Categories
Chicago Exam Questions

Chicago. Money, banking and monetary policy prelim examination, 1956

 

Fourteen graduate students took the prelim exam for the field of money, banking and monetary policy during the summer quarter at the University of Chicago in 1956. These examination questions were found in Milton Friedman’s papers at the Hoover Institution Archives along with the points awarded for each question along with the final grade recommendation by Friedman and the examination committee.

______________________

MONEY, BANKING AND MONETARY POLICY

Preliminary Examination
Summer Quarter, 1956

Write your number and not your name on your examination paper.

Answer all questions. Time: 4 hours. [120 points total]

  1. (a) What is the Keynesian “investment multiplier” in its simplest form? How can it be computed from the consumption function? [5 points]
    (b) Keynes assumed that the consumption function is expressed in wage units and that the average propensity to consume is greater than the marginal propensity. He further assumed as a first approximation that an increase in income is fully reflected in real income with prices stable up to “full employment” and in prices with real income stable, thereafter. What, if any, is the effect of the shift from below full employment to full employment on the numerical value of the “multiplier”? Explain in terms of the properties assigned to the consumption function by Keynes. [15 points]
  1. (a) Compare very briefly the essential parts of the a “fiscal operation” and a “monetary operation,” as they are usually described in the literature, and the way in which they affect prices and employment. Then discuss what the following statement might mean. Is it a meaningful comparison? If not, why not? If so, in what way? “Fiscal policy is more effective than monetary policy.” [10 points]
    (b) Suppose the Treasury engaged in a fiscal operation by running a budget deficit and paid for it by selling bonds to the public. Suppose further the Federal Reserve simultaneously engaged in a monetary operation by selling the public an amount of bonds equal to the deficit. What is likely to be the net effect of these two operations on prices in the short run? In the long run? Explain. What questions of fact did you need to consider in arriving at your answer? [10 points]
  1. “What, by the way of comparison, is likely to be the monetary mechanism of a price-wage spiral? When wages are increased, the immediate finance may be provided either by drawing on firms’ balances which would otherwise have been idle in the short period in question, or by increased borrowing from the banks.” – A. J. Brown
    Discuss, paying special attention to the relation implied between an increase in wages and the willingness of firms to hold smaller cash balances or engage in larger borrowing.
    (a) Discuss both the case of a wage increase in a particular sector and for “all” labor. [5 points]
    (b) Do the two cases differ?
    (c) Does “wages” as used in the second sentence of the quotation refer to “wage rates” or “wage payments”? Does it matter? [5 points]
    (d) If so, why? If not, why not? [5 points]
  2. (a) Sketch the development of the quantity theory of money. [7 points]
    (b) Compared the Cambridge and the Fisherine versions of this theory. [6 points]
    (c) What are the differences and similarities in the formulation of the demand for money between the Cambridge version of the quantity theory and the liquidity-preference function used by Keynes in his General Theory? What are the assumptions underlying these two formulations? What seems to you the most useful formulation of the demand for money? [7 points]
  1. “Inasmuch as the total quantity of purchasing media is expected to increase more or less in parallel with the production of gold and goods, the importance of a given amount of inflationary purchasing media will depend on its relation to the non-inflationary purchasing media in use… The commercial banks are able to [create inflationary purchasing media by acquiring investments in securities and noncommercial loans greater in dollar value than the total of their time deposits and capital], because the banks can create the purchasing media (demand deposits) with which they buy such assets. The inflationary purchasing media thus created are initially in the form of credits (bookkeeping additions) to the accounts of depositors…As these inflationary purchasing media are spent by the original recipients, the funds flow into the channels of trade and are indistinguishable from other demand deposits and currency that represent gold and goods being offered in the Nation’s markets. Thus great additions to the purchasing media used to buy goods can occur without corresponding increases in the goods available in the market; hence the upward pressure on prices and related developments of an inflationary boom.” – American Institute for Economic Research, Current Economic Trends, (June, 1955), p. 7.(a) What is meant by “inflationary purchasing media” in this quotation? [7 points]
    (b) How does their creation allegedly produce “an inflationary boom?” [6 points]
    (c) Evaluate the reasoning implied in the last sentence [7 points].
  1. “There cannot, in short, be intrinsically a more insignificant thing, in the economy of society, then money; except in the character of a contrivance for sparing time and labor. It is machine for doing quickly and commodiously, what would be done without it; and like many other kinds of machinery, it exerts a distinct and independent influence of its own when it gets out of order.” – John Stuart Mill, Principles of Political Economy, Ashley addition, p. 488.

(a) Formulate your conception of money that is in order [5 points],
(b) sketch the monetary experience of one or more countries [5 points],
(c) indicate clearly when you think money was “out of order,” [5 points] and
(d) explain the results [5 points].

 

From Friedman’s handwritten table we find the following distribution of points by question as well as the final grade awarded for the preliminary examination (failure, MA candidacy, PhD candidacy). The committee final grades awarded are designated in boldface. Friedman judged four exams to be borderline cases.

