80
3 140 115
4 185 145
5 225 170
6 260 190
7 290 205
8 315 215
9 335 220

a) Determine wages, rents, and employment on both types of farms

(i) if there are 900 laborers and full competition
(ii) if with 900 laborers, the laborers on the A farms organize and succeed in setting a wage rate of 40,
(iii) if, with 900 laborers, the laborers on the A farms organize and succeed in raising the standard wage rate to 47.

b) State briefly the general economic principles illustrated by each part of the above problem.

  1. Consider a hypothetical society in which there is no investment, either net or gross. All capital is completely permanent, not subject to change in form but capable of being used for different purposes. There is no lending or borrowing, no selling or buying of capital goods: whoever owns the capital goods is forced by the laws or conventions of society to hold them and is permitted only to rent them out (i.e., all capital is subject to the conventions that now govern human capital). Hence there is no market interest rate that matters, and all saving takes the form of hoarding of cash. The total amount of money in society is fixed in nominal units (say dollars). Wages are initially rigid (by law or otherwise) and the society is in a state of Keynesian unemployment equilibrium, unemployment keeping the real income down to a level at which dissaving equals saving, so total net saving is zero.Now wages are made flexible. Describe the process of adjustment to a new equilibrium position. Does this new position involve unemployment? What is the equilibrium condition on total net saving? What forces operate to bring about the satisfaction of this equilibrium condition?

Source: Kaplan, Norman Maurice. Papers, Box 1, Folder 8, Special Collections Research Center, University of Chicago Library.

Image Source:  Milton Friedman, from University of Chicago Photographic Archive, apf1-06230, Special Collections Research Center, University of Chicago Library.

Categories
Exam Questions Harvard

Harvard. Graduate Core Economic Theory Exams and Enrollments. Taussig, 1923-1925

 

Examination questions spanning just over a half-century can be found in Frank Taussig’s personal scrapbook of cut-and-pasted semester examinations for his entire Harvard career. Up to the time when Schumpeter took over the core economic theory course from Taussig in 1935, Taussig’s course covering economic theory and its history was a part of almost every properly educated Harvard economist’s basic training. Taussig’s exam questions have been previously posted for the academic years 1886/87 through 1889/90 along with enrollment data for the course;  material for this course (including semesters when taught with/by other instructors) from 1890/91 through 1893/94; 1897-1900 ; 1904-1909 ; 1911-14 ; 1915-1917; 1918-1919 ; 1920-22 have been posted as well.  

This post begins with the printed course description from 1924 and a link to a list of reading assignments from 1923-24 taken from a student’s notes of the lectures and then addes the enrollment data and three years of semester final examinations for the years 1922-23 through 1924-25.

____________________________________

Course Description: Economics 11
1924-25

ECONOMIC THEORY AND METHOD

Economic Theory. Mon., Wed., Fri., at 2. Professor Taussig.

Course 11 is intended to acquaint the student with the development of economic thought since the beginning of the nineteenth century, and at the same time to train him in the critical consideration of economic principles. The exercises are conducted mainly by the discussion of selected passages from the leading writers; and in this discussion the students are expected to take an active part. A careful examination is made of the writings of Ricardo and J. S. Mill, and of representative modern economists, such as Marshall, Böhm-Bawerk, Clark.

Source: Division of History, Government, and Government. Official Register of Harvard University, Vol. XXI, No. 22 (April 30, 1924), p. 71.

The course reading assignments for Economics 11 according to Frank W. Fetter’s student notes from 1923-24 was posted earlier.

____________________________________

1922-23

Course Enrollment: Economics 11, 1922-23

[Economics] 11. Professor Taussig.—Economic Theory

Total 42: 36 Graduates, 3 Graduate Business, 2 Seniors, 1 Junior

Source: Harvard University. Reports of the President and Treasurer of Harvard College, 1922-23, p. 92.

  

1922-23
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
ECONOMICS 11
Midyear-Exam

Arrange your answers in the order of the questions

  1. (a) “Given machinery, raw materials, and a year’s subsistence for 1000 laborers, does it make no difference with the annual product whether those laborers are Englishmen or East-Indians?”
    (b) “In some exceptional industries it happens that the employer realizes on his product in a shorter time than this (a week), so that the laborer is not only paid out of the product of his industry, but actually advances to the employer a portion of the capital on which he operates.”
    (c) “On American whaling ships the custom is not to pay fixed wages, but a “lay,” or a portion of the catch, which varies from a sixteenth to a twelfth to the captain down to a three-hundredth to the cabin-boy. Thus, when a whaleship comes into New Bedford or San Francisco after a successful cruise, she carries in her hold the wages of her crew, as well as the profits of her owners, and an equivalent which will reimburse them for all the stores used up during the voyage. Can anything be clearer than that these wages — this oil and bone which the crew of the whaler have taken — have not been drawn from capital, but are really a part of the produce of their labor”?
    Are these three situations essentially similar? And what is the bearing of each of them on the question under debate?
  2. “The extra gains which any producer or dealer obtains through superior talents for business, or superior business arrangements, are very much of a similar kind (analogous to rent). If all his competitors had the same advantages, and used them, the benefit would be transferred to their customers, through the diminished value of the article; he only retains it for himself because he is able to bring his commodity to market at a lower cost, while its value is determined by a higher. All advantages, in fact, which one competitor has over another, whether natural or acquired, whether personal or the result of social arrangements, bring the commodity, so far, into the Third Class, and assimilate the possessor of the advantage to a receiver or of rent.” Did Walker add anything of essential significance to this statement of Mill’s?
    Mill, Principles of Pol. Econ., pp. 476-77.
  3. (a) “It is not to be understood that the natural price of labour, estimated even in food and necessaries, is absolutely fixed and constant. It varies at different times in the same country, and very materially differs in different countries. It essentially depends on the habits and customs of the people.”
    (b) “A tax on raw produce, and on the necessaries of the labourer, would have another effect — it would raise wages. From the effect of the principle of population on the increase of mankind, wages of the lowest kind never continue much above that rate which nature and habit demand for the support of the labourers. This class is never able to bear any considerable proportion of taxation; and, consequently, if they had to pay 8s. per quarter in addition for wheat, and in some smaller proportion for other necessaries, they would not be able to subsist on the same wages as before, and to keep up the race of labourers. Wages would inevitably and necessarily rise.”
    (c) “If I have to hire a labourer for a week, and instead of ten shillings I pay him eight, no variation having taken place in the value of money, the labourer can probably obtain more food and necessaries with his eight shillings than he before obtained for ten.”
    Are these several statements of Ricardo’s consistent?
  4. In which of the following passages is the tendency to diminishing returns treated as referring to the amount of the produce, in which as referring to the value of the produce? Which method of treatment seems to you the proper one?

