Author: Irwin Collier

UCLA. Macroeconomics PhD qualifying examination. Spring 1982

Post author By Irwin Collier
Post date 2024-12-11

There are basically two kinds of artifacts that make it into the Economics in the Rear-view Mirror collection. There are items that come from (nearly) complete and neatly arranged sub-collections found in university archives and those somewhat random items plucked from the idiosyncratic personal collections of individual scholars. Today’s Ph.D. macroeconomics exam from UCLA is found in a folder of teaching materials for macroeconomics in Robert W. Clower’s papers at Duke University’s Economists’ Papers Archive.

Other things equal, a balanced panel of such exams across departments and time is what we would ideally hope to accumulate. But the enemy of the good is the perfect in this as in all historical research. So without apology, indeed with a bit of pride, I enter this artifact into our digital record.

Fun Facts: The quote that heads question 9 comes from Charles Dickens’ David Copperfield, for question 10 from Harriet Beecher Stowe’s Uncle Tom’s Cabin.

____________________________

Ph.D. Qualifying Examination
UCLA Department of Economics

Spring 1982

ECONOMIC THEORY
MACRO PART

TIME: 3 hours — plus an additional 15 minutes for students whose native language is not English.

INSTRUCTIONS: Answer Part I in Bluebook #1 ONLY.

Answer Part II in Bluebook #2 and subsequent books.

DO NOT MIX ANSWERS TO PART I AND PART II IN THE SAME BLUEBOOK.

NOTE WELL: It is extremely important to answer only the questions asked. Extraneous material (whether correct or incorrect) will reduce the score of an otherwise correct answer and no positive credit will be given to correct answers to questions not asked. However, a wrong answer to the question asked will receive a higher score than no answer.

PART I — SHORT ESSAYS
(weight = 1/3)

All questions in this part of the exam are true, false, or uncertain questions. FIRST indicate whether the statement is T, F, or U, and then explain or prove your answer briefly.

Answer only six (6) of the eight (8) questions in this part.

What we should reject is the naive reasoning that there is a demand schedule for investment which could be derived from a classical scheme of producers’ behavior in maximizing profit.
An easy money policy is good for the housing industry in the short run but bad in the long run.
In testing the Quantity Theory of hyperinflations, one must realize that the usual money stock data are apt seriously to underestimate the theoretically relevant money stock. Cigarettes and all sorts of things that become money in hyperinflations are not included.
Although the 1933-1934 increase in the dollar price of gold increased U.S. base money growth, it mainly served at the time as a price-support program for gold.
Relative prices are explained by the theory of value, and, once relative prices are known, money prices are determined by the theory of money.
If the growth rate of nominal money follows a random walk with constant variance, there is no solution to the observational equivalence problem.
The first simple story about inflation is that its underlying cause is deficit spending by the federal government. In that case, the way to fix things up is simply to balance the federal budget.
If expectations are formed rationally and anticipated money does not affect real output, monetary policy cannot stabilize real output.

PART II — DISCUSSION QUESTIONS
(weight = 2/3)

Answer only four (4) of the six (6) questions in this part.

ANNUAL INCOME TWENTY POUNDS, ANNUAL EXPENDITURE TWENTY POUNDS, OUGHT, AND SIX, RESULT MISERY.
The federal deficit in 1943 and 1944 was nearly $50 Billion, or some 12% of GNP. Long-term bonds yielded no more than 3% per annum in the same years. Do these facts raise any questions in your mind about the validity of present arguments to the effect that projected federal deficits amounting to some 4% of GNP explain present long-term bond yields in excess of 12% per annum? Defend your answer.
NEVER HAD NO FATHER, NOR MOTHER, NOR NOTHIN’. I WAS RAISED BY A SPECULATOR — TOPSY
1. Explain the analysis behind the presumption, shared by almost all economists, that speculation will be “stabilizing” and not “destabilizing” in any given market that is exposed to regularly recurring “disturbances.”
2. Explain the role of “speculative behavior” in producing the “instability” problems of Keynesian macrotheory.
3. “In any system where speculation is based on rational expectations the Keynesian type of income fluctuations should not arise.” Discuss.
IT’S FINE IN THEORY, BUT WILL IT WORK IN PRACTICE?
From October 1979 to March 1980, money growth slowed sharply in the United States. During the same period of time, inflation accelerated, the unemployment rate rose somewhat, nominal interest rates rose sharply: and the dollar generally appreciated against other major currencies.

1. Can economic theory account for each of these occurrences? Consider each event separately.
2. Under what circumstances, if any, are all these events simultaneously consistent with economic theory? Explain carefully.

GOLDEN AND/OR BRASS RULES

In recent years there has been considerable discussion of instituting a monetary “rule” which would make monetary policy non-discretionary. One question, of course, is what form such a monetary “rule” should take. In light of this question, compare and contrast the probable impact on inflation and unemployment in both the short run and the long run from the following two possible monetary rules:

Policy 1: A k-percent rule: legally requiring the growth rate of the money supply to be k-percent.

Policy 2: A modified k-percent rule: legally requiring the growth rate of the money supply to be k-percent only when unemployment is at some target rate $\bar{u}$ . Formally, letting $\dot{m}$ be the growth rate of the money supply, the modified k-percent rule would require that:

$\dot{m} =k+\beta \left( u^{a}-\bar{u} \right)$

where β is a fixed, positive, non-discretionary constant and $u^{a}$ is the actual unemployment rate.

AN ESSAY ON THE ESSENTIAL ESSENCE
“IS-LM analysis fails to capture the essence of Keynesian economics because it completely ignores the effect of current levels of output and employment upon current production and consumption plans.”
1. Is this a fair comment on IS-LM analysis? Explain.
2. Is its characterization of “the essence of Keynesian economics” valid? Explain why or why not.
SOMETIMES YOU CAN’T LOSE FOR WINNING.
“Inflation is either unanticipated or anticipated. If unanticipated, it will increase output and employment. If anticipated, it has no effect on output and employment. So either it helps you or it does not hurt you.”

Source: Duke University. David M. Rubenstein Rare Book & Manuscript Library. Economists’ Papers Archive. Robert W. Clower papers. Box 4, Folder “Econ 202. Income, Employment, Monetary Theory”.

Image Source: Macro-Man from the DC comics fandom website’s wiki.

Tags Clower

Exam Questions Microeconomics Suggested Reading Syllabus Theory UCLA

UCLA. Price theory. Course outline and reading list. Hirshleifer, 1972

Post author By Irwin Collier
Post date 2024-12-10

A copy of the syllabus for Jack Hirshleifer’s UCLA price theory course taught in 1972 comes as a serendipitous find in the papers of Robert Clower at Duke’s Economist Papers Archive.

_________________________

Posted Earlier

Harvard. Economics Ph.D. alumnus, Jack Hirshleifer, 1950

_________________________

Winter 1972

Econ 201B
Mr. Hirshleifer

COURSE OUTLINE AND READING LIST

Pre-requisite: The student is presumed to have completed Econ 201A prior to undertaking this course; only in exceptional circumstances will this requirement be waived. Acquaintance with the elements of calculus remains a practical necessity.

Procedures: As in 201A, we will have lectures, class discussions, and problems. Students are reminded that classroom contributions and homework performances enter into the final grade.

Readings: The officially required texts are Stigler, THEORY OF PRICE (3rd ed.), Friedman, PRICE THEORY, and Lerner, ECONOMICS OF CONTROL. However, substantial readings are assigned in a number of other books that would make useful additions to one’s library. These include: (1) Baumol, ECONOMIC THEORY AND OPERATIONS ANALYSIS. (But note that while chapters assigned refer to 2nd edition, a new 3rd edition is expected shortly.) (2) Becker, ECONOMIC THEORY. (3) Bronfenbrenner, INCOME DISTRIBUTION THEORY. And there are also a number of books of collected readings that are advantageous to own.

The Graduate Library has been asked to place all assigned materials on reserve. Insofar as possible, readings should be studied in order as listed. The fundamental readings for our purposes are starred below; unstarred items may provide basis for lectures and discussions.

PRODUCTION AND DEMAND FOR FACTORS

*Stigler, THEORY OF PRICE, Ch. 6-9, 14.

*Hirshleifer, “Exposition of the Equilibrium of the Firm,” ECONOMICA, August 1962. [Reprinted in Kamerschen, READINGS IN MICROECONOMICS.]

*Allen, MATHEMATICAL ANALYSIS FOR ECONOMICS, pp. 284-289, 315-322, 340-343.

*Lerner, ECONOMICS OF CONTROL, Ch. 11-17.

*Friedman, PRICE THEORY, Ch. 6-9.

*Becker, ECONOMIC THEORY, Ch. 7-8.

Hicks, VALUE AND CAPITAL, Ch. 6-7.

Marshall, PRINCIPLES OF ECONOMICS (8th ed.) Book V, Ch. 6.

V. L. Smith, INVESTMENT AND PRODUCTION, Ch. 2, Appendix on Kuhn-Tucker Conditions.

*Dorfman, “Mathematical or Linear Programming,” AER v. 43 (Dec., 1953)

*Baumol, ECONOMIC THEORY AND OPERATIONS ANALYSIS (2nd ed.), Ch. 5-6 (omit appendix), 11-12.

Douglas, “Are There Laws of Production?”, AER v. 38 (March, 1948).

*Arrow, Chenery, Minhas, Solow, “Capital-Labor Substitution and Economic Efficiency”, Rev. Ec. and Stat., August 1961 (to p. 234).

SUPPLY OF FACTORS; FACTOR MARKETS; ROLE OF THE FIRM

*J. Robinson, “Rising Supply Price” in AEA READINGS IN PRICE THEORY, Ch. 11.

Marshall, Book VI, Ch. 1-11.

*Stigler, THEORY OF PRICE, Ch. 15-16.

*Chiswick, “The Economic Value of Time and the Wage Rate”, WEJ (June, 1967).

*Lerner, ECONOMICS OF CONTROL, Ch. 18.

*Friedman, PRICE THEORY, Ch. 10-11.

*Becker, ECONOMIC THEORY, Ch. 9.

*Bronfenbrenner, INCOME DISTRIBUTION THEORY, Ch. 9-10.

Hilton, “The British Truck System,” JPE v. 65 (June 1957).

*Alchian and Allen, UNIVERSITY ECONOMICS, Ch. 20.

Schumpeter, THEORY OF DEVELOPMENT, Ch. 1, 2, 4.

*AEA READINGS IN PRICE THEORY, Ch. 16, 17 (Coase, Scitovsky).

Hicks, THEORY OF WAGES, Ch. 6

*Cheung, “Private Property Rights and Sharecropping,” JPE (Nov./Dec., 1968).

*Lindsay, “Measuring Human Capital Returns” (on reserve).

WELFARE ECONOMICS AND GENERAL EQUILIBRIUM

Bronfenbrenner, INCOME DISTRIBUTION THEORY, Ch. 1-5.

*Lerner, ECONOMICS OF CONTROL, Ch. 6, 9.

*B. Hansen, A SURVEY OF GENERAL EQUILIBRIUM SYSTEMS, Ch. 3,4.

*Baumol, ECONOMIC THEORY AND OPERATIONS ANALYSIS, Ch. 16.

AEA READINGS IN PRICE THEORY, Ch. 12 (Ellis-Fellner).

*Bator, “The Simple Analytics of Welfare Maximization,” AER, March 1957
[Reprinted in Kamerschen, READINGS IN MICROECONOMICS, also in Breit and Hochman, READINGS IN MICROECONOMICS.]

*Arrow, “The Organization of Economic Activity,” in Haveman and Margolis, PUBLIC EXPENDITURES AND POLICY ANALYSIS.

Houthakker, “Economics and Biology: Specialization and Speciation,” KYKLOS, v. 9 (1956).

*Vickrey, “Some Objections to Marginal-Cost Pricing,” JPE, (June 1948).

Demsetz, “Why Regulate Utilities?”, JLE (1968).

*Coase, “The Problem of Social Cost,” JLE (Oct., 1960) [Reprinted in Breit and Hochman, READINGS].

Gordon, “The Economic Theory of a Common-Property Resource: The Fishery,” JPE (April, 1954).

*Worcester, “Pecuniary and Technological Externalities”, AER (Dec., 1969).

*Mishan, “The Postwar Literature on Externalities,” JEL (March, 1971).

*Demsetz, “The Private Production of Public Goods,” JLE (Oct., 1970).

Hochman and Rodgers, “Pareto Optimal Redistribution,” AER (Sept., 1969).

Source: Duke University. David M. Rubenstein Rare Book & Manuscript Library. Economists’ Papers Archive. Robert W. Clower Papers, Box 4, Folder “Econ 170-171: Org. of Enterprise + Industry”.

Image Source: Seal of the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) at the Wikimedia Commons.

Tags Hirshleifer

Exam Questions Harvard Theory Uncategorized

Harvard. Graduate Economic Theory Exam. April 1963

Post author By Irwin Collier
Post date 2024-12-09

Edward Chamberlin was a member of the graduate examination committee of the Harvard economics department in the early 1960s and in his files I have found copies of the theory exams from 1961, 1962, and 1963 along with a few memos that circulated among members of the committee that together provide a description of the procedures used for grading.