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Total Final Grade
ID no. (a) (b) (a) (b) (a) (b) (c) (a) (b) (c) (a) (b) (c) (d)

1

4 0 7 4 5 2 4 7 6 4 6 4 3 2 1 59 PhD
2 5 8 4 3 7 4 3 5 1 3 1 3 3 5 1 56

PhD

3

4 12 5 6 6 2 5 5 5 3 3 5 4 3 1 69 PhD
5 5 0 7 6 13 3 4 7 0 4 3 4 3 3 1 63

PhD

6

4 3 4 5 3 3 3 2 0 2 0 3 4 2 2 40 MA/F
7 5 8 7 4 10 3 6 6 3 1 4 3 5 5 3 71

PhD

8

3 0 3 0 7 2 1 3 2 0 0 3 5 2 0 31 F
10 4 2 5 4 8 3 3 6 5 3 5 3 2 2 1 56

PhD

11

5 5 5 2 0 0 3 5 0 0 0 25 F
12 5 7 4 6 3 2 3 3 0 3 1 2 1 2 0 42

MA/F

13

4 3 6 6 5 4 3 4 1 1 1 3 3 2 0 46 MA
14 5 4 5 4 2 3 3 4 0 3 1 1 3 1 0 39

MA/F

15

4 5 3 2 5 2 1 3 5 2 4 3 5 4 2 50 MA/PhD
16 5 6 9 4 10 4 4 6 5 3 4 4 5 3 0 72

PhD

Source: Hoover Institution Archives. Papers of Milton Friedman. Box 76, Folder 10.

Image Source: University of Chicago Photographic Archive, apf1-06231, Special Collections Research Center, University of Chicago Library

Categories
Berkeley Carnegie Institute of Technology Chicago Cornell Duke Economics Programs Harvard Illinois Indiana Iowa Johns Hopkins M.I.T. Michigan Minnesota Northwestern NYU Ohio State Pennsylvania Princeton Stanford UCLA Vanderbilt Wisconsin Yale

Economics Departments and University Rankings by Chairmen. Hughes (1925) and Keniston (1957)

 

The rankings of universities and departments of economics for 1920 and 1957 that are found below were based on the pooling of contemporary expert opinions. Because the ultimate question for both the Hughes and Keniston studies was the relative aggregate university standing with respect to graduate education, “The list did not include technical schools, like the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and the California Institute of Technology, nor state colleges, like Iowa State, Michigan State or Penn State, since the purpose was to compare institutions which offered the doctorate in a wide variety of fields.” Hence, historians of economics will be frustrated by the conspicuous absence of M.I.T. and Carnegie Tech in the 1957 column except for the understated footnote “According to some of the chairmen there are strong departments at Carnegie Tech. and M.I.T.; also at Vanderbilt”.

The average perceived rank of a particular economics department relative to that of its university might be of use in assessing the negotiating position of department chairs with their respective university administrations. The observed movement within the perception league tables over the course of roughly a human generation might suggest other questions worth pursuing. 

Anyhow without further apology…

______________________

About the Image: There is no face associated with rankings so I have chosen the legendary comedians Bud Abbott and Lou Costello for their “Who’s on First?” sketch.  YouTube TV version; Radio version: Who’s on First? starts at 22:15

______________________

From Keniston’s Appendix (1959)

Standing of
American Graduate Departments
in the Arts and Sciences

The present study was undertaken as part of a survey of the Graduate School of the University of Pennsylvania in an effort to discover the present reputation of the various departments which offer programs leading to the doctorate.

A letter was addressed to the chairmen of departments in each of twenty-five leading universities of the country. The list was compiled on the basis of (1) membership in the Association of American Universities, (2) number of Ph.D.’s awarded in recent years, (3) geographical distribution. The list did not include technical schools, like the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and the California Institute of Technology, nor state colleges, like Iowa State, Michigan State or Penn State, since the purpose was to compare institutions which offered the doctorate in a wide variety of fields.

Each chairman was asked to rate, on an accompanying sheet, the strongest departments in his field, arranged roughly as the first five, the second five and, if possible, the third five, on the basis of the quality of their Ph.D. work and the quality of the faculty as scholars. About 80% of the chairmen returned a rating. Since many of them reported the composite judgment of their staff, the total number of ratings is well over 500.

On each rating sheet, the individual institutions were given a score. If they were rated in order of rank, they were assigned numbers from 15 (Rank 1) to 1 (Rank 15). If they were rated in groups of five, each group alphabetically arranged, those in the top five were given a score of 13, in the second five a score of 8, and in the third five a score of 3. When all the ratings sheets were returned, the scores of each institution were tabulated and compiled and the institutions arranged in order, in accordance with the total score for each department.

To determine areas of strength or weakness, the departmental scores were combined to determine [four] divisional scores. [Divisions (Departments): Biological Sciences (2), Humanities (11), Physical Sciences (6), Social Sciences (5)]….

… Finally, the scores of each institution given in the divisional rankings were combined to provide an over-all rating of the graduate standing of the major universities.

From a similar poll of opinion, made by R. M. Hughes, A Study of the Graduate Schools of America, and published in 1925, [See the excerpt posted here at Economics in the Rear-view Mirror] it was possible to compile the scores for each of eighteen departments as they were ranked at that time and also to secure divisional and over-all rankings. These are presented here for the purpose of showing what changes have taken place in the course of a generation.

The limitations of such a study are obvious; the ranks reported do not reveal the actual merit of the individual departments. They depend on highly subjective impressions; they reflect old and new loyalties; they are subject to lag, and the halo of past prestige. But they do report the judgment of the men whose opinion is most likely to have weight. For chairmen, by virtue of their office, are the men who must know what is going on at other institutions. They are called upon to recommend schools where students in their field may profitably study; they must seek new appointments from the staff and graduates of other schools; their own graduates tum to them for advice in choosing between alternative possibilities for appointment. The sum of their opinions is, therefore, a fairly close approximation to what informed people think about the standing of the departments in each of the fields.