(a) “Whatever rise may take place in the price of corn, in consequence of the necessity of employing more labor and capital to obtain a given additional quantity of produce, such rise will always be equalled by the additional rent or additional labor employed. . . . Whether the produce belonging to the farmer be 180, 170, 160, or 150 quarters, he always obtains the same sum of £720 for it; the price increasing in an inverse proportion to the quantity.” — Ricardo.
(b) The Channel Islands obtain agricultural produce to the value of £50 to each acre of the aggregate surface of the island. Fifty pounds’ worth of agricultural produce from each acre of the land is sufficiently good. But the more we study the modern achievements of agriculture the more we see that the limits of productivity of the soil are not attained. . . . I can confirm Mr. Bear’s estimate to the effect that under proper management even a cool greenhouse, which covers 4050 square feet, can give a gross return of £180.” — Kropotkin.
(c) “Ricardo, and the economists of his time generally were too hasty in deducing this inference [tendency to increased pressure] from the law of diminishing return; and they did not allow enough for the increase of strength that comes from organization. But in fact every farmer is aided by the presence of neighbours, whether agriculturists or townspeople. . . . If the neighbouring market town expands into a large industrial centre, all his produce is worth more; some things which he used to throw away fetch a good price. He finds new openings in dairy farming and market gardening, and with a larger range of produce he makes use of rotations that keep his land always active without denuding it of any one of the elements that are necessary for its fertility.” — Marshall.

  1. “Ricardo expresses himself as if the quantity of labour which it costs to produce a commodity and bring it to the market, were the only thing on which its value depended. But since the cost of production to the capitalist is not labour but wages, and since wages may be either greater or less, the quantity of labour being the same; it would seem that the value of the product cannot be determined solely by the quantity of labour, but by the quantity together with the remuneration; and that values must partly depend on wages.” — J. S. Mill.
    What would Ricardo say to this? and in what way, according to Mill, do wages affect value?
  2. Explain briefly external economies; internal economies.
    It has been said that internal economies cause an increase of demand, external economies result from an increase of demand. Do you agree?
    Suppose internal economies to become greater indefinitely, as output enlarges; what consequences would ensue? Suppose the same for external economies, what consequences?
  3. “There is one general law of demand: the greater the amount to be sold, the smaller must be the price at which it is offered in order that it may find purchasers. . . . The one universal rule to which the demand curve conforms is that it is inclined negatively throughout the whole of its length.”
    “The demand curve over short periods — which may be a matter of weeks or months — is not necessarily inclined throughout in the same direction. It may be inclined positively. And similarly the supply curve does not necessarily have that constant positive inclination which is usually assumed. In the course of the higgling of the market this in its turn may have a negative inclination.”
    Whom do you believe to be the writers of these passages? Can they be harmonized? If so, how? If not, why not?
  4. The series of hypotheses made by Marshall concerning “meteoric showers of stones harder than diamonds”; the nature of the incomes derived by those finding them in the several cases; and the general principle which is thus illustrated.

 

 

1922-23
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
ECONOMICS 11
Year-end Final Exam

Arrange your answers in the order of the questions.

  1. “Labour of different kinds differently rewarded. This no cause of variation in the relative value of commodities.” On what grounds did Ricardo reach the conclusion summarized by him in these sentences? Is it consistent with the general trend of his theory of value?
  2. “This doctrine [about non-competing groups] was given its name by J. E. Cairnes. . . . He supposed it to be a rare and remarkable exception to what he believed was the general rule, that the cost-of-production regulated the price of goods — essentially a “labor-theory of value.” We regard it merely as a helpful way of presenting a particular case of the general rule that the value of agents is derived from their products when the market is viewed as a whole.”
    What would Cairnes say to this? What is your own view on the “general rule” stated in the concluding sentence?
  3. “Suppose that society is divided into a number of horizontal grades, each of which is recruited from the children of its own members; and each of which has its own standard of comfort, and increases in numbers rapidly when the earnings to be got in it rise above, and shrinks rapidly when they fall below that standard. Suppose, then, that parents can bring up their children to any trade in their own grade, but cannot easily raise them above it and will not consent to sink them below it. . . .
    On these suppositions, would Cairnes say that value was determined by cost? What would Marshall say?
  4. (a) “We have next to study the conditions of Business Management; and in so doing we must have in view a problem that will occupy our attention as we go on. It arises from the fact that, though in manufacturing at least nearly every individual business, so long as it is well managed, tends to become stronger the larger it has grown; and though prima facie we might therefore expect to see large firms driving their smaller rivals completely out of many branches of industry, yet they do not in fact do so.”
    (b) “Since then business ability in command of capital moves with great ease horizontally from a trade which is overcrowded to one which offers good openings for it; and since it moves with great ease vertically, the abler men rising to the higher posts in their own trade, we see, even at this early state of our inquiry, some good reasons for believing that in modern England the supply of business ability in command of capital accommodates itself, as a general rule, to the demand for it; and thus has a fairly defined supply price.”
    What is Marshall’s solution of the problem stated in the first of these passages? What sort of supply schedule do you suppose him to have in mind in the second? What would Walker say on both passages?
  5. “If the production of any, even the smallest, portion of the supply, requires as a necessary condition a certain price, that price will be obtained for all the rest. . . . The value, therefore, of an article (meaning its natural, which is the same with its average value) is determined by the cost of that portion of the supply which is produced and brought to market at the greatest expense. This is the Law of Value of the third of the three classes into which all commodities are divided. . . . Rent, therefore, forms no part of the cost of production which determines the value of agricultural produce.”
    By whom do you suppose this passage to have been written? What would Marshall say to it?
  6. “‘Rent is not an element in price’ — such is the classical statement on the subject. . . . But, if one defines rent as product imputable to a concrete agent, the impossibility of maintaining such a claim becomes apparent. Even if one were to restrict the term rent to the product created by land, the claim that it is not an element in adjusting market values would be absurd; for it would amount to saying that a certain part of the output of every kind of goods has no effect on their market value. The ‘price’ referred to in the formula is, of course, the market value expressed in units of currency.” What do you say?
  7. “When the artisan or professional man has once obtained the skill required for his work, a part of his earnings are for the future really a quasi-rent of the capital and labour invested in fitting him for his work, in obtaining his start in life, his business connections, and generally his opportunity for turning his faculties to good account; and only the remainder of his income is true earnings of effort. But this remainder is generally a large part of the whole. And here lies the contrast. For when a similar analysis is made of the profits of the business man, the proportions are found to be different: in his case the greater part is quasi-rent.” Why? or why not?
  8. (a) “Capital-goods imply waiting for the fruits of labor. Capital, on the contrary, implies the direct opposite of this: it is the means of avoiding all waiting. It is the remover of time intervals, — the absolute synchronizer of labor and its fruits. It is the means of putting civilized man in a position which, so far as time is concerned, is akin to that in which the rude forester stood, when he broke off limbs of dead trees and laid them on his fire. The very appliances which, in their extent and complexity, seem in one view to mean endless waiting, in another view mean no waiting at all but the instantaneous appearance of the final fruits of every bit of labor that is put forth.”
    (b) “Tools are productive, but time is the condition of getting tools — this is the simple and literal fact. The roundabout or time-consuming mode of using labor insures efficient capital-goods. . . . When the hatchet has worn itself completely out, and the fruits of using it are before the man in the large dwelling, he may look backward to the beginning of the process, when he faced nature empty-handed, and say: ‘Labor has done it all. Work and waiting have given me my goods.’ The working and the waiting have, indeed, insured the hatchet, as an incidental result of this way of working. Production that plans to put its fruits into the future will create capital-goods as an immediate effect, but labor and time are enough to make the ultimate effect certain. Let the man work intelligently through an interval of time, and the production of consumers’ wealth is sure.”
    (c) “The effort of postponement, or the preference of uncertain future for certain present consumables, necessary for supplying capital, if it is an effort, is a continuous one lasting all the time the capital is in use. The critic who asks, why a single ‘act of abstinence’ which is past and done with should be rewarded by a perpetual payment of annual interest, fails to realise that, so far as saving involves a serviceable action of the saver, it goes on all the time that the saver lies out of the full present enjoyment of his property, i.e. as long as his savings continue to function as productive instruments.”
    What would Clark say to the three propositions here stated? What are your own views?
    By whom do you suppose the passages to have been written?