Of related interest is the following report that was transcribed and posted earlier:

Report on the General Examination for an Economics PhD, 1970

_________________________________

Other Written Exams
in Economic Theory

April 11, 1961
November 13, 1962

_________________________________

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
Department of Economics

Written Economic Theory Examination
April 8, 1963

You are to answer a total of 6 questions.

All three questions in Part A.
One question each in Parts B, C, and D.

Use a separate book for each question.

PART A: Answer all THREE

Explain the phenomena of “external economies” and “external diseconomies.” Describe how they affect the efficiency of the competitive pricing mechanism, and discuss measures which have been proposed to improve welfare when external economies or diseconomies are present.
State and explain several leading principles from the field of “non-price competition.” Comment on the problems that arise in combining this type of theory with the more orthodox “price competition.”
Interpret the Marshallian concept of Consumers’ Surplus in terms of a theory of utility based solely on Indifference Lines.

PART B: Answer ONE of the two.

Contrast the “liquidity preference” and the “loanable-funds” theories of interest. Discuss the implications of these two theories for monetary policies intended to maintain full employment.
Discuss the purely theoretical proposition that if all prices everywhere were sufficiently responsive in both directions to supply and demand there would, in a free market economy, be no persistent unemployment. Be equally interested in pointing out what may be right and what may be wrong about the statement. State what assumptions you would want explicitly stated if you had to support the proposition.

PART C: Answer ONE of the two.

Compare the main ideas of Adam Smith and David Ricardo about economic growth — its mechanism and its consequences.
Formulate a simple, highly aggregated model of economic growth. Incorporate technological change in it by including an industry called Research with a production function of a specified shape. Its inputs are capital (stock) and labor (flow). It is up to you to give a definition of its output that is appropriate to your model.

PART D: Answer ONE of the two.

Explain and compare some of the conclusions that economists have reached about the interest rate in a static or stationary state.
Discuss the similarities and differences among the principles of economic choice that are applicable to the three following:
1. an individual consumer;
2. a trade union, producers’ cartel, or other interest group;
3. society as a whole.

You may keep this question sheet when you hand in your exam books.

_________________________________

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
CENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS

Robert R. Bowie, Director
Alex Inkeles
Henry A. Kissinger
Edward S. Mason
Thomas C. Schelling
Raymond Vernon

6 Divinity Avenue
Cambridge 38
Massachusetts

April 23, 1963

From: T. C. Schelling
To: Messrs. Chamberlin, Leontief, Vanek

I enclose a sheet with the names and grades for your information.

The outcome of our regrading was as follows. You will recall that there were five students for whom we were rereading one or more books. You will also recall that we were to count the third reading as equal in weight to the other two. The results were:

Book 3, down from 1.4 to 1.2, Fail
Book 5, down from 1.4 to 1.1, Fail
Book 6, up from 1.5 to 1.6, Fair
Book 7, up from 1.25 to 1.4, Fair –
Book 10, down from 1.5 to 1.0, Fail

To recapitulate, three of these failed, and we had five clean failures, making a total of eight failures. On the rereading, three Fair minuses went down to Fail, one Fail went up to Fair -, one Fair – went up to Fair. I think this is about what we could have expected, and I am glad we did the rereading. Incidentally, two of the three who failed after the rereading had three books reread with two different readers involved, so I think we can feel they got fair treatment.

Next week I shall circulate to you my thoughts about a report to the Department and, if you wish, we can get together or alternatively you can add your comments. If it is convenient I should prefer to get together, but not until I have given you at least my thoughts on what we should report.

TCS: ac

_________________________________

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
CENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS

Robert R. Bowie, Director
Alex Inkeles
Henry A. Kissinger
Edward S. Mason
Thomas C. Schelling
Raymond Vernon

6 Divinity Avenue
Cambridge 38
Massachusetts

June 4, 1963

From: T. C. Schelling
To: Messrs. Chamberlin, Leontief, Vanek
Subject: Report to the Department on the Graduate Theory Examination

We promised the Department a report. And we had some things we wanted to report.

Some of our experiences we can communicate to next year’s committee over the lunch table. Some really require the Department’s cognizance. I am listing below some of the points I think we should like to report. This is not a draft, but just a chance to check with you. If you agree, disagree, or want to add anything, I suggest you do so in writing with copies to each other. There is no great hurry, but next year’s committee will want some Departmental instruction by the time of the second Department meeting next fall. I would like to get this done before my memory fades, and submit it if possible to the Department as soon as everybody is back from the summer.

I would propose that individual questions be graded not Excellent, Good, Fair, and Fail, but either numerically on the base one-hundred or with letter grades A, B, C, with the committee to decide — subject to any advice the Department wishes to make explicit — what kind of average or combination of grades should qualify a person as a “pass.” The Department should either make clear that the committee may do as it pleases or express itself on such things as how many failures on individual questions make a failing exam in spite of the average. The Department might also express itself on how large or how small the failing fraction might be without being considered “abnormal.” Just to get a proposal in the works, I would propose that questions be graded A, B, C, and Fail, with a B- required for passing, but with the committee empowered to make individual exceptions in either direction on the basis of the whole exam, and that the committee expect to fail somewhere from one-tenth to one-fourth without considering a “policy issue” being involved.
I would strongly recommend that we experiment next fall with typewritten examinations. This raises a number of technical questions, ranging from who provides the typewriter to how noisy the room is, and it surely discriminates somewhat according to typing skill. The present scheme also discriminates according to longhand skill. Students who cannot type, or choose not to type, should have their examinations transcribed, either at their own expense or at the Department’s expense. This seems to me the one exam that, because it is for graduates and because it interferes with no individual’s course, lends itself to the experiment. I feel quite sure that the reading of examinations will be much more reliable if the material is typed, and that disputed grades could be discussed more readily if the exams can be easily and quickly read. The number of students taking the exam in the fall is usually small, and that is therefore a good time to try it out.
I am surely persuaded that anonymous examination books make a real difference and the difference is a good one. I think the committee should avoid as far as possible putting students in special categories like the few who this year were offered the option of presenting to the oral exam with a re-examination in theory. At the same time, the committee cannot avoid having an opinion (or opinions) about the success of its own examinations; and the committee may, as I think we did, have some doubts after the examination about its reliability. If these are strong doubts, they should, as we did, consider special treatment of a few individual cases.
Especially if we go in for typed exams, the Department should consider making this a six-hour exam rather than a three-hour exam, just to increase its reliability. Reading time, I believe, would be sufficiently cut by having a typed examination to make the six-hour exam feasible for the committee.
The questions are also up to the committee but I would pass along the advice that the questions be as concrete and as problem-oriented as possible in contrast to general essay or discussions of what economists have said, proposed, etc. I think I say this not out of a priori prejudice but because I have felt more confident of the grade I gave when the student was responding to a very direct question or problem with little scope for inadvertent or deliberate evasion and with the obligation to give his own answer and not to repeat [what]others have [said]. This kind of advice surely is not suitable for Departmental action, but, if we share some experience we might try to articulate it for the next committee.

TCS: ac

_________________________________

Schelling’s Memo to Dunlop
and the Exam Committee

TO: CHAIRMAN [John Dunlop], DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS

FROM: THOMAS C. SCHELLING, CHAIRMAN

DEPARTMENTAL COMMITTEE ON THE GRADUATE THEORY EXAMINATION

RE: WRITTEN THEORY EXAMINATION

DATE: SEPTEMBER 18, 1963

Last year’s committee, consisting of Chamberlin, Leontief, Vanek, and me, reached several conclusions we would like to report for the benefit of the new committee that follows us. Most of the observations we want to pass along arose out of our dissatisfaction, not our contentment, with the examination process. We would like this report to go to the whole Department, or the Executive Committee, or whatever part of the Department is appropriate; if you want to postpone this a month while your new committee decides what it would like to do, if anything, about these recommendations, that is agreeable to us.

Our grading scheme, which we accepted without much thought, was to grade each question excellent, good, fair, or fail, with plus and minus, then to convert these to a numerical scale to facilitate averaging, and then to grade the whole examination. This procedure led to an anomaly that in turn produced some real misunderstanding among the graders. The anomaly was that, after collecting all of the books together and looking at the distribution of grades, the committee might wish to fail people whose average grade was “fair” or to give an “excellent” to a man whose average grade was “good.” This can lead to disputed interpretations of what the grades meant as well as what the grading standards should be. I doubt whether any committee would want, either in principle or in practice, to rely on a straight forward averaging to determine good, fair, fail, etc. I strongly recommend — and this may sound trivial but it is not — that the initial grading be on some arbitrary numerical scale with the final determination of over-all grades from fair to excellent being determined afterward. My committee agrees with this. I personally do not see that a matter of principle is involved here that ought to go to the Department, but I foresee that some eventual controversy may be forestalled if the Department is apprised of this problem and of the new committee’s intentions.
The committee is bound to have some notion of what proportion of those taking the examination might normally be expected to fail it. Different members of the committee may have very different notions. I believe this is meant to be a hard examination, and that the fraction failing it might be comparable to Written Theory Examination the fraction of students who fail their Generals. It is, I believe, also meant to weed out students who would likely fail their Generals. And it is an examination in which the committee ought to feel that anywhere from one-tenth to one-quarter of the candidates might be failed without the result seeming to be abnormal. It might be helpful if the Department would at least discuss the matter briefly so the committee would have a pretty good idea how much leeway it had in grading. It is not quite enough to say that this is completely within the committee’s competence; the philosophy of the examination derives somewhat from the Department’s notion of how strict this examination ought to be and how great a variation in outcomes needs to be expected.
We recommend that the committee experiment in the fall term with typewritten examinations. There are some practical questions here, such as who provides the typewriter, how noisy the room will be, and so forth. Typewritten exams will discriminate according to typing skill; but the present exam discriminates according to long-hand skill. Students who cannot type, or who choose not to type, should have their examinations transcribed, either at their expense or at the Department’s expense. Because this exam is for graduates, and because it interferes with no individual course, it lends itself to experiment; in particular, the small group in the fall term presents an opportunity on a small scale. All of us on the committee believe that the grading will be more reliable if the material is typed, and that disputed grades can be discussed better, and reread more easily, if they are typed. We, therefore, strongly urge that the experiment be made this year.
We are quite persuaded that anonymous examination books (books from which student names have been removed) make a real difference and that the difference is a good one. In case of borderline grades, it is hard to resist the temptation, after the exam has been graded, to get out the student’s record and see whether or not he deserves the benefit of the doubt. We did this, and we believed it was right to do so, but maybe as a matter of principle it should not be done. Let me point out that an awful lot hinges on a single examination if one does not fall back on the student’s theory record in borderline cases. In the oral examination I think it is fair to say that the student’s course background does count in the examiner’s evaluation of him. If the Department really does not want the written theory exam to be anything but an anonymous exam graded solely on its merits, a flat rule would relieve the committee of a philosophical problem that can be quite a nuisance. If the Department wishes the committee to use its own judgment, it will probably help the committee to have it understood in advance that the committee may decide this one. We recommend that the committee be free to use the additional information after the books have once been graded but that the committee avoid this expedient if possible.
If the typed examination is adopted, there is much to be said for making this a six-hour examination to increase its reliability. Reading time will be cut by the typing enough to compensate the greater number of books read.
Our final recommendation involves something that cannot be legislated. It is that the questions be as concrete and as problem-oriented as possible, in contrast to general essays or discussions of what economists have written about a subject. Our impression was that grading was much more reliable on the more direct questions and problems. There was both deliberate and inadvertent evasion on the more general questions, as well as more ambiguity on the committee itself as to what the question called for. The common occurrence of a bluebook that was a decent essay on a question that wasn’t asked might be averted by using questions that are fairly direct and unambiguous. Another common occurrence was the bluebook that indiscriminately gave the positions of various writers without the student’s accepting responsibility for his own analysis or evaluation. Our feeling was that these rather indirect questions provided quite unreliable evidence on which to grade students.

_________________________________

Chamberlin’s Memo
to the Exam Committee

This letter was “in the works” when Tom’s report to John Dunlop of September 18, 1963, came in the mail. It is now sent as a supplement to Tom’s report.

FROM: E. H. CHAMBERLIN
TO: MESSERS. SCHELLING, LEONTIEF, VANEK

SUBJECT: REPORT TO THE DEPARTMENT ON THE GRADUATE THEORY EXAMINATION (letter from Tom Schelling, June 4)

First I should admit that I was against the written theory examination when it was first proposed, but without any question the experience this year has made me more opposed than ever. In my letter to the other members of this committee on April twenty-fourth (?), I urged that the attempt to shake some more failures out of the group of eight between the figures of 1.2 and 1.5 had been a “fiasco” and that we should simply allow all of them (i.e., everyone excepting [name deleted], [name deleted], and [name deleted]) to take the orals, with the decision whether to pass or fail to be made at that time. As a compromise, we finally settled on three students: [name deleted], [name deleted], and [name deleted], and offered them the opportunity of taking the oral examination, in which they might do well enough to pass, even though they had “failed” theory. (The fact that no one of them accepted was certainly not surprising, since they had all been told already that they had failed theory and therefore had two strikes against them if they risked the orals.)