 

OVER-ALL STANDING
(Total Scores)

1925

1957

1.

Chicago

1543

1.

Harvard

5403

2.

Harvard

1535

2.

California

4750

3.

Columbia 1316 3. Columbia 4183
4. Wisconsin 886 4. Yale

4094

5.

Yale 885 5. Michigan 3603
6. Princeton 805 5. Chicago

3495

7.

Johns Hopkins 746 7. Princeton 2770
8. Michigan 720 8. Wisconsin

2453

9.

California 712 9. Cornell 2239
10. Cornell 694 10. Illinois

1934

11.

Illinois 561 11. Pennsylvania 1784
12. Pennsylvania 459 12. Minnesota

1442

13.

Minnesota 430 13. Stanford 1439
14. Stanford 365 14. U.C.L.A.

1366

15.

Ohio State 294 15. Indiana 1329
16. Iowa 215 16. Johns Hopkins

1249

17.

Northwestern 143 17. Northwestern 934
18. North Carolina 57 18. Ohio State

874

19.

Indiana 45 19. N.Y.U. 801
20. Washington

759

 

ECONOMICS

1925

1957

1. Harvard 92 1. Harvard

298

2.

Columbia 75 2. Chicago 262
3. Chicago 65 3. Yale

241

4.

Wisconsin 63 4. Columbia 210
5. Yale 42 5. California

196

6.

Johns Hopkins 39 5. Stanford 196
7. Michigan 31 7. Princeton

184

8.

Pennsylvania 29 8. Johns Hopkins 178
9. Illinois 27 9. Michigan

174

10.

Cornell 25 10. Minnesota 96
11. Princeton 23 11. Northwestern

70

12.

California 22 12. Duke 69
13. Minnesota 20 13. Wisconsin

66

14.

Northwestern 18 14. Pennsylvania 45
15. Stanford 17 15. Cornell

32

16.

Ohio State 15 16. U.C.L.A.

31

According to some of the chairmen there are strong departments at Carnegie Tech. and M.I.T.; also at Vanderbilt.

 

Source:  Hayward Keniston. Graduate Study and Research in the Arts and Sciences at the University of Pennsylvania (January 1959), pp. 115-119,129.

 

 

Categories
Chicago Economics Programs Economist Market

Chicago. Draft memo of a program to rebuild the department of economics by T.W. Schultz, 1956

 

The following draft memo by T. W. Schultz outlines the serious faculty replacement needs of the University of Chicago department of economics in the mid-1950s. Particularly noteworthy, aside from the impressive list of lost faculty, is the appended table listing the sponsored research/3rd party funders of the economics department at that time. One also sees that the department had been authorized to make offers to Kenneth Arrow, Robert Solow and Arthur F. Burns. So much for the best-laid plans of mice and men. A better historian of economics than I might spin a counterfactual tale of a post-Cowles Chicago with Arrow and Solow on the faculty.

Regarding the ICA Chile Enterprise: Economic Research Center, Schultz wrote “The Chilean enterprise will give us a fine ‘laboratory’ in which to test ourselves in the area of economic development– a major new field in economics.” This reminds me of the old Cold-War Eastern European joke about whether Marx and Engels were scientists (“No, real scientists would have tried their experiments on rats first”). What a “fine ‘laboratory'” for testing oneself!

_________________________

A Program of Rebuilding the Department of Economics
(first draft, private and confidential – T. W. Schultz, May 22, 1956)

Your Department of Economics has been passing through a crisis. Whether it would survive as a first rate department has been seriously in doubt, with one adversity following another as was the case up until last year. It is now clear, however, that we have achieved a turning point in that we can rebuild and attain the objective which is worth striving for – an outstanding faculty in economics.

The crisis came upon us as a consequence of a combination of things: (1) the department, along with others in the University, had been denied access to undergraduate students of the University who might want to become economists; (2) Viner left for Princeton, Lange for Poland, Yntema for Ford and Douglas for the Senate; (3) the Industrial Relations Center drained off some of our talent and when it jammed, Harbison left for Princeton; (4) Mr. Cowles’ arbitrary decision to shift “his” Commission to Yale was a major blow; (5) Nef been transferring his talents to the Committee on Social Thought, and (6) add to all these the retirement of Knight.

Meanwhile, there were several external developments which did not reduce our difficulties: (1) a number of strong (new) economic centers were being established – at Stanford, Johns Hopkins, Yale, Vanderbilt, M.I.T. and with public funds at Michigan and Minnesota; (2) our salaries were falling behind seriously relative to some of the other places, and (3) recruiting of established, highly competent economists became all but impossible given the crisis that was upon us and the (then) low repute of the University neighborhood.

The ever present danger of the past few years has been that we would be in the judgment of competent colleagues elsewhere, in the beliefs of oncoming graduate students and in the eyes of the major foundations – not recover our high standing but instead sing to a second or even a third-rate department and in the process lose the (internal) capacity to recruit and rebuild.

We now have achieved a turning point distinctly in our favor.