____________________________________

 1923-24

Course Enrollment: Economics 11, 1923-24

[Economics] 11. Professor Taussig.—Economic Theory

Total 51: 37 Graduates, 5 Graduate Business, 3 Seniors, 6 Radcliffe

Source: Harvard University. Reports of the President and Treasurer of Harvard College, 1923-24, p. 107.

 

 

1923-24
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
ECONOMICS 11
Mid-year Exam

Arrange your answers in the order of the questions

  1. What bearing has the turn-over of retail shops on the question whether the reward of labor is derived from the contemporaneous product of labor?
  2. “Suppose I employ twenty men at an expense of £1000 for a year in the production of a commodity, and at the end of the year I employ twenty men again for another year, at a further expense of £1000 in finishing or perfecting the same commodity, and that I bring it to market at the end of two years, if profits be 10 per cent, my commodity must sell for [?]. Another man employs precisely the same quantity of labour, but he employs it all in the first year; he employs forty men at an expense of £2000, and at the end of the first year he sells it with 10 per cent profit, or for [?].
    Give the figures which Ricardo put into the bracketed spaces, and explain in what way he reached his figures.
    What principle does he mean to illustrate by examples of this kind?
  3. “Thus, in a charitable institution, where the poor are set to work with the funds of benefactors, the general prices of the commodities, which are the produce of such work, will not be governed by the peculiar facilities afforded to these workmen, but by the common, usual, and natural difficulties which every other manufacturer will have to encounter. The manufacturer enjoying none of these facilities might indeed be driven altogether from the market if the supply afforded by these favoured workmen were equal to all the wants of the community; but if he continued the trade, it would be only on condition that he should derive from it the usual and general rate of profits on stock; and that could only happen when his commodity sold for a price proportioned to the quantity of labour bestowed on its production.”
    What principle was Ricardo trying to elucidate in this passage? Is his reasoning sound?
  4. “The amount of produce raised, and therefore the position of the margin of cultivation (i. e., the margin of the profitable application of capital and labour to good and bad land alike) are both governed by the general conditions of demand and supply. They are governed on the one hand by demand; that is, by the numbers of the population who consume the produce, the intensity of their need for it, and their means of paying for it: and on the other hand by supply; that is, by the extent and fertility of the available land, and the numbers and resources of those ready to cultivate it. Thus cost of production, eagerness of demand, margin of production, and price of the produce mutually govern one another: and no circular reasoning is involved in speaking of any one as in part governed by the others.”
    Is this different from Ricardo’s doctrine on the relation between cost of production, value, rent? Is it inconsistent with Ricardo’s doctrine?
  5. “In short periods, that is, in periods short relatively to the time required to make and bring into full bearing improvements . . . no such direct influence on supply price is exercised by the necessity that such improvements should in the long run yield net incomes sufficient to give normal profits on their cost. And therefore when we are dealing with such periods, these incomes may be regarded as quasi-rents which depend on the price of the produce.”
    Would you regard “these incomes” as quasi-rents, in Marshall’s sense? Would you consider this a good definition of quasi-rents?
  6. Indicate summarily Mill’s doctrines regarding

the law of the accumulation of capital;
the factors on which the rate of profits depends;
the tendency of profits to a minimum.

Are they consistent with each other? Which of them, if any, is in accord with Ricardo’s doctrine on profits?

  1. “An increase in the aggregate volume of production of anything will generally increase the size, and therefore the internal economics possessed by a representative firm; it will always increase the external economies to which the firm has access; and thus it will enable it to manufacture at a less proportionate cost of labour and sacrifice than before.”
    Why “generally” in the first case? Why “always” in the second? or why not in either case?
  2. Explain

cost of production,
expenses of production,
supply price,
contemporaneous costs curve,
successive costs curve.

  1. “Among 1317 farms in one county in New York, 13 farms yielded labor incomes of over $2000. . . . Part of this difference was due to the soils being better than the average, and part was due to better management.” In the book from which this passage is taken, “labor income” is ascertained by deducting from the farm receipts (a) expenses incurred in operating the farm, (b) the interest which the farmer would have got if, instead of investing in the farm, he had lent his money at the current rate. Would you accept this definition of labor income?
    Does “economic rent” appear in the analysis? If so, where and how?

 

 

1923-24
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
ECONOMICS 11
Year-end Final Exam

Arrange your answers strictly in the order of the questions

  1. What is left, in the present stage of economic theory, of Ricardo’s doctrine of value? of wages? of profits?
  2. “When considering costs from the social point of view, when inquiring whether the cost of attaining a given result is increasing or diminishing with changing economic conditions, then we are concerned with the real costs of efforts of various qualities, and with the real cost of waiting. If the purchasing power of money in terms of effort has remained about constant, and if the rate of remuneration for waiting has remained about constant, then the money measure of costs corresponds to the real costs; but such a correspondence is never to be assumed lightly.” — Marshall.
    Consider separately the two propositions stated in these sentences, and give your opinion on them.
  3. “Let us now drop the supposition that labour is so mobile as to ensure equal remuneration for equal efforts, throughout the whole of society, and let us approach much nearer to the actual conditions of life by supposing that labour is not all of one industrial grade, but of several. Let us suppose that parents always bring up their children to an occupation in their own grade; that they have a free choice within that grade, but not outside it. Lastly, let us suppose that the increase of numbers in each grade is governed by other than economic causes: as before it may be fixed, or it may be influenced by changes in custom, in moral opinion, etc.” — Marshall.
    On these suppositions, is value determined by “real costs.”? Wherein, if at all, do the suppositions differ from those made by Marshall in earlier editions?
  4. “While we [the Austrians] say that the value of means of production, that is of cost-goods, is determined by the value of their products, the usual way of interpreting the law is to say that the value of their products, the usual way of interpreting the law is to say that the value of the products is determined by the amount of their costs, — by the value of the means of production out of which they are made.” — Böhm-Bawerk.
    What are grounds of this conclusion? What is your own view?
  5. “The difference between land and other durable agents is mainly one of degree; and a great part of the interest of the study of the rent of land arises from the illustration it affords of a great principle that permeates every part of economics.” — Marshall.
    Why is the difference mainly one of degree? and what is the great permeating principle?
  6. State the precise point on which Böhm-Bawerk rests his contention that there is no specific productivity of capital.
  7. Böhm-Bawerk remarks that the theory put forth by him bears a certain resemblance to the wage fund doctrine of the older English school, but differs from it in essentials. Explain the resemblance; point out the difference which Böhm-Bawerk believes to be essential; and give you instructor’s comment on that point of difference.
  8. Under the regulation for administering the Excess Profits Tax, while it was levied in the United States, an individual business man liable for this tax was allowed, when declaring his profits, to deduct from his receipts not only all outlays incurred but also (a) eight per cent on his invested capital, (b) a reasonable salary for his own labor of management.
    Were these two allowances in accord with the theoretic treatment of business profits by Clark? by Marshall? by your instructor?