Although we all concurred in the decisions, I feel that I was mainly responsible for the matter coming up at all. As certainly evident in my letter of April twenty-fourth, I was extremely critical of the attempt to fail people who had already been graded at or near the good- to fair+ line merely because we “needed” more failures. In this respect especially I think the policy worked badly this year. The whole matter is probably one for the Executive Committee, rather than for this one. I hope it is understood that from many years of examining in economic theory I have the matter very much at heart. Certainly the treatment of our graduate students at the end of the second year is of the first importance, and I think the Executive Committee should devote some time to reconsidering the whole problem.

I still hope that this group may issue a unanimous report to the Department although as will be seen from the following comments there are son important differences between Tom and me. Perhaps we ought to have a meeting. Comments:

Questions of grading.
1. The approach of failing a certain percentage of those who take the exam (“one-tenth” to “one fourth”) must absolutely be dropped. It is contrary to the practice , both of this Department and of Harvard University, for as far back as I can remember. One only needs to recall the recent principle that “all (undergraduate) students are potential honors candidates” and to consider the grading processes with respect to these latter, to realise how far astray the concept of “failing or passing a certain percentage” is from the general practice at Harvard, and, in the past, in this Department. In any event, it is clearly unjustifiable with a group as small as we normally expect in the written theory examination — this year 37, of whom we failed, by a great effort, 8, or more than 20 per cent. I think it was the obsession that 3 was not enough failures and that we ought to increase the number, that led to a compounding of arbitrary decisions at the “margin”, and to results which, as I think I demonstrated in my earlier letter, made passing or failure for the group of 8 to which it was applied, almost a matter of pure chance. It was a witch’s brew if there ever was one. However, it was described in some detail in my earlier letter, and I refrain from another lengthy demonstration here.

Only one example from later developments: there were three books at the same grade of 1.25, (a Fair+ by the first reading). Two of them, having no questions eligible for re-reading by our rules, were below the new line of 1.4, and left as “failures”; a third, however, qualified for having two questions re-read (the intervals of discrepancy being 4 and 5 in the two cases), was converted into a pass and finished with a “Good” in the Generals. Why should he have had the opportunity to take Generals while two at the same grade had to wait six months? The conclusions: 1. I think we should admit that the methods we used to make distinctions within this “marginal” group were at fault (to put it mildly) and were future committees against them. 2. We should revert to an “absolute”, not a “relative”” or percentage, standard of quality for passing, and for the several grades of Excellent, Good and Fair, rather than trying to fail a particular number or percentage of people. 3. We should recommend to the Executive Committee that they reconsider whether we really want to “raise standards” in the Economic Theory part of the General examination as much as we appear to have done.

As for the second point, my own conviction is that only those conspicuously deficient in Theory should be failed. It should be not only possible, but a goal of the Department that all who take the examination should be well enough prepared to pass. After all, this only means that the Admissions Committee has done its work well, that the student has been well-advised as to courses, and that he has not outrageously neglected his work. Realistically, of course, there will usually be a few failures, either in the Theory exam or in the Generals. But in my opinion, failures should be voted by the Executive Committee upon recommendation of the Committee on the examination. In all cases of recommended failures, the members of this latter committee should each read the entire book with full knowledge of the identity of the persons involved and decide upon the fate of the student only in consultation, (as at present after the general oral examination).

1. As for grading terminology, this year it was Excellent, Good, Fair, and Fail, as we all know, and when numerical values were given to these categories later, the space between then was assumed to be equal: 6, 3, 0 (=Fair!) and -3. Tom has made another proposal in his letter (of June fourth). The important thing, it seems to me, is to put more space between Fair, which has always been a passing grade, and Failure. Indeed, one could easily explain the fact that 23 out of 37 books, approximately two-thirds, received a good- (2) in the first reading by the fact that 2 is mid-point between 6 and -3! Although these (good-) books were later broken down and distributed between the levels of “good” and “fair-”, this merely disguises the fact that the grades given actually had very little difference between them. In fact, with the exception of only four books, 33 of the 37 lay between the limits of 2.8 and 1.2, the former .2 below the good average, and the latter .2 above the fair+ average. Clearly the method of grading used this year, in spite of later adjustments, did a poor job of revealing the differences which must exist among the candidates who took the examination.

However, using the same figures, I experimented with breaking up the concentration at good- by introducing mechanically several considerations which ought to enter in anyway. Since this was actually done (out of the sheer fascination of the problem) I attach copies of the result for what they may be worth, perhaps only in suggesting the other ways in which the objective might be achieved. The 6, 3, 0, were kept for Excellent, Good, and Fair, but Fail became -9 (i.e., -6 more in every case of a -3). A more normal scale would evidently be: six questions with a value of 15 each; highest possible total grade a 90. Each question graded 15 = Excellent, 12 = Good, 9 = Fair, 0 a total failure. Also +3 whenever two different readers agreedthat an answer was a Good or better, and -3 whenever two readers both gave 0 (=Fair) or less. These several devices spread out the grades, [name deleted] actually got his Excellent, [name deleted] and [name deleted] showed up as clear failures instead of getting fairs, with [name deleted] such a low Fair that he might easily be added in, the number of Good’s was reduced to 15, etc., etc. (The applause is accepted). No re-readings, either.

To return to Tom’s letter:

I do not think it is fair to require students to type-write their examinations or pay to have it done (I think it is optional now). But they should be warned to write legibly and told that if they do not, they will have to pay to have their written examinations transcribed.
I agree that anonymous examination books are desirable up to a point. But no one should ever be failed without knowing the candidate’s identity and all we can about him.
A three hour examination seems to me long enough, or four at the very most. We should not forget that each student has already been examined for three hours per semester in his courses.
I think the questions should be of all kinds. Just as I refuse assent to the proposition that the scope of Economic theory should be limited to what can be treated in mathematical symbols, as I should not want an examination in theory to be cast in one particular mold.

_________________________________

Leontief Letter to Schelling

September 23, 1963

TO: T. C. Schelling

FROM: W. Leontief.

cc: B. H. Chamberlin, J. Vanek

I heartily approve of all recommendations contained in your memorandum on Written Theory Examinations dated September 18th.

The typing of all examinations — which, incidentally, I proposed at the very beginning before we started them — might not be easy to arrange since the secretaries in the Department offices have no less difficulty in reading the handwritten bluebooks than we do.

A six-hour examination might be rather hard on the students unless it is made quite clear that the additional two hours are allotted for preparing a clear typescript or readable long-hand.

WL: kd

Source: Duke University. David M. Rubenstein Rare Book & Manuscript Library. Economists’ Papers Archive. Edward H. Chamberlin Papers, Box 18, Folder “Written Theory Committee, 1963-64”.

Tags Chamberlin, Dunlop, Leontief, Schelling, Vanek

Exam Questions Harvard Theory

Harvard. Graduate Economic Theory Exam. November 1962

Post author By Irwin Collier
Post date 2024-12-09

Of related interest is the following report that was transcribed and posted earlier:

Report on the General Examination for an Economics PhD, 1970

_________________________________

Other Written Exams
in Economic Theory

April 11, 1961
April 8, 1963

_________________________________

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
Department of Economics

Written Exam in Economic Theory
November 13, 1962

ANSWER ANY 7 (AND ONLY 7)
AMONG THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS.

Questions are all of equal weight.

Use a separate book for each question.

(Please write legibly. Please write, on your first exam book, a phone number or address where you can be reached quickly in the event your exam book, because of handwriting, has to be transcribed and the typist cannot decipher some of your writing.)

Compare the views and arguments of Ricardo, the Austrians, and Marshall, on the question of the roles of utility and demand, and of cost of production and supply, in determining the prices of the goods produced in a competitive economy.
Construct a simple (static) general equilibrium model of a closed national economy, and show how it can be used to explain employment, prices, wage rates and the distribution of national income between capital and labor.
Indifference surfaces of an individual’s ordinal utility function are defined by

U = x^1/3 y^1/3 z^1/3

where U is utility and x, y, and z express quantities of three different products consumed. The individual himself produces 1 unit of x, 2 units of y, and 3 units of z.

1. Derive the equilibrium levels of consumption of the three products as a function of relative prices;
2. Derive the demand (supply) curves for the three products, and show as an application the quantities of x, y, and z demanded or supplied in the case where all money prices are equal;
3. Derive the relative prices that would have to prevail in a competitive market to keep the individual at autarky.
Compare and evaluate critically the solutions of duopoly proposed by at least 3 of the following: Cournot, Bertrand, Stackelberg, and Fellner.
Keynes maintained that an economy could be in equilibrium with a substantial amount of involuntary unemployment, but many other economists feel that an equilibrium in which an important market is not cleared is a contradiction in terms. Explain the concept of macro-economic equilibrium and in the light of this explanation sketch Keynes’ justification of his position and the Pigou-Patinkin refutation of it.
Present the argument according to which indirect taxes reduce the efficiency of the economic system, while a direct income tax does not, and show how the validity of this argument is affected by the existence of consumers’ choice between work and leisure.
Write on “increasing returns” with respect to (a) the firm; (b) the industry; and (c) the whole economy. In each case you should discuss at least: explanations of the phenomenon, how it affects the efficiency of the competitive pricing mechanism, and the question of stability or instability of equilibrium.
Point out and discuss what seem to you the most important similarities and difference between (a) Marx’s, and Schumpeter’s, theories of economic development under capitalism.
Discuss the problem of excess capacity in firms or in groups of firms. What different meanings may the phrase have? To what extent and way would you expect to find excess capacity in (a) static equilibrium; (b) a fluctuating economy; (c) a growing economy.
“Comparative advantage” is typically elaborated in the context of international or interregional trade. Generalize the concept as an economic principle and discuss the reasons you think account for its conspicuous association with international economics.
Discuss the theoretical significance of the distinction between net and gross investment in models of economic growth incorporating technological change.

You may keep this question sheet when you hand in your exam books.

_________________________________

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
CENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS

Robert R. Bowie, Director
Alex Inkeles
Henry A. Kissinger
Edward S. Mason
Thomas C. Schelling

6 Divinity Avenue
Cambridge 38
Massachusetts

November 19, 1962

From: T. C. Schelling

To: Messrs. E. H. Chamberlin, W. W. Leontief, and J. Vanek

Subject: Written Examination in Economic Theory

Seven students took the exam, and we have a total of forty-two questions, each in a separate book. I had managed to allot the questions so that each of us grades either ten or eleven books. I am asking Chamberlin to grade questions 1 and 9, Leontief 2, 7, and 11, Vanek questions 3, 4, 8, and 10, Schelling questions 5 and 6. Wassily and I get eleven a-piece, Ed and Jaroslav get ten a-piece.

If you are interested in what the students chose, it is follows:

Question 1 — 6	7 — 5
2 — 4	8 — 5
3 — 1	9 — 4
4 — 4	10 — 1
5 — 5	11 — 2
6 — 6

Enclosed, for each of you, are the books you should grade.

Each book will have a second reader. I will redistribute them as they come back. Some may need a third reader.

As we agreed, let’s grade them “excellent,” “good,” “fair,” and “fail,” with plus and minus as appropriate, and for averaging we will treat the intervals between grades as numerically equivalent. For borderlines between pass and fail, if any, we can reconsider the scaling system.

The immediate urgency is only in letting students know whether they are still preparing for orals. When I asked, none were scheduled for before Christmas. But I would like to finish the grading by the middle of next week if we can. If you can read your books before Thanksgiving, so I can redistribute them next Monday, it would help.

[After a] quick check I did not notice any with an impossible handwriting, [and] if you wish you may ask Joyce to get your books transcribed. That will slow us down, but I believe it is worthwhile. If you lose any books, we all hang together.

P.S. I suggest you not write your grade on the book. Each of us is then free to do a second reading unconstrained. Instead, turn in a sheet for each question with a grade corresponding to each student number; the number in red pencil is the code for the individual student. Please return your books and grade sheets to Joyce.

TCS: ac

Enc.

_________________________________

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
CENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS

Robert R. Bowie, Director
Alex Inkeles
Henry A. Kissinger
Edward S. Mason
Thomas C. Schelling

6 Divinity Avenue
Cambridge 38
Massachusetts

December 7, 1962

From: T. C. Schelling

To: Messrs. Chamberlin, Leontief, and Vanek

Subject: Theory Exam Grades

I have communicated to the Departmental office that all six who took the exam have passed. Wassily and I agreed on the phone that we should add to the dosier of the two poorest ones our scepticism that they are qualified for a Ph.D, and urging the oral examining committee to take very seriously the unsatisfactory quality of their theory exam. I shall set up a meeting this week at which we can settle on the grades for these students and work out language to meet Wassily’s point.

In preparing some statistics for you I discovered some minor errors in my tabulation; these raised the lowest grades by about one point in total, or 1/14th of a point for the grade average.