The major efforts which have contributed most have been as follows:

  1. We have taken full advantage of our unique organization in combining real research with graduate instruction. Our research and instruction workshops are the result. The Rockefeller Foundation gave us three grants along the way – agricultural economics, money and public finance – to test this approach and advanced graduate work. The Ford Foundation has now financed our workshops with $200,000 (eight 5-year grant) (our proposal of January 1956 to The Ford Foundation states the theory and argues the case for this approach on the basis of the experiences we have already accumulated).
  2. We set out aggressively to recruit outstanding younger economists. The workshops were a big aid to us in doing this; so was the financial support of the University. We had the ability to “spot them”. We now have the best group of talented young economists, age 30 and less, to be found anywhere. This achievement is rapidly becoming known to others in keen “competition” is already upon us as a consequence.
  3. We need urgently to run up a lightning rod, a (rotating) professorship with a salary second to none, to attract talent and make it clear we were in business and would pay for the best. The Ford Foundation took favorably to the idea. (Thought so well of it that they will do the same for 3 other privately supported Universities – Columbia, Harvard and Yale!)
    The $500,000 endowment grant from them for a rotating research professorship is our reward.
  4. The foundations have given us a strong vote of confidence: grants and funds received by the Department of Economics during 1955-56 now total $1,220,000. (A statement listing these is attached).
  5. The marked turn for the better in the number and the quality of students applying for scholarships and fellowships is, also, an affirmative indication.
  6. The Economics Research Center is filling a large gap in providing computing, publishing and related research facilities which was formally a function of the Cowles Commission.
  7. The Chilean enterprise will give us a fine “laboratory” in which to test ourselves in the area of economic development – a major new field in economics.

There remains, however, much to be done. We must, above all, not lose the upward momentum which is now working in our favor.

Faculty and University Financial Support

To have and to hold a first rate faculty in economics now requires between $225,000 and $250,000 of University funds a year.

To have a major faculty means offering instruction and doing research in 8 to 10 fields. Up until two years ago we came close to satisfying the standard in our graduate instruction. We then had 11 (and just prior to that, 12) professors on indefinite tenure.

Then, Koopmans and Marschak were off to Yale, Harbison to Princeton and Knight did reach 70. And, then there were 7. On top of these “woes” came the serious illness of Metzler which greatly curtailed his role; and, Nef having virtually left economics. Thus, only 5 were really active in economics with Wallis carrying many other professional burdens. Meanwhile we added only one – Harberger was given tenured this year.

Accordingly at the indefinite tenure level we are down to about one-half of what is required to have a major faculty. Fortunately, several younger men have entered and have been doing work of very high quality.

It should be said that the Deans and the Chancellor have stood by, prepared to help us rebuild.

Major appointments were authorized – Arrow, Stigler, Solow and others. We still are hoping that Arthur F. Burns will come.

The resignations and the retirement, however, did necessarily reduce sharply the amount of financial support from the University.

In rebuilding, at least five additional tenure positions will be required:

  1. Labor economics (from within)
  2. Trade cycle (we hope it will be Arthur F. Burns, already authorized).
  3. Money
  4. Econometrics and mathematical economics.
  5. Business organization
  6. Consumption economics (when Miss Reid retires; next 3 years we shall have the extra strength of Dr. D. Brady with finances from The Rockefeller Foundation)
  7. International trade (pending Metzler’s recovery)
  8. Economic development.

The faculty and the University financial support recommended is as follows:

Tenured positions (for individuals fully committed to economics).

    1. Now in the harness

6: Friedman, Johnson, Harberger, Hamilton (Metzler), Wallis (Nef), Schultz

    1. To be added

5: Burns pending, (labor), (money), and two other fields, most likely econometrics and business organization

 

Budget:

11 [tenured positions]

 

$165,000

Metzler and Nef $15,000
$180,000
III. Supplementary non-tenure faculty $45,000
Altogether $225,000

 

Outside Financial Support for the Department of Economics

Grants

Amount of grant Available 1956-57

A. Received during 1955-56.

1.     Sears Roebuck Fellowships

$4,000

$4,000

2.     National Science Foundation (2 years)

$13,000

$6,500

3.     Conservation Foundation (2 years)

$33,000

$16,500

4.     Rockefeller Foundation: consumption economics (3 years)

$45,000

$15,000

5.     American Enterprise (2 years)

$17,250

$8,625

6.     Ford Foundation: research and instructional workshops (5 years)

$200,000

$30,000

7.     Earhart Fellowships.

$6,000

$6,000

8.     S.S.R.C. Student Grants

$5,000

$5,000

9.     Ford Foundation: 3 pre-doctoral grants

$10,200

$10,200

10.  Ford Foundation: faculty research grant (Hamilton)

$12,500

$8,000

11.  ICA Chile Enterprise: Economic Research Center Fellowships, research support (3 yrs)

$375,000

$125,000

12.  Ford Foundation: endowment for rotating research professor

$500,000

$25,000

13.  Rockefeller Foundation: Latin America (Ballesteros)

$5,000

$5,000

Sub-totals

$1,225,950

$264,825

B. Received prior to 1955-56 where funds are available for 1956-57.

1.     Rockefeller Foundation: workshop in money (3 years with one year to go)

$50,000

$20,000

2.     Rockefeller Foundation: workshop in public finance (3 years with one year to go)

$50,000

$20,000

3.     Resources for the Future (3 years with one year to go)

$67,000

$27,000

4.     Russian Agriculture (2 years with one to go)

$47,000

$22,000

B sub-totals

$214,000 $89,000

A and B totals

$1,439,950

$353,825

 

Source:  University of Chicago Archives. Department of Economics Records. Box 42, Folder 8.