____________________________________

 

Course Enrollment: Economics 11, 1924-25

 

[Economics] 11. Professor Taussig.—Economic Theory

Total 59: 43 Graduates, 2 Seniors, 8 Graduate Business, 6 Radcliffe

Source: Harvard University. Reports of the President and Treasurer of Harvard College, 1924-25, p. 75.

 

 

1924-25
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
ECONOMICS 11
Mid-Year Exam

 

  1. “When the labourer maintains himself by funds of his own, as when a peasant-farmer or proprietor lives on the produce of his land, or an artisan works on his own account, they are still supported by capital, that is, by funds provided in advance. The peasant does not subsist this year on the produce of this year’s harvest, but on that of the last. The artisan is not living on the proceeds of the work he has in hand, but on those of work previously executed and disposed of. Each is supported by a small capital of his own, which he periodically replaces from the produce of his labour.” J. S. Mill.
    Are the two situations here described essentially similar? and what general proposition or propositions do they illustrate?
  2. “In a charitable institution, where the poor are set to work with the funds of benefactors, the general prices of the commodities, which are the produce of such work, will not be governed by the peculiar facilities afforded to these workmen, but by the common, usual, and natural difficulties which every other manufacturer will have to encounter. The manufacturer enjoying none of these facilities might indeed be driven altogether from the market if the supply afforded by these favoured workmen were equal to all the wants of the community; but if he continued the trade, it would be only on condition that he should derive from it the usual and general rate of profits on stock; and that could only happen when his commodity sold for a price proportioned to the quantity of labour bestowed on its production.”

(a) What principle was Ricardo trying to elucidate in this passage?
(b) It has been argued that labor in a “charitable institution” is usually inefficient, and that nothing of the sort described by Ricardo happens. What would you say? What would Ricardo say?
(c) Trade-unions are opposed to the employment of convict labor, on the ground that it takes work from their members and tends to lower wages. Is their attitude inconsistent with the sort of reasoning Ricardo applies?

  1. It has been said:

(a) that the law of diminishing returns refers to the physical quantity of the produce obtained from land, not to the value of the produce;
(b) that the law of diminishing returns refers to the yield from each several piece of land, not to the yield from land at large;
(c) that if all land were equally endowed by nature, and if all were used, the income of the land-owners would be in the nature of a monopoly gain.

Which of these statements would you accept, which reject?

  1. “In estimating the exchangeable value of stockings, for example, we shall find that their value, comparatively with other things, depends on the total quantity of labour necessary to manufacture them and bring them to market. First, there is the labour necessary to cultivate the land on which the raw cotton is grown; secondly, the labour of conveying the cotton to the country where the stockings are to be manufactured, which includes a portion of the labour bestowed in building the ship in which it is conveyed, and which is charged in the freight on the goods; thirdly, the labour of the spinner and weaver; fourthly, a portion of the labour of the engineer, smith, and carpenter, who erected the buildings and machinery, by the help of which they are made; fifthly, the labour of the retail dealer, and of many others, whom it is unnecessary further to particularise.”
    What is the bearing of this enumeration on Ricardo’s theory of value? on his theory of profits?
  2. “The cause of profit is that labour produces more than is required for its support.”
    “The capitalist may be assumed to make all the advances and receive all the profit. His profit consists of the excess of the produce above the advances.”
    Are these two statements inconsistent with each other?
    Which, if either, was Ricardo’s doctrine? Which Mill’s? Which, if either, comes near the truth?
  3. What is the short-period point of view, what the long-period point of view, in the discussion of value at the hands of Mill? of Marshall?
  4. Under what circumstances, if under any, would you expect to find

(a) a demand curve positively inclined;
(b) a successive costs curve negatively inclined;
(c) a contemporaneous costs curve negatively inclined?

  1. Wherein is the incidence of a tax on dwellings significant as regards the doctrine of quasi-rent? That of a tax on printing-presses?
  2. Would you expect an increase of demand for an article to lead to external economies in its production? to internal economies?

 

 

1924-25
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
ECONOMICS 11
Year-end Final Exam

Arrange your answers in the order of the questions
Questions 1, 2, 3 may be answered as one, if you prefer

  1. Explain summarily

“real” costs of production,
money costs of production,
expenses of production,
supply price,
derived supply price.

  1. Would you reckon “economic rent” among the expenses of production of a commodity? Quasi-rent?
  2. (a) When a supply curve is laid out for the purpose of representing conditions of diminishing returns, is it supposed to indicate gradations in real costs or in money costs?
    (b) When a supply curve is constructed for a manufactured commodity, on the basis of data furnished by cost accountants, does it indicate gradations in real costs or in money costs?
  3. (a) “The ordinary bargain between labour and capital is that the wage-receiver gets command over commodities in a form ready for immediate consumption, and in exchange carries his employer’s goods a stage further towards being ready for immediate consumption. But while this is true of most employees, it is not true of those who finish the process of production. For instance, those who put together and finish watches, give to their employers far more commodities in a form ready for immediate consumption, than they obtain as wages. And if we take one season of the year with another, so as to allow for seed and harvest time, we find that workmen as a whole hand over to their employers more finished commodities than they receive as wages.”
    (b) There is, however, a rather forced sense in which we may perhaps be justified in saying that the earnings of labour depend upon advances made to labour by capital. For — not to take account of machinery and factories, of ships and railroads — the houses loaned to workmen, and even the raw materials in various stages which will be worked up into commodities consumed by them, represent a far greater provision of capital for their use than the equivalent of the advances which they make to the capitalist, even when they work for a month for him.”
    (c) “The whole question, whether goods are advanced by one class of persons to another, in order to tide that other class over an interval of waiting, clearly has reference, not to the relation of capitalists in general to laborers in general, but to the relation of certain sub-groups to other sub-groups in the producing series. It is the sub-group A´´´ [those making finished goods] that must advance the stock of the article A´´´ to all the sub-groups that are below it in the series, if any advances at all are needed; but does it actually make any advances? . . . Nothing of this kind, however, takes place. The stocks of A´´´, B´´´ and C´´´ are drawn upon and replenished simultaneously, like water in a full pipe, with an inflow at one end and an outflow at the other.”