Attached is a tabulation that gives the two grades by student, by question, and by grader — the capital letters are the initials of the four graders.

I will call you to set up a meeting. At that time we can also discuss what we want to report to the Department, if anything.

The names of the students, with their scores, are as follows:

Book	Student	Score
6	[name deleted]	30.0
3	[name deleted]	23.3
5	[name deleted]	22.0
1	[name deleted]	18.0
2	[name deleted]	16.3
4	[name deleted]	14.3

TCS:ac

Theory Exam Grades*

Question		Student
Question		1	2	3	4	5	6
1	C	2-	1	2-	1	2+	2
1	V	2+	2	2+	2-	3-	2+
2	S			2-	2-		2+
2	L			0	0		0+
3	V					2+
3	L					0+
4	C		2	1		2	3
4	V		2	2+		3-	3-
5	S	2-	1	3		2	1
5	V	2-	1+	3-		2	3-
6	S	0+	0	2-	1	1	2-
6	L	1-	0	2	0	1-	3
7	C	2	1	2-	1-	0+
7	L	2	1	1	0	1
8	S	2-	1	1-	2-		3
8	V	2-	2-	2-	2		3-
9	C	1	1+		1+		1+
9	L	1	1		1		2
10	S	0-
10	V	1-
11	V				1+	2-
11	L				1	1
Total points**		18.0	16.3	23.3	14.3	22.0	30.0
Average		1.28	1.17	1.66	1.02	1.57	2.15
No. of excellents**		0	0	2	0	2	6
No. of fails**		2	2	1	3	2	1

*Scoring: Excellent = 3, Good = 2, Fair = 1, Fail = 0, with 1/3 point for (+) and (-).

**For fourteen grades, two on each question.

Source: Duke University. David M. Rubenstein Rare Book & Manuscript Library. Economists’ Papers Archive. Edward H. Chamberlin Papers, Box 18, Folder “Written Theory Committee, 1963-64”.

Tags Chamberlin, Leontief, Schelling, Vanke

Exam Questions Harvard Theory

Harvard. Graduate Economic Theory Exam. April 1961

Post author By Irwin Collier
Post date 2024-12-09

Of related interest is the following report that was transcribed and posted earlier:

Report on the General Examination for an Economics PhD, 1970

_________________________________

Other Written Exams
in Economic Theory

November 13, 1962
April 8, 1963

_________________________________

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
Department of Economics

Written Exam in Economic Theory
April 11, 1961

Answer six questions. All questions count equally. Please write legibly.

Set out Ricardo’s formal model of economic growth, so far as he has a complete system. Compare Ricardo’s diagnosis and prognosis with those of Adam Smith and Marx.

Discuss the rationale and limitations of measures of national income as indicators of social welfare.

III

Answer one of the following

Explain the concept of a “shadow price” in linear programming. Compare it with the role of the price concept in marginal analysis.

Give examples of “corner solutions”

1. in the analysis of production
2. in the analysis of consumers’ demand
3. in the analysis of exchange

and show in what respect they differ from the corresponding marginal solutions.

Answer one of the following

What were the basic theoretical issues between Keynes and non-Keynesians at the time the General Theory was published? To what extent has a synthesis since been achieved?

Discuss the effect of changes in the general level of money wages on the level of real wages.

“In contrast to the propositions of positive economic theory, the propositions of welfare economics cannot be subject to empirical verification. Hance the latter discipline can hardly be useful.” Discuss this observation using specific examples.

The homogeneous Cobb-Douglas production function is usually defined for two factors of production. Construct a Cobb-Douglas function for three factors and for one factor and show that their basic formal properties are analogous to those of a two-factor function.

_________________________________

Note: the following list of ten undated and unattributed questions was found in Chamberlin’s papers immediately following the above examination.

PROPOSED WRITTEN GRADUATE THEORY EXAM

Answer six questions; all questions have equal weight.

Describe and discuss Ricardo’s theory of economic growth; and discuss its relevance to problems now confronting ‘underdeveloped’ countries, or economies.
What are the chief differences in the conclusion reached by analysing an area of the economy (say, an “industry”) under the assumptions of (a) pure competition, on the one hand, and (b) monopolistic competition on the other. Elaborate the explanation of one of the differences mentioned.
To what extent may the concept of economic rent be generalized beyond its original application to land? Discuss fully, making clear what you mean by “rent” in each case.
Identify and illustrate the main kinds of uncertainty that arise in economic decisions; and relate the different kinds of “decisions”. Can problems of choice involving uncertainty be analysed in terms of ordinal utility?
Give an economic appraisal of the effects of comparative resource allocation in the case of “indivisibility”.
Set up an example of a simple static general equilibrium system with three goods and two factors of production, for example, land and labor.
How can technological change cause unemployment? What market forces tend to eliminate the unemployment? What factors may impede the operation of those forces?
What is the theoretical justification of the “competitive ideal”? How is the validity of the argument that competition produces ideal results affected by recognition of the phenomenon of product differentiation?
Describe the Neumann Model, and the principal results concerning it. Discuss the relevance of these results to real economies.
Outline and criticize the theory of economic growth, of one of the following authors:

Solow, Joan Robinson, Kaldor, Tobin.

_________________________________

Excerpt from the minutes of the Department of Economics meeting held on Tuesday, May 16, 1961

Copies of the Written Theory Examination were distributed. Professor Chamberlin had three comments to make on the examination:

There is not sufficient choice
The questions are overly specific
There were no questions on Economics 201 yet 35 of the students take this course as one half of their preparation for economic theory.

He concluded that the examination results must be capricious.

Professor Smithies defended the examinations by saying that the questions were varied from one examination to another and you had to look at all examinations in order to generalize, and the results of the examination showed a close correspondence with those of course grades.

There were some things suggested as a result of the discussion. The whole Department should be asked to submit questions. There were, a number of people who felt that there should be a number of specific questions. Professor Duesenberry suggested that the student should have a better idea of what the coverage would be. It was also decided that the grading of these examinations should be on the same basis as the General Oral Examinations rather than A, B, or C.

Professor Duesenberry suggested that there should be a theory syllabus including topics which are not covered in courses but which are nevertheless important and the topics should be divided into optional subjects and required subjects with the understanding that students would be examined on required subjects and on some optional fields.

Professor Dunlop contemplated no action tonight and that this should be referred to a committee.

Source: Duke University. David M. Rubenstein Rare Book & Manuscript Library. Economists’ Papers Archive. Edward H. Chamberlin Papers, Box 18, Folder “Theory, 1952-1962”.

Tags Chamberlin, Duesenberry, Dunlop, Smithies

Carnegie Mellon Northwestern Suggested Reading Syllabus Theory

Northwestern. Reading list for advanced price theory. Mortensen, 1966

Post author By Irwin Collier
Post date 2024-12-06

One of the 2010 Nobel prize laureates in economics, Dale T. Mortensen, was still a year short of his Ph.D. degree from Carnegie-Mellon University when he taught advanced price theory at Northwestern University. I recently found a copy of his course reading list in the Robert Clower papers at Duke’s Economists’ Papers archive.

_________________________

NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
Department of Economies

Economics D-10
Advanced Price Theory
Mr. Mortensen

Fall, 1966
MW 3-5 P. M.

TEXTS:

Cohen and Cyert: Theory of the Firm
Hicks: Value and Capital
Samuelson: Foundations of Economic Analysis
Henderson and Quandt: Microeconomic Theory

Introduction: The Role of Economic Theory

Lipsey and Steiner: Economics, Chaps. 2-4

*Cohen and Cyert: Chaps. 1-4

*Henderson and Quandt: Chap. 1 and Appendix

Samuelson: Chaps. 1-3 and Mathematical App. A

Allen: Mathematical Analysis for Economists, Chaps. 8, 10, 14

Yamane: Mathematics for Economists, Chaps. 3 and 5.

Theory of Consumer Behavior

Stigler: The Theory of Price, Chap. 5

*Cohen and Cyert: Chap 5

*Hicks: Chaps. 1-3 [and/or] Samuelson: Chap. 5 [and/or] Henderson and Quandt: Chap. 2, pp. 6-32

Houthakker: “The Present State of Consumption Theory,” Ec. (Oct., 1961)

Becker: “Irrational Behavior and Economic Theory,” JPE (Feb., 1962)

Theory of the Firm

Leftwich, The Price System and Resource Allocation, Chaps. 7-9

*Cohen and Cyert: Chaps. 6-8

*Hicks: Chaps. 6-7 [and/or] Henderson and Quandt: Chap. 3 [and/or] Samuelson: Chap. 4

Kurz and Manne: “Capital-Labor Substitution in Metal Machinery,” AER (September, 1963)

Dhrymes and Kurz: “Technology and Scale in Electrical Generation,” Ec. (Aug., 1964)

Walters: “Production and Cost Functions: An Econometric Survey,” Ec., (1963)

Market Structure

*Cohen and Cyert: Chaps. 10-13

Henderson and Quandt: Chap. 6

Joan Robinson: The Economics of Imperfect Competition

E. H. Chamberlain: The Theory of Monopolistic Competition

William Fellner: Competition Among the Few

Martin Shubik: Strategy and Market Structure

Smith: “Effect of Market Structure on Competitive Equilibrium,” QJE (1964)

Economic Efficiency

*Cohen and Cyert: Chap. 14 [and/or] Henderson and Quandt: Chap. 7

*Samuelson: Chap. 8

Bator: “The Simple Analytics of Welfare Maximization,” AER (March, 1957)

Lipsey and Lancaster: “The General Theory of Second Best,” RES (1956)

Special Topics

Cohen and Cyert: Chaps. 15-17

Henderson and Quandt: Chap. 8

Baumol: Business Behavior, Value and Growth, Chaps. 6-8

Simon: “Theories of Decision Making in Economics and Behavior Sciences,” AER (June, 1956)

Modigliani: “New Developments on the Oligopoly Front,” JPE (June, 1958)

Simon: “New Developments in the Theory of the Firm,” AER (May, 1962)

Source: Duke University, David M. Rubenstein Rare Book & Manuscript Library, Economists’ Papers Archive. Robert W. Clower papers, Box 4, Folder “Econ D-10, Exams, Outline”.

Image Source: Dale Mortensen’s senior year portrait from the 1961 Willamette University yearbook.

Tags Mortensen

Exam Questions Harvard

Harvard. Exams for principles of accounting. W. M. Cole, 1907-1908

Post author By Irwin Collier
Post date 2024-12-05

William Morse Cole, his life, career, and publications. The essence of Cole’s accounting course is to be found in his textbook:

Accounts. Their Construction and Interpretation for Business Men and Students of Affairs. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1908.

“The first issue of this book was brought out at a time when no general, non-technical, non-professional treatise on accounting had been published . The author had then been giving for eight years a course of instruction to seniors in Harvard College on the principles of accounting, and believed that many business men and students of affairs would be interested to see briefly but comprehensively how accounts are constructed and interpreted.”
Revised and enlarged edition, 1915.

__________________________

Earlier Accounting Exams

1901-02
1902-03
1903-04
1904-05
1905-06
1906-07

________________________

Course Announcement
1907-08

*[Economics] 18. Principles of Accounting. Mon., Wed., and (at the pleasure of the instructor) Fri., at 3.30. Mr. W. M. Cole

Course 18 is not open to students before their last year of undergraduate work. It may be taken as a half-course in the first half-year.
[“A star (*) prefixed to the number of a course indicates that the course cannot be taken without the previous consent of the instructor.” Introductory note.]

Source: Harvard University. Announcement of the Courses of Instruction offered by the Faculty of Arts and Sciences 1907-08, 2^nd ed., p. 50.

________________________

Course Enrollment
1907-08

Economics 18. Mr. W. M. Cole. — Principles of Accounting.

Total 83: 10 Graduates, 41 Seniors, 22 Juniors, 6 Sophomores, 4 Others.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College, 1907-1908, p. 67.

________________________

ECONOMICS 18
Mid-year Examination, 1907-08

Give suppositional details to illustrate the meaning of the following journal entries:

Adam Bede
	To Stationery
Accounts Payable
	To Bills Payable
Bills Receivable
	To Machinery
Surplus
	To Capital Stock
Loss and Gain
	To Bills Receivable

“Real Estate is a capital account, and Rent is a revenue account.” How far is this statement true? If it is correct, what does it mean? If it is incorrect or inadequate, compare these two accounts in respect to both the use and the ultimate treatment of them.
Illustrate roughly any book of original entry constructed in such form that the maximum number of entries may be made so as to require only the minimum number of postings. Show ten entries with an indication of three postings to cover them.
Fill out the following incomplete six-column statement, using no figures not given or implied.

	Dr.	Cr.	Resources.	Liabilities.	Loss.	Gain.
Cash			20,000
Office furniture	3,000				500
Expense	13,000				13,000
Interest	500					50
Bills Receivable			5,000
Bills Payable				2,000
Accounts Receivable	3,000
Accounts Payable		1,000
Merchandise	20,000					21,000
Capital Stock

Show the balance sheet for the new year, supposing no dividends to be declared.