Image Source: 1944 photo of T.W. Schultz from University of Chicago Photographic Archive, apf1-07479, Special Collections Research Center, University of Chicago Library. Cf. Wikimedia Commons, same portrait (dated 1944) from Library of Congress.

Categories
Chicago Columbia Economists Gender Northwestern Social Work

Chicago. Economics Ph.D. Alumna, Helen Fisher Hohman, 1928

 

We have just met Helen Fisher Hohman’s husband Elmo Paul Hohman by way of his Northwestern reading list on labor problems that somehow found its way into the Harvard course syllabi archives. Helen herself went on to get a Ph.D. at the University of Chicago in 1928 (Elmo was teaching at Northwestern) and her dissertation won the distinguished Hart, Schaffner and Marx competition over Simon Kuznets’ dissertation that was given honorable mention. 

One wonders what Helen Fisher Hohman’s career path might have looked like had she been born to a later cohort. It would be nice if we could find a picture of her, maybe some descendent will stumble upon this page and share with Economics in the Rear-View Mirror.

_____________________

Helen Fisher Hohman

1916. B.A. University of Illinois.

1919. A.M. Columbia University.

1919. New York School of Social Work (completed two year program).

1920. Assistant in the economics department, Vassar College.

1921-22. Instructor of economics at Simmons College.

1928. Ph.D. University of Chicago. Thesis: The Trade Board Acts and the Social Insurance Acts in Relation to a Minimum Standard of Living in Great Britain: A Study in Attitudes toward Poverty and Methods of Dealing with It, 1880-1926.

Received first prize in the Hart, Schaffner and Marx competition in 1928 (honorable mention went to Simon S. Kuznets for his “Secular Movements in Production and Prices”)

1931. Edited Essays on Population and other papers by James Alfred Field. (Chicago: University of Chicago).

1933. The Development of Social Insurance and Minimum Wage Legislation in Great Britain: A Study of British Social Legislation in Relation to a Minimum Standard of Living. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

1940.  Old Age in Sweden: A Program of Social Security. U.S. Social Security Board.

Source:  Kirsten Madden. Women economists of promise? Six Hart, Schaffner and Marx Prize winners in the early twentieth century. Chapter 13 in Kirsten Madden, Robert W. Dimand (eds). Routledge Handbook of the History of Women’s Economic ThoughtLondon: Routledge, 2018.
Also: Simmons College yearbook Microcosm 1922, p. 38.

_____________________

1940. Helen Fisher Hohman was listed as Consultant, Bureau of Research and Statistics [Social Security Board]; and Lecturer in the Division of Social Work, Northwestern University.

Source:  Helen Fisher Hohman. Social Democracy in Sweden. Social Security Bulletin, Vol.3, No. 2. February 1940, pp. 3-10

_____________________

Obituary of Helen Hohman (nee Fisher)
August 2, 1894 – December 18, 1972

Mrs. Helen Fisher Hohman, 78, of 606 Trinity Ct., Evanston, former professor of economics at Northwestern University and an authoress, died yesterday in the infirmary of Presbyterian Home, Evanston.

Mrs. Hohman, who taught at N. U. during World War II, wrote the book “British Insurance and Minimum Wage Legislation in Great Britain,” which won a Hart, Schaffner and Marx prize in 1928. Survivors include her husband, Elmo; a daughter, Mrs. Rene Wadlow; and two grandchildren. Private services will be held.

Transcribed from Chicago Tribune, December 19, 1972 by Marsha L. Ensminger

Source:  Genealogy Trails History Group for Washington County, Illinois.

 

 

 

Categories
Chicago Economists

Chicago. Chancellor Hutchins interrogated regarding Lange’s leave of absence, 1949

 

One of the things that is so nice about stumbling through the hathitrust.org collection is that you really never know when you’re about to discover an interesting but really obscure publication. Today we get to attend hearings conducted  in the Spring of 1949 at the Illinois House of Representatives regarding communists among the students and faculty of the University of Chicago and Roosevelt College. In the excerpt below we have part of the opening statement of the Chancellor of the University of Chicago as well as his responses to a hostile line of questions regarding the distinguished Chicago economics professor, Oscar Richard Lange, who had been on leave from the University to serve as Polish Ambassador in Washington and whohad by 1949 returned to Poland. Chancellor Hutchins acquitted himself honorably.

Just how “red” was Oscar Lange in fact? I think the greatest lower bound lands him comfortably in the category “useful idiot economist”.

Notes from a 2 hour 15 minute official meeting of Oscar Lange with Joseph Stalin and V. M. Molotov, May 17, 1944.

One partially encrypted  message regarding Oscar Lange, a.k.a. “Friend” (August 1944) from the Venona project.

_____________________

Investigation of the University of Chicago and Roosevelt College, 1949, special report;
public hearings held in House of Representatives Chamber, State Capitol Building,
April 21, 22, 23, 1949, May 19, 1949.
(pp. 25-28 for Q&A)

Robert M. Hutchins, Chancellor of the University of Chicago
examined by Dr. J. B. Matthews, Chief Investigator

…Mr. Chairman, I should like, first of all, to express my appreciation for the courtesy shown me in allowing me to make my opening statement. My name is Robert M. Hutchins, and I have been chief executive officer of the University of Chicago for twenty years, and I am now Chancellor of the University. The subpoena which I have received summons me to testify concerning subversive activities at the University of Chicago. This is a leading question, and the answer is assumed in the question. I cannot testify concerning subversive activities at the University of Chicago because there are none….