Explain whom you believe to be the writers of these passages; what Böhm-Bawerk would say on the general propositions here laid down; what your own views on them are.

  1. “When an artisan or a professional man has exceptional natural abilities, which are not made by human effort, and are not the result of sacrifices undergone for a future gain, they enable him to obtain a surplus income over what ordinary persons could expect from similar exertions following on similar investments of capital and labour in their education and start in life; a surplus which is of the nature of rent.” Would Marshall agree to this as regards (a) the incomes of professional men; (b) business profits? Would you?
  2. Explain briefly whether anything in the nature either of a producer’s surplus or of a consumer’s surplus appears as regards (a) instruments made by man and the return secured by their owners; (b) unskilled labor and the wages paid for it.
  3. Is interest “earned”? Are business profits “earned”?
  4. Are there grounds for maintaining that Clark’s doctrine of the “zone of indifference” is inconsistent with his doctrine of the specific productivity of labor and capital?
  5. “Suppose a poor man receives every day two pieces of bread, while one is enough to allay the pangs of positive hunger, what value will one of the two pieces of bread have for him? The answer is easy enough. If he gives away the piece of bread, he will lose, and if he keeps it he will secure, provision for that degree of want which makes itself felt whenever positive hunger has been allayed. We may call this the second degree of utility. One of two entirely similar goods is, therefore, equal in value to the second degree in the scale of utility of that particular class of goods. . . . Not only has one of two goods the value of the second degree of utility, but either of them has it, whichever one may choose. And three pieces have together three times the value of the third degree of utility, and four pieces have four times the value of the fourth degree. In a word, the value of a supply of similar goods is equal to the sum of the items multiplied by the marginal utility.” — Wieser.
    What is meant by “value” in this passage? Do you think the analysis tenable? and do you think it inconsistent with the doctrine of total utility and consumer’s surplus?

 

Source for examination questions: Harvard University Archives. Prof. F. W. Taussig, Examination Papers in Economics 1882-1935 (Scrapbook).

Image Source: Frank W. Taussig, Harvard Class Album, 1925.

Categories
Exam Questions Johns Hopkins Suggested Reading

Johns Hopkins. Reading list and exam for Economic Fluctuations and Growth. Domar, 1957

 

 

The following macroeconomics course outline with readings and examination questions come from the last academic year that Evsey Domar taught at Johns Hopkins University (1957-58) before he moved to M.I.T.

Note: the last three reading items in section VII (Solow (1956), Solow (1957), and Abramovitz (1956) have clearly been added after the original syllabus was typed (a lighter typewriter ribbon and a larger font were used).

___________________________

THE JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY

ECONOMIC FLUCTUATIONS AND GROWTH
E. D. Domar
Political Economy 605
Fall, 1957-58

READING LIST

Students not familiar with accounting are advised to read Mason and Davidson, Fundamentals of Accounting, Chapters 3-5, 9, 13, 17, 21, 25-26, or an equivalent.

The purpose of this list is to suggest to the student the sources in which the more important topics of the course are discussed from several points of view. His objective should be the understanding of these topics and not the memorization of opinions expressed.

Items marked with an * are strongly recommended. (I don’t like to use the expression “required” in a graduate reading list.)

  1. NATIONAL INCOME AND RELATED ITEMS

*Kuznets, S., National Income and Its Composition (New York, 1941), particularly vol. I, Chapter 1.
*Ruggles, R. & N., National Income Accounts and Income Analysis (New York, 1956).
*National Income, 1954 Edition, Supplement to the Survey of Current Business.
*Leontief, “Output, Employment, Consumption and Investment,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, Feb., 1944.
Leontief, The Structure of American Economy (New York, 1951)

 

  1. KEYNESIAN ECONOMICS — GENERAL

Students without prior training in this field are advised to study D. Dillard, The Economics of John Maynard Keynes (New York, 1948), A. H. Hansen, A Guide to Keynes (New York, 1953), or K. Kurihara, Introduction to Keynesian Dynamics (New York, 1956).

*J. M. Keynes, The General Theory of Employment, Interest, and Money (New York, 1936), Philadelphia, 1944).
*American Economic Association, Readings in Business Cycle Theory, essays 5, 6, 7, 8.
S. E. Harris, The New Economics (New York, 1947) essays 1-19, 30-33, 38-46.
*A. P. Lerner, Economics of Control (New York, 1944), chapters 21-23, 25.
*K. K. Kurihara, Post Keynesian Economics (New Brunswick, N. J., 1954), essays 1, 11*.
*American Economic Association, Readings in the Theory of Income Distribution (Philadelphia, 1946), essay 24.
L. R. Klein, The Keynesian Revolution, chapters 3-5.
H. S. Ellis, A Survey of Contemporary Economics (Philadelphia, 1948) Vol. 1, chapter 2.
*Income, Employment, and Public Policy, Essays in Honor of Alvin H. Hansen (New York, 1948, essay I.)
*A. F. Burns, “Economic Research and the Keynesian Thinking of our Times,” in his The Frontiers of Economic Knowledge, (Princeton, 1954), or in the Twenty-Sixth Annual Report of the National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc. (New York, 1946). See also the discussion by Hansen and Burns in the Review of Economic Statistics, November, 1947.
Patinkin, D., Money, Interest, and Prices (Evanston, Ill., 1956)

 

  1. THE THEORY OF INTEREST

Readings in the Theory of Income Distribution, essays 22, 23, 26
Readings in Monetary Theory, essays 6, 11, 15
*Haberler, Prosperity and Depression, (Lake Success, N.Y., 1946), chapter 8.
*J. E. Meade and P. W. S. Andrews, “Summary of Replies to Questions on Effects of Interest Rates,” and “Further Inquiry into the Effects of Rates of Interest,” Oxford Economic Papers, No. 1, 1938 and No. 3, 1940.
*J. G. Gurley and E. S. Shaw, “Financial Aspects of Economic Development,” American Economic Review, September, 1955
A. G. Hart, Money, Debt, and Economic Activity, Second Ed. (New York, 1953).
*J. F. Ebersole, “The Influence of Interest Rates,” Harvard Business Review, Vol. XVII, 1938, pp. 35-39.
*H. D. Henderson, “The Significance of the Rate of Interest,” Oxford Economic Papers, October, 1938, pp. 1-13.
R. S. Sayers, “Business Men and the Terms of Borrowing,” Oxford Economic Papers, Feb. 1940, pp. 23-31.
P. W. S. Andrews, “A Further Inquiry into the Effects of Rates of Interest,” Oxford Economic Papers, Feb. 1940, pp. 32-73.
*W. H. White, “Interest Inelasticity of Investment Demand – the Case from Business Attitude Surveys Re-examined,” American Economic Review, Sept. 1956, pp. 565-87.
F.A. Lutz, “The Interest Rate and Investment in a Dynamic Economy,” American Economic Review, Dec., 1945.