Arrange the following items in what seems to you the best form of income sheet: commission paid, 12,000; depreciation, 1,500; dividends, 20,000: rent paid, 1000; surplus for the year, 12,500; wages paid, 110,000; miscellaneous expenses, 8,000; material consumed, 85,000; sales of merchandise manufacture, 250,000. It is assumed that no goods are bought.
Show the Loss and Gain account on the ledger for the corporation whose income-sheet figures are given above (problem 5).
A summary of the transactions of a corporation for one year is as follows: net income, now in the form of cash, 34,000; dividends declared but not yet paid, 25,000; bills payable converted into capital stock, 20,000; real estate bought for cash, 15,000; notes received in payment of outstanding ledger accounts, 7,000; all other transactions have exactly offset each other, so that except for those mentioned above the status is exactly as it was a year ago. The balance sheet at the beginning of the old year was as follows:

Real estate	70,000	Capital stock	197,000
Machinery	86,000	Bills payable	25,000
Bills receivable	24,000	Accounts payable	12,000
Accounts receivable	20,000	Surplus	21,000
Merchandise	31,000
Cash	24,000

Show the balance sheet for the beginning of the year.

Source: Harvard University Archives. Harvard University. Mid-year Examinations, 1852-1943. Box 8, Bound Volume: Examination Papers, Mid-Years 1907-08.

________________________

ECONOMICS 18
Year-end Examination, 1907-08

I.
Take all.

Distinguish between
1. Trial Balance and Balance Sheet,
2. Balance Sheet and Income Sheet,
3. Income Sheet and Profit & Loss account.
You are receiver for an insolvent. You find accounts reported on the books as below. The bookkeeping is known to register correctly the amount of receipts and expenditures, and to do this in the accounts apparently concerned. Which of the accounts indicated below would need investigation beneath the surface, and in the case of each what investigation should be conducted to determine the facts?
Loans on commercial paper; bonds owned; real estate; accounts payable; debts due from branches; capital stock; merchandise in branch stores; collateral held to secure loans made.
Compare the purpose and nature of reserve or reserve funds in the following kinds of enterprise: fire insurance; manufacturing; banking; life insurance.
Name and describe any other kinds of reserve that occur to you.
The following items appear, among others, in one report of a corporation. Interpret each, and show the relation of each to the others if such relation exists.

Assets		Liabilities
Sinking Funds bonds	250,000	Collateral Trust bonds	1,500,000
Discount on bonds	75,000	Sinking Fund	225,000
Bonds of subsidiary companies deposited as collateral	2,000,000	Replacement Fund	100,000
		Surplus	500,000

Net earnings		200,000
Other income		100,000
		300,000
Fixed charges	80,000
Discount on bonds	10,000	90,000	210,000
Dividends			150,000
Surplus			60,000

Which of the following facts would you recommend to show, and where and how would you show them, in the report of a corporation?

Receipts from operations,
Expense of operations (not including improvements),
Fuel consumed,
Improvements charged to maintenance,
Improvements charged to capital,
Reserve from profits, set aside for future improvements,
Selling costs,
Guaranteed bonds of subsidiary companies,
Interest on capital stock,
Advances to cover deficits of failing subsidiary companies.

II.
Take three.

Explain in municipal accounting (a) the common lack of correspondence between different sets of official figures for apparently the same expenditures, and (b) the danger in comparing costs between different cities.
Compare the adequacy of a bank balance sheet, as a means of judging solvency, with that of a balance sheet of a mercantile concern.
Why does a bank balance sheet distinguish between different kinds of cash?
What is the ultimate purpose of cost accounting?
With that purpose in view, defend or oppose the keeping of an account for idle machine time. If you defend it, show how the account should be kept.
Does a 5% bond bought at 125 pay 4%? Prove the truth of your answer by indicating the correct entries to interest account when interest is received. (Do not take time to compute definite figures, but illustrate by rough figures or symbols, indicating what they stand for.)
When cost figures in manufacturing are based in part on estimates for the distribution of burden, what method is available for revising and correcting such estimates? Illustrate by applying the method to a specific account or group of accounts.

Source: Harvard University Archives. Harvard University, Examination Papers, 1873-1915. Box 8, Bound vol. Examination Papers 1908-09 (HUC 7000.25), pp. 42-44.

Image Source: William Morse Cole faculty portrait in Radcliffe College, Book of the Class of 1913-14. Colorised at Economics in the Rear-view Mirror.

Tags ColeWM

Econometrics Harvard Suggested Reading Syllabus

Harvard. Course Outline and Reading List for Quantitative Research on the Behavior of the Firm. John R. Meyer, 1955-56

Post author By Irwin Collier
Post date 2024-12-04

Having a fresh Ph.D. in hand and starting his first year at the rank of assistant professor of economics at Harvard in the Fall term of 1955-56, John R. Meyer offered a graduate course in applied econometrics based largely on his Ph.D. thesis work. A course description, outline, and reading list for “Quantitative Research on the Behavior of the Firm” are transcribed below.

Information on Meyer’s brillian future career can be found at the following links:

Edward L. Glaeser’s tribute to John R. Meyer.

Obituary from the Boston Globe.

_______________________

Harvard Ph.D. in Economics, 1955

John Robert Meyer, A. B. (Univ. of Washington) 1960.

Special Field, Statistical Method and its Application. Thesis, “Business Motivation and the Investment Decision: an Econometric Study of Postwar Investment Patterns in the Manufacturing Sector.”

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College, 1965-1955, p. 285.

_______________________

Course Announcement

Economics 222. Quantitative Research on the Behavior of the Firm
Half-course (fall term). M., W., F., at 9. Assistant Professor J. R. Meyer.

Use of statistical inference and other quantitative methods (e.g. interviews and questionnaires) in determining business motivation and behavior as this relates to-dividend, investment, pricing, financial, and similar policy decisions of the firm. The relevance to public policy and the possibilities for further research.
Prerequisite: Economics 221a and 221b or 221c.

Source: Courses of Instruction Offered by the Faculty of Arts and Sciences, 1955-56. Official Register of Harvard University Vol. LII, No. 20 (August 31, 1955), p. 92

_______________________

Course Enrollment

[Economics] Quantitative Research on the Behavior of the Firm. Assistant Professor J. R. Meyer. Half course.

(Fall) 7 Graduates.

Source: Harvard University. Report of the President of Harvard College, 1955-56, p. 79.

_______________________

Course Outline

Fall Term, 1955-56

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
Department of Economics
Economics 222

Quantitative Studies
on the Behavior of the Business Firm

Sept. 26. Introduction.

Sept. 28, 30. A Survey of the Problems involved in Statistical Measurement of Cost and Production Functions.

Oct. 3. Interdependence, Multicollinearity, and a General Introduction to the Problems and Concepts of Multivariate Analysis.

Oct. 5. Principle Component Analysis.

Oct. 7. Principle Components as an Alternative to Confluence Analysis in Detecting Multicollinearity (using the Cobb Douglas Production Function as an Illustrative Case).

Oct. 14. Railroad Cost Analyses as an Illustrative Example of Statistical Measurement of Costs: I, The Historical Origins and Importance of the Problem.

Oct. 17. Railroad Cost Analyses as an Illustrative Example of Statistical Measurement of Costs: II, A Critique of Present Procedures in Railroad Cost Analysis.

Oct. 19. Railroad Cost Analyses as an Illustrative Example of Statistical Measurement of Costs: III, A Presentation and Comparison of Empirical Cost Functions for Railroading obtained by Alternative Procedures.

Oct. 21. Discussion.

Oct. 24. Plant and Equipment Investment: The Three Basic Theoretical Models.

Oct. 26, 28. Plant and Equipment Investment: The Existing Empirical Evidence.

Oct. 31. The Statistical Analysis of Cross-Section Data: I, the “Size Problem.”

Nov. 2, 4. The Statistical Analysis of Cross-Section Data: II, Identification and Questions of Causation in Regression and Correlation Analysis.

Nov. 7. Discussion.

Nov. 9. The Combined Use of Cross-Section and Time Series Estimates in an Investment Study: An Illustrative Example.

Nov. 14, 16. A Suggested Application of Factor or Principle Component Analysis to an Empirical Investigation of Investment Motivation.

Nov. 18. Discussion.

Nov. 21. The Accuracy of Survey Estimates of Investment Outlay.

Nov. 23. A Critique of Present Investment Surveys from the Standpoint of Statistical Sampling Technique.

Nov. 25. Discussion.

Nov. 28. The Financial Policy of Corporations: I, The Institutional Pattern of Conservation.

Nov. 30. The Financial Policy of Corporations: II, The Effect of Taxes.

Dec. 2. The Determination of Dividend Levels.

Dec. 5. Discriminator Analysis and a Possible Application in the Study of Dividend Behavior.

Dec. 7, 9 The Inter-relationships between Financial Policy and Investment Outlays.

Dec. 12. Discussion.

Dec. 14. The Holding of Business Inventories: The Present State of Empirical Knowledge.

Dec. 16. Some Possible Relationships between Liquidity, Trade Credit, and Inventory Levels.

Dec. 19. Horizontal Integration in Manufacturing and the Holding of Wholesale and Retail Inventories.

Dec. 22. Summary and Discussion.

______________________

Reading List
Economics 222
Fall, 1955

I. Cost and Production Functions

A. Required

G.H. Borts, “Production Relations in the Railway Industry,” Econometrica, January 1952, pp. 71-79.

J. Dean, “Department Store Cost Functions,” Studies in Mathematical Economics and Econometrics, U. of Chicago Press, 1942, pp. 222-254.

P.H. Douglas, “Are There laws of Production?,” American Economics Review, March 1948, pp. 1-41.

Interstate Commerce Commission Bureau of Accts., Cost Finding and Valuation, Explanation of Rail Cost Finding Procedures and Principles Relating to the Use of Costs, Washington, D.C., November 1954, pp. 27-87.

H. Mendershausen, “On the Significance of Professor Douglas’ Production Function,” Econometrica, April 1938, pp. 143-153.

Caheb Smith, “The Cost-Output Relation for the U.S, Steel Corporation,” Review of Economics and Statistics, November 1942, pp. 166-176.

T.O, Yntema, An Analysis of Steel Prices, Volume and Costs Controlling Limitations on Price Reductions, U.S. Steel TNEC Papers, (Pamphlet No. 6) pp. 231-302.

B. Recommended

J.M. Clark, Studies in the Economics of Overhead Costs, U. of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1923, pp. 258-317.

Committee on Price Determination for the Conference on Price Research, Cost Behavior and Price Policy, NBER, New York, 1943, pp. 80-115, 291-301, 219-263, 321-329.

J. Dean, Statistical Cost Functions of a Hosiery Mill, Studies in Business Administration, U. of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1941.

J. Dean, Statistical Determination of Costs with Special Reference to Marginal Costs, U. of Chicago Business Studies, Vol. VII, #1.

J. Dean, The Relation of Cost to Output for a Leather Belt Shop, NBER Tech Paper 2, New York, 1941.

D. Durand, “Some Thoughts on Marginal Productivity, with Special Reference to Professor Douglas’ Analysis,” Journal of Political Economy, December 1937, pp. 740-758.

F.K. Edwards, “Application of Market Pricing Factors in the Division of Traffic According to Principles of Economy und Fitness,” American Economic Review, May 1955, pp. 621-632.

M. Ezekiel and K.H, Wylie, “Cost Functions for the Steel Industry,” Journal of the American Statistical Association, March 1941, pp. 91-108.

J. Mosak, “Some Theoretical Implications of the Statistical Analysis of Demand and Cost Functions for Steel,” Journal of the American Statistical Association, March 1941.

W.H. Nicholls, Labor Productivity Functions in Meat Packing, U. of Chicago Pres, Chicago 1948.

H. Starkle, “The Measurement of Statistical Cost Functions: An Appraisal of Some Recent Contributions,” American Economic Review, June 1942.

II. Plant and Equipment Investment

A. Required

P.N.S. Andrews and J.E. Meade, “Summary of Replies to Questions on the Effects of Interest Rates,” Oxford Economic Papers, 1938, pp. 25-28.

P.N.S. Andrews, “A Further Inquiry into the Effects of Rates of Interest,” Oxford Economic Papers, No. 3, February 1940, p. 3 ff.

H. Chenery, “Overcapacity and the Acceleration Principle,” Econometrica, January 1952, pp. 1-28.

J.M. Clark, “Business Acceleration and the Law of Demand; A Technical Factor In Economic Cycles,” Journal of Political Economy, March 1917, pр. 217-235. — also in Readings in Business Cycle Theory.

I. Friend and J. Bronfenbrenner, “Business Investment Programs and Their Realization,” Survey of Current Business, December 1950, pр. 11-22.

W. Heller, “The Anatomy of Investment Decisions,” Harvard Business Review, March 1951.

L. Klein, “Studies in Investment Behavior,” Conference on Business Cycles, NBER, New York 1951, pp. 23-303.

S. Kuznets, “Relation Between Capital Goods and Finished Products in the Business Cycle,” Economic Essays in Honour of Wesley Clair Mitchell, New York, 1935, pp. 248-267.