…The Constitution of the United States guarantees freedom of speech and the right of the people peaceably to assemble. The American way has been to encourage thought and discussion. We have never been afraid of thought and discussion. The whole educational system, and not merely the University of Chicago is a reflection of the American faith in thought and discussion as the path to peaceful change and improvement. The danger to our institutions is not from the tiny minority who do not believe in them. It is from those who would mistakenly repress the free spirit upon which those institutions are built. The miasma of thought control that is now spreading over the country is the greatest menace to the United States since Hitler. There are two ways of fighting subversive ideas. One is the policy of repression. This policy is contrary to the letter and spirit of the Constitution of this country. It cannot be justly enforced, because it is impossible to tell precisely what people are thinking; they have to be judged by their acts. It has been generally thought that the widest possible latitude should be given to freedom of speech and publication, on the ground that the expression of differing points of view, some of which are bound to be unpopular, is the way to progress in the State. Hyde Park Corner in London, where anybody may say anything, has long been a symbol of the confidence of the Anglo-Saxon world in the ability of democratic institutions to withstand criticism and also even to nourish itself upon it. There are numerous laws already on the books which provide for the punishment of subversive acts. The policy of repression of ideas cannot work and never has worked. The alternative to it is the long and difficult road of education. To this the American people have been committed. It requires patience and tolerance, even in the face of intense provocation. It requires faith in the principles and practices of democracy, faith that when the citizen understands all forms of government he will prefer democracy, and that he will be a better citizen if he is convinced, rather than he would be if he were coerced….

Q. Doctor, you are quite definite in your statement that there are no subversive activities on the campus of the University of Chicago, is that my correct understanding?

A. I say that no professor is a Communist, or has ever advocated the overthrowing of the government by violence. I say that one or two students have announced publicly that they are Communists. However, if they have advocated the overthrowing of the government by violence, then the proper officials of this State should institute proceedings other than Seditious Activities, or rather, Seditious proceedings against them.

Q. If a professor’s name was carried as an active professor, or a professor emeritus, or on leave of absence, is it not true that that individual is still connected with the University?

A. I don’t understand the tendency of your question. I am sorry. Professor Oscar Lange, Professor of Economics, is listed as “on leave of absence”.

Q. Would you give us the present status of Professor Lange?

A. Well, the present status is that he is on leave of absence. He, therefore, is not in contact with our students or with his colleagues on the faculty. That’s all there is to it.

Q. But the fact that his name is still carried in the University’s catalogue means there is some kind of connection in that….

A. (Interrupting) …He has no connection with the University while on leave of absence, if that is what you mean.

Q. Just a minute…I did not finish my question. You interrupted me.

A. I beg your pardon. Go ahead.

Q. Would it be true that he is what is known as on Tenure?

A. He is on a leave of absence.

Q. Do you have any doubts about Professor Lange being a Communist?

A. Oh, yes.

Q. You know, do you not, that he renounced his American citizenship in order to become an ambassador to a Communist form of government?

A. If that is because he regarded it his patriotic duty to his native land, then it would be my guess that he would be assassinated rather shortly if he were here.

Q. Was that sentence concluded.

A. Oh, yes.

Q. Do you know where he is now at the moment?

A. No. I should think it would be very dangerous for him to be at home.

Q. You think, in other words, that it would be very dangerous for him to be in this country?

A. I believe I said “at home”.

Q. You stated, I believe, that his patriotic duty to the land of his birth compels him to renounce his American citizenship. Does anyone have a duty to the land of his birth if he is a citizen of the country in which he is residing?

A. You recall the situation when Professor Lange was repressed by the government of his country. The war had just been concluded. The Polish State has just been reconstructed. The choice he had to make was extremely difficult because both sides felt that he should make great contributions with, or to the leaders between the United States and Poland. He had that choice to make which was extremely difficult.

Q. Were you so apprized by the government at Washington…by the economic department of the University regarding that information?

A. I don’t know the sources of the information; but in view of the demand under which it was made, it should only be reasonable.

Q. Are you acquainted with the record of voting by Professor Lange at the United Nations?

A. I am.

Q. Did he vote with the so-called Soviet Block?

A. I don’t know that he did.

Q. Just a minute, Doctor. Let me ask the question this way: did he vote consistently with the so-called Soviet Block?

A. I don’t know that he did. It all depends upon what the word “consistently” means as you are using it. I don’t suppose that is correct, but if you mean that he usually did, I would say it was.

Q. You would not state then, Doctor, that he consistently voted that way?

A. That is not my recollection.

Q. In view of this, would Professor Lange be received back at the University of Chicago if he asked to come back?

A. I am not acquainted with Professor Lange’s present views. If his views are now what they were when he went on leave of absence…if we had the money to pay his salary…he would be welcome back. I don’t know if his views are different now from what they were.

Q. Do you recall that he made a statement renouncing the United States?

A. I do.

Q. But he will be taken back, as a professor at the University of Chicago, if he so desires, is that right, even though he is an objector of this form of government?

A. This certain policy of the United States is the same to which many loyal Americans objected.

Q. How long is it a practice to carry such a professor as he on leave of absence status?

A. Well, we carried the present vice-president of the Marshall-Field Company for ten years; and the vice-president of the Ford Motor Company for ten years….J. O. McKenzie also for about ten years.