 

  1. THE CONSUMPTION FUNCTION

Post-Keynesian Economics, essay 15.
Income, Employment and Public Policy, Essays in Honor of Alvin H. Hansen, (New York, 1948) essay III.
*J. S. Duesenberry, Income, Saving, and the Theory of Consumer Behavior (Cambridge, Mass., 1949).
*B. F. Haley, A Survey of Contemporary Economics (Homewood, Illinois, 1952), Vol. II, essay 2.
*T. E. Davis, “The Consumption Function as a Tool of Prediction,” The Review of Economics and Statistics, August, 1952.
W. W. Heller, F. M. Boddy & C. L. Nelson, Savings in the Modern Economy, A Symposium (Minneapolis, 1953).
*R. Ferber, A Study of Aggregate Consumption Functions, National Bureau of Economic Research, Technical Paper 8 (New York, 1953).
M. Friedman, A Theory of the Consumption Function (Princeton, N. J., 1957).

 

  1. THE MULTIPLIER AND THE ACCELERATOR

*Readings in Business Cycle Theory, essays 9-12.
*Haberler, Prosperity and Depression, chapter 13.
*S. Kuznets, “Relation between Capital Goods and Finished Products in the Business Cycle,” in Economic Essays in Honor of Wesley Clair Mitchell, (New York, 1935).
*R. F. Kahn, “The Relation of Home Investment to Unemployment,” Economic Journal, 1931. Republished in Hansen and Clemence, Readings in Business Cycles and National Income (New York, 1953), essay 15.
*Haavelmo, T., “Multiplier Effects of a Balanced Budget,” Econometrica, 1945; reprinted in Readings in Fiscal Policy, pp. 335-343.
*William A. Salant, “Taxes, Income Determination, and the Balanced Budget Theorem,” The Review of Economics and Statistics, May, 1957.

 

  1. PRICE FLEXIBILITY AND EMPLOYMENT

*A. C. Pigou, “The Classical Stationary State,” The Economic Journal, December, 1943.
*O. Lange, Price Flexibility and Employment, (Bloomington, Indiana, 1944).
*M. Friedman, “Lange on Price Flexibility and Employment,” American Economic Review, Sept. 1946.
*Readings in Monetary Theory, essay 13.
*T. C. Schelling, “The Dynamics of Price Flexibility,” American Economic Review, Sept. 1949.
D. Patinkin, Money, Interest, and Prices (Evanston, Ill., 1956).

 

  1. THEORY OF GROWTH

*E. D. Domar, Essays in the Theory of Economic Growth (New York, 1957), Foreword, Essays I, III-V.
W. Fellner, Trends and Cycles in Economic Activity, (New York, 1956)
A. H. Hansen, Fiscal Policy and Business Cycles (New York, 1941)
*R. F. Harrod, Towards a Dynamic Economics (London, 1951), Part III.
W. W. Leontiev [sic], Studies in the Structure of the American Economy, (New York, 1953).
J. Robinson, The Accumulation of Capital, (London, 1956).
*Simon Kuznets, “Towards a Theory of Economic Growth,” R. Keckachman, ed., National Policy for Economic Welfare at Home and Abroad (New York, 1955)
*Robert M. Solow, “A Contribution to the Theory of Economic Growth,” The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Feb. 1956.
*Robert M. Solow, “Technical Change and the Aggregate Production Function,” The Review of Economics and Statistics, August, 1957.
*Moses Abramovitz, “Resource and Output Trends in the United States since 1870,” American Economic Review Papers and Proceedings, May, 1956, pp. 5-23.

 

Source:   Duke University. David M. Rubenstein Rare Book and Manuscript Library. Economists’ Papers Archive. Papers of Evsey D. Domar, Box 15, Folder “Macroeconomics, Old Reading Lists”.

___________________________

THE JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY

ECONOMIC FLUCTUATIONS AND GROWTH
(Political Economy 605, Fall Term 1957-58)

Final Examination—Three hours
January 23, 1958
E. D. Domar

Please answer all questions in any order you like. Your reasoning is more important than your answers.

I. (25%)

(a) Explain the basic economic philosophy which forms the foundation of modern National income (and gross product) estimates in Western countries.

(b) Show how this philosophy is transformed into specific criteria used by the U.S. Department of Commerce in their estimates of GROSS NATIONAL PRODUCT, NATIONAL INCOME, AND CONSUMER DISPOSABLE INCOME. Illustrate your discussion with examples.

(c) “Existing methods of computing national income or product exaggerate the difference between the incomes (or products) of advanced and of undeveloped countries.”

Comment fully.

II. (15%)

The following comment was made by Mr. Ayzenshtadt, a Soviet economist, in 1947:

“Even the greatest admirers of Keynes and of his theory that loan capital is the main propeller of the industrial cycle, do not see anything new in it…Keynes himself thinks that the ‘novelty’ of his system lies in the equilibrium formula of the economic process in which the independent and dependent variables are arranged as follows:

Independent Variables:

(1) Propensity to consume
(2) Marginal efficiency of capital
(3) Rate of interest
(4) Liquidity preference

Dependent Variables:

(1) Savings
(2) Investment
(3) Level of Employment”

Comment. Be specific.

III. (15%)

“The best cure against inflation is increased production.” Do you agree? Why or why not? Comment fully.

IV. (25%)

Write an analytical essay on the subject: “The effect of a proportional personal and corporate income tax on the rate or rates of interest.”

V. (20%)

Examine the effect on GROSS NATIONAL PRODUCT of a $100 increase in GROSS PRIVATE CAPITAL FORMATION.

(a) Discuss the conceptual and analytical questions involved.
(b) Try to make a numerical estimate

 

Source:   Duke University. David M. Rubenstein Rare Book and Manuscript Library. Economists’ Papers Archive. Papers of Evsey D. Domar, Box 16, Folder “Final Exams. Johns Hopkins, Stanford, U of Michigan”.

Image Source: MIT Museum website

Categories
Harvard Seminar Speakers

Harvard. International Economic Relations Seminar. Haberler and Harris, 1940-45

 

The most famous economics seminar at Harvard University in the history of economics is undoubtedly the fiscal policy seminar run by John Williams and Alvin Hansen. A list of that seminar’s speakers and their topics was included in an earlier post. Below I provide the reported speaker’s and topics for the “younger” international economic relations seminar jointly organized by Gottfried Haberler and Seymour Harris during the War years.

___________________________________

EXPANSION OF THE SEMINAR PROGRAM

Several additions have been made in the seminar program of the School [of Public Administration] for the year 1940-1941. Professors Haberler and Harris are presenting a seminar on international economic relations. We planned our seminar program in 1937 on the assumption that it was wise to begin with domestic problems despite the fact that a number of the Faculty had special interests in the international field. In view of the events of the last few years, it seems highly important to develop these interests. The seminar given by Professors Haberler and Harris deals with the application of the principles of international trade to current problems…

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College and Reports of Departments for 1939-40, p. 306.