R. Mack, The Flow of Business Funds and Consumer Purchasing Power, New York 1941, Chapter VIII, pp., 237-305.

J. Meyer and E. Kuh, “The Accelerator and Related Theories of Investment,” Review of Economics and Statistics, August 1955.

J. Tinbergen, “Statistical Evidence on the Acceleration Principle,” Economica, 1938; and Statistical Testing of Business Cycle Theories, League of Nations, Geneva 1938, Vol. I, Chaps. 3 and 5, and Vol. II, Chap. 2.

B. Recommended

J.S. Bain, “The Relation of Economic Life of Equipment to Reinvestment Cycles,” Review of Economics and Statistics, May 1939.

D.H. Brill, “Financing of Capital Formation,” Paper presented at NBER Conference on Research in Income and Wealth of October, 1953.

J. Ebersole, “The Influence of Interest Rates Upon Entrepreneurial Decisions in Business — A Case Study,” Harvard Business Review, Autumn, 1938.

J. Einarsen, Reinvestment Cycles und Their Manifestation in the Norwegian Shipping Industry, Oslo, 1938.

M. Ezekiel, “Statistical Determination of Savings, Consumption and Investment,” American Economic Review, March 1942, pp. 22-50 and June 1942, pp. 272-308.

G.H. Fisher, “A Survey of the Theory of Induced Investment, 1900-1940,” Southern Economic Journal, April 1952, pp. 474-494.

M. Gort, “The Planning of Investment: A Study of Capital Budgeting in the Electric Power Industry,” Journal of Business of the University of Chicago, 1951.

H.D, Henderson, “The Significance of the Rate of Interest,” Oxford Economic Papers, October 1938, pp. 1-13.

Factors Affecting Volume and Stability of Private Investment, Materials on the Investment Problem Assembled by the Staff of the Subcommittee on Investment, Joint Committee on the Economic Report, Washington, 1949.

L. Klein, Economic Fluctuations in the United States, 1921-1941, New York, 1950.

L. Klein, “Pitfalls in the Statistical Determination of the Investment Schedule,” Econometrica, July-October 1943, pp. 246-258 and “The Statistical Determination of the Investment Schedule; A Reply,” Econometrica, January 1944, pp. 91,92.

A.D. Knox, “The Acceleration Principle in the Theory of Investment; A Survey,” Economica, August 1952, pp. 269-297.

W. Leontief, “A Comment on Klein’s Studies in Investment Behavior,” Conference on Business Cycles, 1951, pр. 310-313.

T.C. Liu and C.G. Chang, “U.S, Consumption and Investment Propensities,” American Economic Review, September 1950, pp. 565-582.

C.D. Long, Building Cycles and the Theory of Investment, Princeton, 1940.

A.S. Manne, “Some Notes on the Acceleration Principle,” Review of Economics and Statistics, 1945.

J. Meyer and E. Kuh, “On the Interpretation of Regression and Correlation Coefficients When the Data Are Ratios,” Econometrica, October, 1955.

Roos, “The Demand for Investment Goods,” American Economic Review Supplement, May 1948, pp. 311-320.

G. Terbourgh, A Dynamic Equipment Policy, New York, 1949.

Tinbergen, “Critical Remarks on Some Business Cycle Theories,” Econometrica,1942, p. 139.

III. Corporation Finance, Dividends, and Savings Policies

A. Required

L. Bridge, “The Financing of Investment by New Firms,” Conference on Research in Business Finance, New York 1952, pp. 65-74.

N.S. Buchanan, “Theory and Practice in Dividend Distribution,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, November 1938.

J.K. Butters and J. Lintner, Effect of Federal Taxes on Growing Enterprises, Boston, 1945, pp. 1-134.

G.H. Evans, “Comment on Historical Series on Sources and Uses,” Conference on Research in Business Finance, New York 1952, pp. 28-34.

N.H. Jacoby and R.J. Saulnier, Term Lending to Business, New York, NBER, 1942, pp. 1-8.

A.R. Koch, The Financing of Large Corporations, 1920-1939, NBER, New York, 1943, pp. 1-8, 91-109.

J. Lintner, “The Determinants of Corporate Savings,” Savings in the Modern Economy (A Symposium), U. of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, 1953, pp. 230-255.

F.A. Lutz, Corporate Cash Balances, 1914-43, NBER, New York, 1945, pp. 1-8, 17-29.

C.L. Merwin, Financing Small Corporations in Five Manufacturing Industries, 1926-1936, NBER, New York, 1942, pp. 1-6, 57-89.

D.T. Smith, Effects of Taxation; Corporate Financial Policy, Boston, 1952, pp. 1-140.

B. Recommended

E.C. Brown, Effects of Taxation: Depreciation Adjustments for Price Changes, Boston, 1952, pp. 1-18.

A. Cowles and Associates, Common Stock Indexes, Bloomington, 1939, pp. 43-44.

O.J. Curry, Utilization of Coporate Profits in Prosperity and Depression, Ann Arbor, U. of Michigan Business Studies, 1941

C.O. Hardy and Jacob Viner, Report on the Availability of Bank Credit in the Seventh Federal Reserve District, Washington, Government Printing Office, 1935.

L.H. Kimmel, The Availability of Bank Credit, 1933-1938, New York, NICB, 1939.

A.R. Koch and C.H. Schmidt, “Financial Position of Manufacturing and Trade in Relation to Size and Profitability, 1946,” Federal Reserve Bulletin, September, 1947, pp. 1091-1102.

L.F. McHugh, “Financing Small Business in the Postwar Period,” Survey of Current Business, November 1951, pp. 17-24.

L.F. McHugh and L.G. Rosenberg, “Financial Experience of Large and und Medium Size Manufacturing Firms, 1927-51,” Survey of Current Business, November 1952, pp. 7-13.

D.C. Miller, “Corporate Taxation and Methods of Corporate Financing,” American Economic Review, December, 1952, pp. 839-854.

J.L. Nicholson, “The Fallacy of Easy Money for the Small Business,” Harvard Business Review, Autumn, 1938, pp. 31-34.

R.S. Sayres, “Business Men and the Terms of Borrowing,” Oxford Economic Papers, February, 1940, pp. 21-31.

Securities and Exchange Commission, Sales Record of Unseasoned Registered Securities, 1933-39, Washington, The Commission, June 1941, p. 10.

Securities and Exchange Commission, Cost of Flotation of Registered Securities, 1938-39, Washington, The Commission, 1941.

IV. Inventory Investment

A. Required

M. Abramovitz, Inventories and Business Cycles, NBER, New York, 1950.

R.P. Mack, “The Process of Capital Formation in Inventories and the Vertical Propagation of Business Cycles,” Review of Economics and Statistics, August, 1953.

T.M. Whitin, The Theory of Inventory Management, Princeton, 1953, pp. 3-161.

B. Recommended

M. Abramovitz, “Influence of Inventory Investment on Business Cycles,” Conference on Business Cycles, NBER, New York, 1951, pp. 319-324.

M. Abramovitz, The Role of Inventories in Business Cycles, NBER, Occasional Paper No. 26, New York, 1948.

R.H. Blodgett, Cyclical Fluctuations in Commodity Stocks, U. of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia, 1935.

J. Tinbergen, “An Accelerator Principle for Commodity Stockholding and a Short Cycle Resulting from It,” Studies in Mathematical Economics and Econometrics, U. of Chicago Press, 1942, pp. 255-267.

Source: Harvard University. Syllabi, course outlines and reading lists in Economics, 1895-2003, Box 6, Folder “Economics, 1955-1956 (2 of 2)”.

Image Source: Portrait John R. Meyer, 1958 Fellow of the John Simon Guggenheim Memorial Foundation.

Tags Glaeser, MeyerJ

Exam Questions Industrial Organization Princeton

Princeton. General PhD Exams in Industrial Organisation, 1975-1979

Post author By Irwin Collier
Post date 2024-12-03

In William Baumol’s papers in Duke University’s Economists’ Papers Archive I came upon a cache of six Ph.D. exams for the field of industrial organization at Princeton from the late 1970s. This is definitely a collection worth the effort of transcribing and presenting in a single post.

_______________________________

PRINCETON UNIVERSITY
Department of Economics

General Examination
for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy
Industrial Organization

Time: 3 Hours

October 1975

Start a new paper or book for each question.

You are required to answer the question in Part A and then must choose two questions from Part B (except that you cannot choose both questions 1 and 2 in Part B). The questions could easily be the subjects of long books. Instead, please try to summarize the arguments as concisely and yet as thoroughly as time allows.

PART A. One hour

The Justice Department, in relation to its investigation of merger activity, has hired you as a special consultant to determine the nature and extent of economies of scale in industry X. The industry is composed of 60 firms of various sizes. Write a summary of your report which includes:

a discussion of the sources of economies (and diseconomies) of scale generally;
a discussion of the various methods of measuring scale economies, including their strengths and weaknesses;
which method you would choose, and why.

PART B. Two hours

Answer two of the following (except that if you choose either question 1 or 2, you must choose your other question from 3 or 4; you cannot choose both 1 and 2).

The Federal Trade Commission has recently filed an antitrust suit against the four major American breakfast cereal manufacturers. A major part of the case argues that the high advertising rates in this industry are responsible for the high concentration in this industry and for the high profits in this industry. This has been viewed as a landmark case.
1. Sketch briefly the economic and legal arguments that each side will make.
2. Indicate how you think the courts will rule on this and what precedents they will use.
The testing of the market structure-profitability hypothesis has generated a great deal of controversy in the journal literature. Write an essay describing that controversy and sorting out the arguments and the points that are at contention.
Schumpeter has argued that high concentration in industries is beneficial because it makes more rapid the page of technological progress in those industries. This would argue for a lax antitrust policy. On the other hand, others have argued that innovation is best encouraged by direct government subsidy (or production) and that a strict antitrust policy is necessary to ensure static efficiencies.
Write an essay discussing the arguments that each side would offer, and indicate which set of arguments you find more convincing and why.
Economists are nearly unanimous in their contention that the railroad Industry has been strangled by federal regulation. Yet there appears to be no end in sight.
1. What are the characteristics of rail transportation that appear inevitably both to draw government into the arena and yet commit it to failure?
2. Do you think public policy should lead in the direction of nationalization, of more enlightened regulation, or of less government control? Why?

_______________________________

PRINCETON UNIVERSITY
Department of Economics

General Examination
for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy
Industrial Organization

Time: 3 Hours

May 1976

Do not write your name on any of your examination papers, but identify them with a Code Number which you will have obtained from Mrs. Coleman.

Start a new paper or book for each question so that the examinations can be assembled by question rather than by candidate. Be sure that your Code Number appears on each sheet or book.

Part A. (One hour) Answer all eight (8) questions. Comment on the validity of each statement.

U. S. v. American Tobacco (1946) represented a new and significant direction for antitrust policy that has had long-lasting effects.
Since advertising constitutes an important barrier to entry, a tax on advertising would improve the competitive functioning of markets.
The Robinson-Patman Act constitutes an important antitrust safeguard to competitive markets.
Hypotheses concerning invention and innovation can be satisfactorily tested by using data on research and development expenses.
Competition is more vigorous if there are four firms of equal size than if there are four firms of unequal size.
Reciprocity always indicates the exercise of monopoly power.
Queues of customers outside doctors’ offices indicate a lack of competition.
Capital markets tend to require a lower rate of interest from larger firms. This is only a pecuniary economy and can not be used as evidence against anti-trust efforts to break up large firms.

Part B. (Two hours) Answer three (3) of the following questions.

A judge asks for your expert opinion with regard to a case in which the three major manufacturers of competing lines of washing machines are accused of engaging in violations of anti-trust law. Consider the following list of pricing practices. On pure economic grounds, which of them support the government’s case? What would be the legal significance of each?
1. The manufacturers list identical prices for each type of machine. When price changes are made, in most cases one particular firm initiates the change and the other two follow within a week.
2. Large purchasers are given quantity discounts.
3. In a recessionary period, the major manufacturers temporarily reduce their prices 25% below their historical average cost. During this time several minor firms go bankrupt.
4. In a recessionary period, the major manufacturers maintain their prices at pre-recessionary levels and experience a sharp decline in sales.
5. The manufacturers have all taken advantage of resale price maintenance, where state law has permitted it.
How do you think the domestic airlines would change their fare structures and service quality if government regulation in these areas was eliminated? Support your answer.
“Oligopoly theory is in such poor shape that it is unlikely ever to serve as a reliable guide to policy.” Comment.
“A concentration ratio is a deceptively simple number. In fact, once one begins looking closer, it becomes nearly impossible to determine satisfactorily the level of concentration in an industry. Consequently, antitrust policy simply does not have a good foundation.” Comment.
“There is no satisfactory solution to the problem of regulating a natural monopoly.” Discuss.

_______________________________

PRINCETON UNIVERSITY
Department of Economics

General Examination
for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy
Industrial Organization

Time: 3 Hours

October 1976

Do not write your name on any of your examination papers, but identify them a Code Number which you have obtained from Mrs. Coleman.