Q. Since you do not know where Professor Lange is at the present time, are you prepared to state when the University last heard from him?

A. I do not know. It is not my understanding that your information is correct. It is not my understanding that he is carried in the catalogue of the University.

Q. For your information, Doctor Hutchins, I would like to note here that the latest available catalogue from the University of Chicago was dated May 25, 1948, and is the catalogue from which I take the information that he is still listed, although designated as on leave of absence.

A. To my knowledge, that is incorrect.

Q. Then there is a later catalogue?

A. Yes. [Note: Lange was not listed in the 1949-50 catalogue published July 1, 1949]

Image source: Wikipedia/commons.

 

Categories
Chicago Suggested Reading

Chicago. Reading list for second core price theory. D. Gale Johnson, 1955.

 

This post adds a reading list from 1955 to ten previous postings of material for University of Chicago core graduate price theory following the second World War. The course was taught by D. Gale Johnson during the Winter Quarter. The copy of the reading list was found in Milton Friedman’s papers.

Chapters on interest rates from Keynes’ General Theory make a brief appearance in this course that focused on functional income distribution (theories of wages, interest, and profits).

___________________

Previous postings for Chicago core price theory.

Econ 300A, Milton Friedman. 1946.

Econ 300 A&B. Milton Friedman ca 1947.

Econ 300 A&B, Milton Friedman, Winter Quarter, 1947.

Econ 300 A&B, Milton Friedman. 1948.

Econ 300 A&B, Lloyd A. Metzler. 1948-49.

Econ 300 A&B, Milton Friedman, 1951-52.

Econ 300 A&B, Lloyd A. Metzler, 1952.

Econ 300A, Arnold Harberger, 1955.

Econ 300A. Gary Becker, 1956.

Econ 300 A&B, Milton Friedman 1958.

___________________

D. Gale Johnson
Winter Quarter 1955

Economics 300B
Reading Assignments

  1. P. H. Douglas, “Are There Laws of Production?” A. E. R., XXXVIII (1948), 1-41.
  2. D. G. Johnson, “The Functional Distribution of Income in the United States, 1850-1952,” R. E. & S., XXXVI (1954), 175-82.
  3. E. J. Working, “What Do Statistical ‘Demand Curves’ Show?” XLI (1927), 212-35. Reprinted in Readings in Price Theory.
  4. F. H. Knight, Risk, Uncertainty and Profit, Ch. IV.
  5. A. Marshall, Principles of Economics, 8th, Book IV, Chs. 1, 2, 3 and Book V, Ch. 6.
  6. A. E. A. Readings in The Theory of Income Distribution. Articles by J. M. Cassels, George Stigler, E. H. Chamberlin and Fritz Machlup.
  7. G. Stigler, Production and Distribution Theories, Chs. IV and XII.
  8. Philip H. Wicksteed, The Co-ordination of the Laws of Distribution.
  9. R. G. D. Allen, Mathematical Analysis for Economists, 11.8; 12.7; 12.8; 12.9; 13.7.
  10. Paul A. Samuelson, Foundations of Economic Analysis. Ch. IV.
  11. J. R. Hicks, The Theory of Wages. Chs. 1-6.
  12. A. Marshall, Principles of Economics, Book VI, Ch. I-V.
  13. Adam Smith, The Wealth of Nations, Book I, Ch. X.
  14. D. H. Robertson, “Wage Grumbles,” in 6.
  15. M. Friedman and S. Kuznets, Income from Independent Professional Practice, pp. v-x, 81-95, 118-37, 142-61.
  16. George Stigler, Domestic Servants in the United States, 1900-1940. (N.B.E.R. Occ. Paper No. 24).
  17. A. Marshall, Principles of Economics, Book VI, Ch. IX. See Index on quasi-rent.
  18. F. H. Knight, “Capital and Interest,” in 6.
  19. J. M. Keynes, The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money, Chs. 11-14.
  20. R. W. Clower, “Productivity, Thrift and the Rate of Interest,” Economic Journal, March, 1954, 107-15.
  21. R. W. Clower, “An Investigation into the Dynamics of Investment,” American Economic Review, XLIV (1954), 64-81.
  22. A. P. Lerner, “On the Marginal Product of Capital and the Marginal Efficiency of Investment,” J. P. E. LXI (1953), 64-81.
  23. H. Makower and J. Marschak, “Assets, Prices and Monetary Theory,” Economics, 1938, 261-88. Reprinted in Readings in Price Theory.
  24. J. F. Weston, “A Generalized Uncertainty Theory of Profit,” A. E. R., March, 1950, 40-60.
  25. J. F. Weston, “The Profit Concept and Theory: A Restatement,” J. P. E., April, 1954, 152-170.

 

Source:  The Hoover Institution Archives. Papers of Milton Friedman.Box 77. Folder 77.1 “University of Chicago Econ. 300A & B”.

Source: David Gale Johnson portrait from the University of Chicago Photographic Archive,  apf1-10169, Special Collections Research Center, University of Chicago Library

Categories
Chicago Exam Questions Fields Undergraduate

Chicago. Comprehensive Exams in Economics for B.A., 1941

 

 

One presumes that a departmental comprehensive examination would cover material that would be expected of any student going on to graduate studies in economics.  The comprehensive examination for Harvard economics majors from 1953 has been previously posted as has Swarthmore’s comprehensive examination for 1931.