___________________________________

1940-41
INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC RELATIONS SEMINAR
[partial list]

[Seven of the meetings of the Fiscal Policy Seminar were held jointly with other seminars – four with the International Economic Relations Seminar and three with the Agricultural, Forestry, and Land Policy Seminar.]

 

October 11. SVEND LAURSEN, Student, Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, Harvard University.

Subject: International Trade and the Multiplier. (Joint meeting with Fiscal Policy Seminar.)

February 21. HARRY D. WHITE, Director, Division of Monetary Research, United States Treasury Department.

Subject: Blocked Balances. (Joint meeting with Fiscal Policy Seminar.)

March 21. RICHARD V. GILBERT, National Defense Advisory Commission.

Subject: The American Defense Program. (Joint meeting with Fiscal Policy Seminar.)

May 2. GUSTAV STOLPER, Financial Adviser.

Subject: Financing the American Defense Program. (Joint meeting with Fiscal Policy Seminar.)

 

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College and Reports of Departments for 1940-41, p. 323 ff.

___________________________________

INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC RELATIONS SEMINAR:
1941-1942. Professor Haberler and Associate Professor Harris

In 1941-42 the seminar devoted its attention to war and post-war problems in the field of International Economic Relations. A few meetings were spent on the discussion of fundamental theoretical problems. During the first semester all meetings were taken up by papers of outside consultants and their discussion. In the second semester student reports were presented and discussed, and a few extra meetings were arranged for outside speakers. The consultants and their topics were as follows:

 

October 1. EUGENE STALEY, Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy. Economic Warfare.

October 8.[**] CHARLES P. KINDLEBERGER, Federal Reserve Board. Canadian-American Economic Relations in the War and Post-War Period.

October 15.[**] A. F. W. PLUMPTRE, University of Toronto. International Economic Position of Canada in the Present Emergency.

October 22. HEINRICH HEUSER, Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy. Exchange Control.

October 29. FRITZ MACHLUP, University of Buffalo. The Foreign Trade Multiplier.

November 5. HENRY CHALMERS, United States Department of Commerce. Trade Restrictions in Wartime.

November 12. ARTHUR R. UPGREN, United States Department of Commerce. International Economic Interest of the United States and the Post-War Situation.

November 19. OSKAR MORGENSTERN, Princeton University. International Aspects of the Business Cycle.

November 28.[*] NOEL F. HALL, British Embassy. Economic Warfare.

December 5.[*] ROBERT BRYCE, Department of Finance, Canada. International Economic Relations with Special Reference to the Post-War Situation.

January 26.[*] PER JACOBSSEN, Bank for International Settlements. The Problem of Post-War Reconstruction.

February 13.[*] JACOB VINER, University of Chicago. Monopolistic Trading and International Relations.

February 18. H. D. FONG, Director, Nankai Institute of Economics, Chungking, China. Industrialization of China.

February 25. MICHAEL HEILPERIN, Hamilton College. International Aspects of the Present and Future Economic Situation.

March 11. JACOB MARSCHAK, New School for Social Research. The Theory of International Disequilibria.

March 14.[*] RICHARD M. BISSELL, JR., Yale University and the United States Department of Commerce. Post-War Domestic and International Investment.

March 18. ANTONIN BASCH, Brown University. International Economic Problems of Central and Southeastern Europe.

March 20.[*] ALBERT G. HART, University of Iowa. The Present Fiscal Situation.

April 10. ABBA P. LERNER, University of Kansas City. Post-War Problems.

May 8. HORST MENDERSHAUSEN, Bennington College. International Trade and Trade Policy in the Post-War Period.

 

Six of these were joint meetings with the Fiscal Policy Seminar [*] and two were joint meetings with the Government Control of Industry Seminar[**].

Student reports were presented on the following subjects:

Argentine International Trade.
Exchange Control in Argentina.
Some Aspects of Sino-Japanese Trade.
International Effects of Price Ceilings.
Location Theory and the Reconstruction of World Trade.
Some Post-War Politico-Economic Problems of the Western Hemisphere.
Economic Problems and Possibilities of a Pan Europe, Pan America and Similar Schemes.
The Balance of Payments of China.

 

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College and Reports of Departments for 1941-42, pp. 344-346.

___________________________________

INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC RELATIONS SEMINAR
1942-43. Professor Haberler

A larger portion of the time of the seminar than usual was devoted to the discussion of fundamental principles of international trade and finance. This was due to the fact that the graduate course on international trade (Economics 143) was not offered, and the seminar had to take over to some extent the functions of the graduate course.

There were eleven meetings with outside consultants, of which eight were joint meetings with the Fiscal Policy seminar. The smaller number of students made it advisable to combine the two seminars more frequently than usual. The consultants and the topics discussed with them were as follows:

 

November 13. Professor FRITZ MACHLUP, University of Buffalo. (Joint meeting with Fiscal Policy seminar.)

Subject: National Income, Employment and International Relations; the Foreign Multiplier.

November 18. Dr. THEODORE KREPS, Economic Adviser, Board of Economic Warfare, Office of Imports.

Subject: Some Problems of Economic Warfare.

November 27. Hon. GRAHAM F. TOWERS, Governor, Bank of Canada. (Joint meeting with Fiscal Policy seminar.)

Subject: Canadian War Economic Measures.

December 4. LYNN R. EDMINSTER, Vice-Chairman, U. S. Tariff Commission. (Joint meeting with Fiscal Policy seminar.)

Subject: Post-War Reconstruction of International Trade.

December 11. Professor SEYMOUR E. HARRIS, Director, Office of Export-Import Price Control, Office of Price Administration. (Joint meeting with Fiscal Policy seminar.)

Subject: Trade Policy in Wartimes.

February 12. THOMAS MCKITTRICK, President, Bank for International Settlements. (Joint meeting with Fiscal Policy seminar.)

Subject: The Bank for International Settlements.

February 24. Dr. LEO PASVOLSKY, State Department. (Joint meeting with Fiscal Policy seminar.)

Subject: Post-War Problems in International Trade.

March 3. P. T. ELLSWORTH, War Trade Staff, Board of Economic Warfare.

Subject: The Administration of Export Control.

April 12. EMILE DESPRES, Office of Strategic Services, Washington, D. C. (Joint meeting with Fiscal Policy seminar.)

Subject: The Transfer Problem and the Over-Saving Problem in the Pre-War and Post-War Worlds.

April 16. Dr. ALBERT HAHN. (Joint meeting with Fiscal Policy seminar.)

Subject: Planned or Adjusted Post-War Economy.

April 20. Dr. ALEXANDER LOVEDAY, League of Nations.

Subject: European Post-War Reconstruction.