Start a new paper or book for each question so that the examination can be assembled by question rather than by candidate. Be sure that your Code Number appears on each sheet or book.

Answer Parts I, II and III.

Part I: Write for roughly 15 minutes each on THREE of the following five questions:

Suppose that you had access to data concerning a number of firms which had been subject to take-over attempts via tender offers, some successful and some unsuccessful. The data includes accounting profits, stock market prices, and dividends paid over a number of years both prior to and subsequent to the take-over attempt. How would you use this data to reach conclusions concerning the efficiency of the market for corporate control and the extent of X-inefficiency in the economy?
Comment on the validity of the following remark:
“Wasteful self-cancelling advertising can not exist unless consumers act irrationally, because rational consumers will always prefer to buy a less intensively advertised good at a lower price.”
Suppose that you believe advertising expenditures should be treated as capital investments, in the same manner as investments in buildings and equipment, rather than as current expenses. Show precisely how this would affect your measure of a firm’s equity and its rate of return. How would such a change in accounting affect your interpretation of regression equations relating accounting profits to advertising/sales ratios?
Fair trade laws should be re-enacted because they provide an irreplaceable means by which manufacturers can ensure that their goods receive sufficient promotion at the retail level. Comment.
“It is an absurdity to believe that reciprocal dealing by oligopoly firms is anything more than a device for strengthening already rigid price structures.”
Comment on the validity of this statement.

Part II: Write for roughly 45 minutes on the following question:

Some economists hold that the amount of concentration in an industry, measured by, say, the Herfindahl index, bears a very tenuous relation with the degree of monopoly power, in the sense of ability to control market price and quantity. Furthermore, they claim, even if there were such a relationship it would not necessarily imply that a policy of industrial deconcentration is advisable. What arguments can be used to support this point of view? What weaknesses do they have?

Part III: Answer questions 7 and EITHER question 8 OR question 9. You should spend no more than a half hour on question 7.

There is a durable good, say, a milling machine, which company X alone manufactures at constant costs. This milling wears out in precisely ten years, but is as good as new until it wears out. It cannot be repaired or in any other way made to last more than ten years and its life does not depend on rate of use. Company X contemplates either (a) selling machines outright, in which case there will be a competitive second hand market or (b) retaining ownership in the machines and renting them out.

(i) Show how to determine the ultimate optimum long-run position for company X in both cases (i.e., neglect the initial stage of building up its market) and show that its optimum output is the same in the two cases. Assume perfect capital markets, perfect foresight on its part and its customers’ part, etc.

(ii) Change the preceding case by supposing that the life of milling machines can be prolonged by spending money repairing them, and assume that the repair services can be obtained competitively. Prove that the company’s optimum output would now be different in cases (a) and (b) and indicate in which case, and why, the net rental value would be lower.

The Cable Report to the President, prepared by the Office of Telecommunication Policy, supports a recommendation requiring separation of ownership (or control) between cable television installations and television program sources with the following language: (By “cable system operator,” the OTP means the owner of a local cable facility. That owner is assumed to sell access to the systems to “channel users” who in turn are the owners and/or originators of programs. The “cable system operator” may also charge local viewers for access to the system.)

“If the cable system operator were to have such an interest in a channel user he would have an economic incentive to favor the user in which he had a financial interest. Simply requiring the system operator to treat all channel users on a non-discriminatory basis would not be adequate to prevent anti-competitive behavior. The cable operator could, for example, charge artificially high, but still ‘non-discriminatory’ rates to users of his channels and use the excess profits … to subsidize his programming affiliate. This cross-subsidization would place the other channel users at a severe competitive disadvantage. Moreover, requiring ‘arms length’ transactions between companies in the same corporate structure and prohibiting cross-subsidization present severe enforcement problems. Such problems typically lead federal or state enforcement agencies to impose rate-of-return, public utility-type regulation to control cross-subsidization and other anti-competitive abuses.”

Elsewhere in its report, the OTP recommends that “rate-of-return regulation of the rates which cable operators charge cable users should not be imposed by any level of government unless there is a clearly defined need for it,” and notes that “the need for such regulation may never arise, since the power of the operator to charge excessive rates for channel leasing would be held in check by the presence of competition from broadcast stations, telephone companies and new technologies.”

Evaluate the economics and the consistency of this pair of recommendations.

Following a decision several years ago to relocate the Newark airport terminal, American Motor Inns, Inc., acquired property facing the new location and proceeded to plan the construction of a Holiday Inn. American Motor Inns at the time was the largest franchisee of Holiday Inns, operating large number of these “motels” throughout the country. After howls of protest from the operator of the existing Holiday Inn at the old Newark airport (and from the operators of other nearby Holiday Inns) Holiday refused American the necessary added franchise. American responded by announcing its intention to build and operate the motel under a Ramada franchise. Holiday then threatened litigation: their existing contracts with American provided that no owner of a Holiday Inn franchise could operate an inn or similar facility under a competing franchise. American promptly sued Holiday for treble damages alleging violation of federal antitrust statutes.

(1) Assess the likely outcome of this litigation on the basis of your knowledge of the law and similar cases.

(2) Indicate and explain briefly your impression of the legality of the exclusive Holiday Inn franchise agreement.

(3) Prior to a final decision in this case, Holiday bought American thereby providing an automatic settlement. Would you argue that such an acquisition could itself be held in violation of the antitrust laws? Why?

(4) From the standpoint of resource allocation, evaluate the effects of:

(a) The Holiday Inn exclusive franchise;
(b) Holiday’s acquisition of American.

In your answers to (a) and (b), make whatever assumptions you feel to be necessary and appropriate regarding the structure or other aspects of this industry.

_______________________________

PRINCETON UNIVERSITY
Department of Economics

General Examination
for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy
Industrial Organization

Time: 3 Hours

May 1977

Do not write your name on any of your examination papers, but identify them with a Code Number which you have obtained from Mrs. Coleman.

Start a new paper or book for each question so that the examination can be assembled by question rather than by candidate. Be sure that your Code Number appears on each sheet or book.

Answer Parts I, II, and III according to the instructions given in each

PART I. (45 minutes)

Write for not more than five minutes on 6 of the following, indicating that you are familiar with the concept or expression and with its relevance to industrial organization:
1. Satisficing
2. Regulatory lag
3. Limit pricing
4. Per se rule
5. Gibrat’s law
6. Standard Industrial Classification
7. Survivorship Method
8. Cournot Equilibrium

PART II. Answer EITHER Question 2 OR Question 3
(45 minutes)

Every recent proposal for antitrust reform has advocated either repeal or very substantial revision of the Robinson Patman Act. In contrast there are few economists who would argue that price discrimination, except under very special circumstances, is desirable.
Are these two positions — one regarding the desirability of anti-price discrimination law, and the other the desirability of price discrimination itself — inconsistent? Explain carefully, making certain that you both define price discrimination and identify the major problems associated with Robinson Patman or alternative instruments of control.
“Perhaps the major area for concern in the economics of American industry today is oligopoly, and oligopoly is precisely that form of organization with which the American antitrust laws cannot satisfactorily cope. Here, as so often elsewhere in that country, the law is written as though by the major corporations themselves.” Do you agree or disagree? Why?

PART III. Answer TWO of the following THREE Questions. (45 minutes each)

“Advertising is not per se a market imperfection; it arises as a corrective response to other market imperfections, such as the public goods nature of information and the peculiarities of the television market. Banning advertising or regulating it significantly is thus inadvisable.”
Write a broad, coherent essay on the economics of advertising in response to this statement.
In recent Congressional hearings, most airlines have opposed the Civil Aeronautics Board recommendations that the airline industry be substantially deregulated. They have used the following arguments:
1. We currently have the world’s “finest air transportation system” and “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.”
2. “Airlines are already highly competitive.”
3. “Deregulation will increase the number of competitors on major routes, reducing load factors and giving rise to wasteful duplication of resources.”
4. Advocates of deregulation fail to consider network effects. For example, entrants may institute non-stop service from Buffalo to Los Angeles, thereby making unprofitable flights from Buffalo to Chicago, which are more efficient.
5. Airlines cannot fine-tune capacity to meet demand, since there are a very small number of flights per day on most routes. It is thus unrealistic to expect large improvements in load factors to occur.
6. Deregulation will hurt airlines’ financing prospects, according to experts in the financial industry.
7. Airports’ financing of passenger terminals, through the issue of airport revenue bonds, will be undermined by deregulation, because they will no longer be able to get long-term commitments from airlines to use the terminals.

Do these arguments provide valid reasons for opposing deregulation? If not, how would you rebut them?

Vertical integration, under different circumstances, may:
1. Permit discriminatory pricing that would not be possible without integration.
2. Be a competitive response to market imperfection.
3. Be a device for the avoidance of regulation in regulated industries.
4. Create barriers to entry unrelated to any efficiency gain.

Discuss the validity of each of these propositions using either real or hypothetical cases to illustrate your answer.

_______________________________

PRINCETON UNIVERSITY
Department of Economics

General Examination
for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy
Industrial Organization

Time: 3 hours

May 1978

Do not write your name on any of your examination papers, but identify them with a Code Number which you have obtained from Mrs. Coleman.

Start a new paper or book for each question so that the examinations can be assembled by question rather than by candidate. Be sure that your Code Number appears on each sheet or book.

Answer either IA or IB, but not both. (20%)

IA. What does the survivor technique purport to show about economies of scale, and what are some of its pitfalls? Relate these to pitfalls in estimating a production cost function from a cross-section of firms of different sizes. Which of these pitfalls can lead to mistaken policy conclusions?

IB. What are some of the factors that make firm and plant economies of scale differ? Explicitly model one of them. Do these factors suggest using firm or plant degree of scale economies as a guide for policy towards the firm?

Answer any one of IIA, IIB, or IIC. (20%)

IIA. Explicitly show that a duopoly has the elements of a “Prisoners’ Dilemma” for the two firms. What are some aspects of the industry that would make implicit collusion between the two firms difficult?

IIB. Explain several factors that would lead to the larger firms in an industry being more fully vertically integrated than the smaller firms. Do all of these factors suggest that such integration is socially counterproductive?

IIC. Carefully explain what empirical evidence would support the proposition that market power is socially desirable in that it promotes technological progress.

All must answer this question. (35%)

III. Write and explain a system of simultaneous industry structural relations among the profit level, concentration, minimum efficient scale, advertising intensity, and some exogenous variables. From this perspective, what could be inferred from cross-sectional positive correlations between profit rates, concentration, and advertising intensity? What are some invalid inferences that are sometimes drawn from such findings?

Answer either IVA or IVB, but not both. (25%)

IVA. Consider a new electric utility company which is planning its production facilities. It can choose to install divisible but nonfungible generators dollars of two types. Type i requires a_i dollars in fuel cost per KWH generated (up to capacity) and incurs b_i dollars in capital costs per KWH of capacity per 24 hour period. The company can operate equipment of either or both types.
Let a₁ < a₂, b₁> b₂, b₁ + a₁ > b₂ + a₂ and b₁ + 2a₁ < b₂ + 2a₂.
Each 24 hour period is divided into a 12 hour day subperiod and a 12 hour night subperiod. Demand is homogeneous during each subperiod, but day demand far exceeds night demand.
What is the least cost per 24 hour period of generating x KWH each day and y KWH each night, with x > y? If day and night prices were equated to long run marginal costs, would revenues cover total costs? Would the peak period customers pay all capacity costs?
Suppose the plant is built according to plan, new capacity requires one year construction time, and demands in both subperiods exogenously and unexpectedly grow a bit. Describe the new efficient prices. What do they signal about a desirable investment plan?

IVB. Contrast price regulation that constrains the anticipated rate of return on capital with that which constrains the rate of return calculated on the basis of last period’s output, last period’s cost, but current price. In both cases, assume that the regulated firm will do all it can to maximize profit. Can the regulator equate the allowed rate of return on capital to the market rate of return?

_______________________________

PRINCETON UNIVERSITY
Department of Economics

General Examination
for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy
Industrial Organization

Time: 3 hours

May 1979

Do not write your name on any of your examination papers, but identify them with a Code Number which you have obtained from Mrs. Coleman.

Start a new paper or book for each question so that the examinations can be assembled by question rather than by candidate. Be sure that your Code Number appears on each sheet or book.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Because this is a relatively long test, be sure to allocate your time in accord with the numbers in parentheses below. These numbers will serve as the relative weights aggregating the grades of the different questions. Pithy answers to all questions are suggested.

All must answer this question. Do not spend more than 20 minutes on it. (20 minutes)

I. Consider a monopoly TV station that changed from collecting all its revenues from advertisers to a system by which it collected all its revenues from viewers by means of prices attached to individual programs. Characterize the changes you would expect in the station’s choices of aired programs. Explain how the station would have incentives to implement a price system which would, coincidentally, and alleged externalities aside, give the station incentives to select socially desirable programs.

Answer either IIA or IIB, but not both. (40 minutes)

IIA. Describe some ways in which a firm’s motives for vertical integration would depend on the structure of its own industry and on the structure of the industry into which it might integrate. Briefly, by reference to some polar cases, indicate how your assessment of the social desirability of such integration would be affected by knowledge of those industry structures.

IIB. It is now considered illegal for the manufacturer of a product in interstate commerce to require a franchisee to sell at retail at a specific price. Explain why a manufacturer might have incentives to control the prices at which its franchisees will sell its products, and evaluate the consequences of prohibiting such controls.

Answer either IIIA or IIIB, but not both. (50 minutes)

IIIA. It is a common practice of petroleum retailers in establishing new outlets (gas stations) to buy nearby potentially (or actually) competing sites and subsequently to re-sell those sites with covenants precluding their use for the retailing of petroleum products. Would society necessarily benefit if this practice were prohibited?

IIIB. Describe several different modes of entry deterrence and briefly trace their effects on industry welfare performance. Would these modes of entry deterrence be effective without structural entry barriers? Are there observable clues that such deterrence is taking place?

Answer either IVA or IVB, but not both. (70 minutes)

IVA. [Time-varying rates]

(i) What are the common economic features of the electric power and telecommunications industries that argue for different prices at different times of day?

(ii) Do time-invariant prices necessarily cause cross-subsidization in industries in which the characteristics you identified above are important? How does the answer depend on the presence of product-specific scale economies?

(iii) What factors would enlarge the welfare loss from such time-invariant rates?

(iv) Why might it be appropriate to see peak rates suddenly rise and then later fall after an unanticipated permanent expansion of demand for service during peak times? Might the same considerations pertain to off-peak times?

(v) Why might a regulated firm resist setting time-varying rates?

IVB. [Natural monopoly with no barriers to entry]

(i) Carefully describe a scenario in which an industry is a natural monopoly with no barriers to entry.

(ii) On the basis of a reasonable theory of firm behavior, characterize the principal features of the industry equilibrium.

(iii) In particular, if arbitrage were very costly to consumers, why or why not would you expect to see price discrimination?

(iv) Why or why not would you expect to see cross-subsidization?

(v) If subsidies to the industry were ruled out, and if regulation were costless, what, if any, aspects of industry welfare performance could be improved by regulation?

Source: Duke University. David M. Rubenstein Rare Book & Manuscript Library. Economists’ Papers Archive. William J. Baumol Papers, Box 20, Folder “Indust[rial] Org[anization]”.

Image Source: Princeton seal from Wikimedia Commons.

Exam Questions Math Princeton

Princeton. Mathematics for Economics Grad Students Exam. 1960

Post author By Irwin Collier
Post date 2024-11-30

Before one gets too smug about the modest level of mathematical sophistication revealed in the following examination that was taken in 1960 by ten Princeton economics graduate students and only passed by half of them, it is important to keep in mind that the purpose of the examination appears only to have been to permit economics students to substitute mathematics for a foreign language as a formal requirement to be awarded a Ph.D. degree. As far as I am aware, by 1960 the exams to test a reading knowledge of a foreign language (at least those administered by an economics department itself) were rather low hurdles hardly capable of tripping any diligent student and generally a waste of time for all but the area specialists and economic historians. Still five of the ten economics grad students at Princeton failed the mathematics exam transcribed below!

__________________________

On Harold W. Kuhn

Princeton University obituary for Harold W. Kuhn (1925-2014).

Autobiographical sketch in WIKIMIZATION.

__________________________

MEMORANDUM

To: Members of the Economics Department
From: H. W. Kuhn
Re: Mathematics Examination for graduate students.

Attached is a copy of the first Mathematics Examination for graduate students in Economics which, as you know, can substitute for one language examination. This memorandum is to describe what the examination was intended to test, report on the performance of the students who took it, and invite comments from you concerning the design of future examinations. (Will Baumol is writing the next one now.)

By agreement of those charged with the conduct of the examination (Baumol, Coale, Kuhn, Okun, and Quandt), it deals only with two subjects, calculus and matrix algebra. The level of the calculus that is assumed is thoroughly elementary and could be acquired in a one-year course. However, it should be augmented by those calculus tools peculiar to economics such as Lagrange multipliers, partial derivatives, and optimization conditions. Study of R. G. D. Allen’s “Mathematical Analysis for Economists” is recommended. The level of matrix algebra is harder to specify. Almost any standard course is too much. Two indications of the level of proficiency demanded are the matrix algebra sections of “Finite Mathematics” by Kemeny, Snell, and Thompson or the Appendix to Dorfman, Samuelson, and Solow. Another book appropriate for study would be “Mathematical Economics” by R. G. D. Allen

The following is an explanation of the first test, question by question, with remarks on the performance of the ten students who took it.

Straightforward translation of economic terms from words to formulas and back. Four parts out of five was par for the course.
The definition of matrix multiplication and of a production matrix. All answers were correct.
A test of understanding of the first and second order conditions for a maximum. Very poor performance; much confusion between necessary and sufficient conditions.
A test of their acquaintance with an indispensable mathematical tool, the Lagrange multiplier. The first pages of “Value and Capital” will give an example. Good performance.
This was intended to draw out the linear case in which solvability is stated in matrix terms. Good performance.
The proper method was by means of partial differentiation. From the variety of answers (mostly weak), this should have been clued.
This model is reproduced almost verbatim from “Finite Mathematics.” The question is intended to test the ability to translate matrix relations into meaningful economic conditions. The average was about half right.

The test was graded on a strict percentage basis, with 70% a passing grade. Five passed and five failed. This may be somewhat hard on those who failed but reflects my own belief that requirements are better too hard than so easy as to be meaningless.

COMMENTS INVITED

__________________________

PRINCETON UNIVERSITY

Department of Economics
Mathematics Examination

October 26, 1960

Please spend no more than two hours on this examination. No books or papers may be consulted. Please attempt all of the questions.

Let y = f(z) be a production function, where y denotes the quantity of output for a quantity of input z. Let c = g(y) be the associated cost function. Let P = F(y) define the demand schedule.

Give the common names for

1. dy/dz
2. dc/dy
3. Py

Give formulas for the

1. marginal revenue
2. price elasticity of demand.
The number of tubes and the number of speakers used in assembling three different models (a), (b), (c) of TV sets are specified by a parts-per-set matrix.

$\begin{gathered}\\ \begin{matrix}(a)&(b)&(c)&\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \end{matrix}\\ \left[ \begin{matrix}13&18&20\\ 2&3&4\end{matrix} \right] \begin{matrix}\text{tubes}\\ \text{speakers}\end{matrix}\end{gathered}$

The number of orders received for the three different models in January and February are specified in a sets-per-month matrix

$\begin{gathered}\begin{matrix}\ \ \ &\text{Jan.}&\text{Feb.} \ \ \end{matrix}\\ B=\ \left[ \begin{matrix}12&6\\ 24&12\\ 12&9\end{matrix} \right] \begin{matrix}(a)\\ (b)\\ (c)\end{matrix}\end{gathered}$

Express the number of parts used per month as a matrix C in terms of A and B. How many tubes were used in February?

Let y = f (x) be a differentiable function defined for

a ≦ x ≦ b. Let a < c < b.

1. The conditions f'(c)=0 and f”(c)< are necessary and sufficient for f(c) to be a local maximum value for f. True or false? (Give explanation.)
2. Describe a method for finding the absolute maximum value of f.

Lagrange multipliers are used to solve what class of calculus problems? Give at least one example from economic theory.
Discuss the assertion: Every system of n equations in n unknowns has a unique solution. (It is clearly false; show this by example and modify the statement to be useful.)
The following formula gives the profit P in dollars as a function of the quantities x₁, and x₂ of two commodities.

P = x₁⁵⁰ x₂³⁵ + x₁⁸⁵

When x₁ = x₂ = 100, P = 2 • 10¹⁷⁰
Approximate P when x₁ = 101 and x₂ = 100

Consider the following economic model: A set of n goods are produced (jointly by m activities. The i^th activity requires a_ij units of good j and produces b_ik units of good k.
Let x = (x₁,…,x_m) represent the levels of the activities
and y^t = (y₁,…,y_n) represent the prices of the goods, while A and B denote the input and output matrices. Suppose α and β are non-negative numbers. Give common English interpretations of the following equilibrium conditions:
1. x (B – α A) ≧ 0
2. (B – β A) y ≦ 0
3. x (B – α A) y = 0
4. x (B – β A) y = 0
5. x B y > 0

What condition on A would insure that every process uses some good as input?
What condition on B would insure that every good can be produced in the economy?

Source: Duke University. David M. Rubenstein Rare Book & Manuscript Library. Economists’ Papers Archive. William J. Baumol Papers, Box 10, Folder “Princeton University 1952-69”.

Image Source: Harold W. Kuhn, ca. 1961. Wikimization website.

Tags Baumol, Coale, KuhnHW, Okun, Quandt

ECONOMIC THEORY MACRO PART

PART I — SHORT ESSAYS (weight = 1/3)

PART II — DISCUSSION QUESTIONS (weight = 2/3)

Posted Earlier

Econ 201B Mr. Hirshleifer

COURSE OUTLINE AND READING LIST

Other Written Exams in Economic Theory

HARVARD UNIVERSITY Department of Economics

Written Economic Theory Examination April 8, 1963

HARVARD UNIVERSITY CENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS

HARVARD UNIVERSITY CENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS

Schelling’s Memo to Dunlop and the Exam Committee

Chamberlin’s Memo to the Exam Committee

Leontief Letter to Schelling

Other Written Exams in Economic Theory

HARVARD UNIVERSITY Department of Economics

Written Exam in Economic Theory November 13, 1962

HARVARD UNIVERSITY CENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS

HARVARD UNIVERSITY CENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS

Other Written Exams in Economic Theory

HARVARD UNIVERSITY Department of Economics

Written Exam in Economic Theory April 11, 1961

Excerpt from the minutes of the Department of Economics meeting held on Tuesday, May 16, 1961

NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY Department of Economies

Earlier Accounting Exams

Course Announcement 1907-08

Course Enrollment 1907-08

ECONOMICS 18 Mid-year Examination, 1907-08

ECONOMICS 18 Year-end Examination, 1907-08

I. Take all.

II. Take three.

Harvard Ph.D. in Economics, 1955

Course Announcement

Course Enrollment

Course Outline

HARVARD UNIVERSITY Department of Economics Economics 222

Quantitative Studies on the Behavior of the Business Firm

Reading List Economics 222 Fall, 1955

I. Cost and Production Functions

A. Required

B. Recommended

II. Plant and Equipment Investment

A. Required

B. Recommended

III. Corporation Finance, Dividends, and Savings Policies

A. Required

B. Recommended

IV. Inventory Investment

A. Required

B. Recommended

PRINCETON UNIVERSITY Department of Economics

General Examination for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Industrial Organization

PRINCETON UNIVERSITY Department of Economics

General Examination for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Industrial Organization

PRINCETON UNIVERSITY Department of Economics

General Examination for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Industrial Organization

PRINCETON UNIVERSITY Department of Economics

General Examination for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Industrial Organization

PRINCETON UNIVERSITY Department of Economics

General Examination for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Industrial Organization

PRINCETON UNIVERSITY Department of Economics

General Examination for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Industrial Organization

On Harold W. Kuhn

MEMORANDUM

PRINCETON UNIVERSITY

Department of Economics Mathematics Examination

October 26, 1960

ECONOMIC THEORY
MACRO PART

PART I — SHORT ESSAYS
(weight = 1/3)

PART II — DISCUSSION QUESTIONS
(weight = 2/3)

Econ 201B
Mr. Hirshleifer

Other Written Exams
in Economic Theory

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
Department of Economics

Written Economic Theory Examination
April 8, 1963

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
CENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
CENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS

Schelling’s Memo to Dunlop
and the Exam Committee

Chamberlin’s Memo
to the Exam Committee

Other Written Exams
in Economic Theory

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
Department of Economics

Written Exam in Economic Theory
November 13, 1962

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
CENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
CENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS

Other Written Exams
in Economic Theory

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
Department of Economics

Written Exam in Economic Theory
April 11, 1961

NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
Department of Economies

Course Announcement
1907-08

Course Enrollment
1907-08

ECONOMICS 18
Mid-year Examination, 1907-08

ECONOMICS 18
Year-end Examination, 1907-08

I.
Take all.

II.
Take three.

HARVARD UNIVERSITY
Department of Economics
Economics 222

Quantitative Studies
on the Behavior of the Business Firm

Reading List
Economics 222
Fall, 1955

PRINCETON UNIVERSITY
Department of Economics

General Examination
for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy
Industrial Organization

PRINCETON UNIVERSITY
Department of Economics

General Examination
for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy
Industrial Organization

PRINCETON UNIVERSITY
Department of Economics

General Examination
for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy
Industrial Organization

PRINCETON UNIVERSITY
Department of Economics

General Examination
for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy
Industrial Organization

PRINCETON UNIVERSITY
Department of Economics

General Examination
for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy
Industrial Organization

PRINCETON UNIVERSITY
Department of Economics

General Examination
for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy
Industrial Organization

Department of Economics
Mathematics Examination