 

Student reports were presented on the following subjects among others: practice and theory of an international bank; post-war industrialization of China; coordination of fiscal policy in different countries; international position of the Brazilian economy; international commodity agreements; international implications for fiscal policy; British exchange equalization account; and Argentine exchange control.

Twelve students were enrolled in the seminar of which four were Littauer fellows, seven graduate students from the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, and one from the College.

 

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College and Reports of Departments for 1942-43, pp. 246-247.

 

___________________________________

INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC RELATIONS SEMINAR
1943-44. Associate Professor Harris

A new approach was tried in the International Economic Relations Seminar this year. We paid particular attention to the international economic problems of Latin America and especially to the problems raised by the great demand for Latin American products for war, the expansion of exports and of money, and the resulting inflation. Attention was also given to the transitional problems in the postwar period, particularly to the adjustments that will be required in exports, imports, capital movements, exchange rates, and the allocation of economic factors. In the course of the year leading government authorities on Latin American economic problems were invited to address meetings of the seminar, which were frequently joint meetings with the Fiscal Policy Seminar or the students of the graduate course in international organization.

The schedule of meetings for 1943-44 was as follows:

 

November 12. Professor HARRIS.

Subject: Inflation in Latin America.

December 9. Dr. CORWIN EDWARDS, Chairman, Policy Board of the Anti-Trust Division of the Department of Justice and Chief of Staff of the Presidential Cooke Commission to Brazil.

Subject: Brazilian Economy.

December 17. Dr. HARRY WHITE, Director of Monetary Research, Treasury Department.

Subject: Problems of International Monetary Stabilization.

January 6. Professor HARRIS.

Subject: International Economic Problems of the War and Postwar Period.

January 10. Professor HABERLER.

Subject: Reparations.

January 14. Dr. N. NESS, Member, Mexican-U. S. Economic Commission.

Subject: Mexico.

January 17. Dr. BEARDSLEY RUML, Chairman, Federal Reserve Bank of New York.

Subject: Economic Budget and Fiscal Budget.

January 21. Dr. P. T. ELLSWORTH, Economic Studies Division, Department of State.

Subject: Chile.

January 24. Dr. DON HUMPHREY, Special Advisor on Price Control to Haitian Government; Chief, Price Section, O.P.A.

Subject: Haiti.

January 31. Dr. ROBERT TRIFFIN, Member, U. S. Economic Commission to Paraguay.

Subject: Money, Banking, and Foreign Exchanges in Latin America.

February 4. Dr. MIRON BURGIN, Office of Coordinator of Inter-American Affairs.

Subject: Argentina.

February 9. Dr. FRANK WARING, Director, Research Division, Office of Coordinator of Inter-American Affairs.

Subject: Broad Aspects of Latin-American Economics.

February 10. Dr. BEN LEWIS, Head of Price Control Mission to Colombia, Special Assistant to the Price Administrator.

Subject: Colombia.

March 9. Dr. HENRY CHALMERS, Department of Commerce.

Subject: Inter-American Trade Practices.

March 31. Mr. HENRY WALLICH.

Subject: Fiscal Policy and International Equilibrium.

 

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College and Reports of Departments for 1943-44, pp. 271-2.

___________________________________

INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC RELATIONS SEMINAR
Professor Haberler and Associate Professor Harris

The seminar meetings in the year 1944-1945 may be arranged under the following headings:

  1. Exchanges, Controls, and International Trade (8 meetings)
  2. Regional Problems (8 meetings).
  3. Regional and International Aspects of Domestic Problems (8 meetings).
  4. Lectures and Discussions on International Trade by Professors Haberler and Harris (8 meetings).

Four of the papers presented at these meetings were subsequently published in economic journals.

The schedule of meetings for 1944-1945 was as follows:

November 16. Dr. RANDALL HINSHAW, Federal Reserve Board.

Subject: American Prosperity and the British Balance-of-Payments Problem. (Published in the Review of Economic Statistics, February 1945.)

December 11. EDWARD M. BERNSTEIN, Assistant Director, Division of Monetary Research, Treasury Department.

Subject: The Scarcity of Dollars. (Published in The Journal of Political Economy, March 1945.)

December 15. Dr. FRANCIS MCINTYRE, Representative of the Foreign Economic Exchange on Requirements Board of the War Production Board.

Subject: International Distribution of Supplies in Wartime.

December 21. Dr. ALEXANDER GERSCHENKRON, Federal Reserve Board.

Subject: Some Problems of the Economic Collaboration with Russia.

January 11. Dr. WOLFGANG STOLPER, Swarthmore College.

Subject: British Balance-of-Payments Problem After World War I.

January 22. Dr. WALTER GARDNER, Federal Reserve Board.

Subject: Some Aspects of the Bretton Woods Program.

January 26. Dr. WILLIAM FELLNER, University of California.

Subject: Types of Expansionary Policies and the Rate of Interest.

January 29. Professor WALTER F. BOGNER, Dr. CHARLES R. CHERINGTON, Professors CARL J. FRIEDRICH, SEYMOUR E. HARRIS, TALCOTT PARSONS, ALFRED D. SIMPSON, and Mr. GEORGE B. WALKER.

Subject: The Boston Urban Development Plan.

March 5. Dr. ROBERT TRIFFIN, Federal Reserve Board.

Subject: International Economic Problems of South America.

March 19. Dr. LOUIS RASMINSKY, Foreign Exchange Control Board, Ottawa, Canada.

Subject: British-American Trade Problems from the Canadian Point of View. (Published in the British Economic Journal, September I945.)

March 22. Dr. ROBERT A. GORDON, War Production Board.

Subject: International Raw Materials Control: War and Postwar.

March 26. Dr. HERBERT FURTH, Federal Reserve Board.

Subject: Monetary and Financial Problems in the Liberated Countries.

April 2. Dr. LLOYD METZLER, Federal Reserve Board.

Subject: Postwar Economic Policies of the United Kingdom. (An article based on this paper and written in collaboration with Dr. RANDALL HINSHAW was published in The Review of Economic Statistics, November 1945.)

April 16. Professor EDWARD S. MASON, State Department, Washington.

Subject: Commodity Agreements.

April 23. Dr. ABBA P. LERNER, New School for Social Research, N. Y.

Subject: Postwar Policies.

April 27. Professor JOHN VAN SICKLE, Vanderbilt University.

Subject: Wages and Employment: A Regional Approach.

May 14. Dr. E. M. H. LLOYD, United Relief and Rehabilitation Administration, British Treasury.

Subject: Inflation in Europe.

May 28. Professor LEON DUPRIEZ, University of Louvain, Belgium.

Subject: Problem of Full Employment in View of Recent European Experience.

May 29. Professor SEYMOUR E. HARRIS, Professor WASSILY W. LEONTIEF, Professor GOTTFRIED HABERLER, Professor ALVIN H. HANSEN.

Subject: The Shorter Work Week and Full Employment.

 

Source:   Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College and Reports of Departments for 1944-45, pp. 285-6.