A few things worth noting:

  • Henry Simons and Paul Douglas were apparently enough at odds with each other’s economics to be unable to come up with a single principles examination in Part I.
  • Both accounting and basic statistics shared equally in the quantitative Part II.
  • Either U.S. or European Economic History was required to be one of the three field examinations in Part III. A student could even take both economic history examinations, so one can say economic history was very much part of the common core for economists-in-training.
  • From today’s perspective it is interesting to find that “transportation” was a field still having equal status with “labor” and “government finance”.

According to a handwritten note attached to the following comprehensive exam was used four times:  Spring 1940, Winter 1941, Autumn 1941, and (with slight correction) Winter 1942.

__________________

PART I

COMPREHENSIVE EXAMINATION FOR THE BACHELOR’S DEGREE IN ECONOMICS

(Start each new subject in a new examination book)

The comprehensive examination in Economics is divided into three parts:

PART I — Time: Approximately 2 ½ hours.

(a) Principles of Economics
(b) Principles of Money and Banking

PART II — Time: Approximately 2 ½ hours.

(a) Elementary Accounting
(b) Statistics

PART III — Time: Approximately 3 hours.

Write on either (a) or (b) and two other subjects. One of these may be the second subject in Economic History.

(a) Economic History of the United States
(b) Economic History of Europe
(c) Labor
(d) Government Finance
(e) Transportation

 

 

PART I

(a) Economic Principles

Write on either examination A or examination B. In view of the difference in reading lists, examination A is offered primarily for those who did their work in Economics 209 with Mr. Douglas, while examination B is for those who had this course with Mr. Simons.

Examination A.
(Answer all questions.)

  1. Describe in some detail why the demand curves for the products of an industry are negatively inclined and give and illustrate the formula for the measurement of elasticity.
    Why, under atomistic competition, is the demand curve for the products of an individual firm of infinite elasticity and indicate by graphs what forces determine equilibrium for the individual firms (a) with no alternation in their number, (b) in the longer run, where the numbers of firms may vary but where there is no change of the scale of the individual plant, (c) in the still longer run when both the numbers and the scale of plants vary.
  2. Discuss and illustrate equilibrium under conditions of “imperfect competition,” showing (a) the role of average and marginal revenue curves, (b) average and marginal cost curves. Discuss both short-run and long-run equilibrium and the light such conclusions throw upon whether competition is or is not desirable, the proper role of the state, etc.
  3. Trace the theory of production, showing the relative effect upon product of changes in the quantities of the three factors of production, i.e., land, labor and capital, and the steps by which the theory of distribution can be derived from the theory of production.

 

Examination B.
(Answer both questions.)

  1. (50 points)
    In an isolated community there are two kinds of land, and only one product, wheat. There are 100 farms of each The labor supply is homogeneous—i.e., all workers are equally efficient. There is private property in land and free contract for labor. Labor services are bought and sold only in units of one laborer per year. The markets for both labor and land (unless otherwise specified) should be assumed to be freely competitive.
    The table below shows the amounts of wheat which can be obtained from onesingle farm of each grade, with different numbers of laborers per year.
Number of Laborers Output on A-grade Farm Output on B-grade Farm
1 1,000 900
2 1,800 1,200
3 2,400 1,400
4 2,900 1,550
5 3,300 1,650

The labor population is 450 — all workers will seek to be fully employed at any wage rate above zero.

a. What will be the wages per man? Explain why.

b. What will be the rent of farms of each grade?

c. Explain how the productivity (product increment) of an A-grade farm may be determined.

d. What would happen to wages and rents if an output tax of 5 per cent were imposed upon the production of wheat?

e. What would happen to wages and rents if a tax of 100 bushels per farm were levied, the tax being payable by owners?

f. Suppose a minimum wage law is passed and enforced, requiring the payment of at least 700 bushels per year for labor. What will be the effect on total employment and on rents?

g. Suppose that workers on the A-grade farms organize into a trade union and enforce a minimum wage of 700 bushels per year on the A-grade farms. What will happen to rents? To numbers of workers employed on A-grade farms? To the wages of workers not employed on A-grade farms?

h. Suppose that workers organize only on the B-grade farms and enforce there a wage of 700 bushels per year. What will happen to rents? To wages on the A-grade farms?

  1. (50 points)
    Indicate the conditions or circumstances under which each of the following relationships is likely to obtain, in the short run if not in the long run, and explain briefly in each case:

    1. Marginal revenue is equal to price.
    2. Price is equal to average expense (total cost per unit) but far in excess of marginal expense.
    3. Marginal expense, for the industry as a whole, fare exceeds marginal expense for the individual firm.
    4. All firms in a highly competitive industry are maintaining outputs at which their average-cost curves are falling (negatively sloped).
    5. All firms in a highly competitive industry are maintaining outputs at which their marginal-expense curves are falling.
    6. The price of a productive service is equal to its product increment times product price.
    7. The price of a productive service is much less than its product increment times product price.
    8. The price of a productive service is much less than its product increment times marginal revenue (for the firm).
    9. The total output of all firms in an industry is such that marginal revenue, for the industry as a whole, is negative.
    10. Marginal expense and average expense are equal but both are far in excess of product price.

 

(b) Principles of Money and Banking

(Answer all parts in questions 1 and 2; if time permits answer question 3.)

  1. (25 points)
    The following statements are to be completed by filling in the blanks with the most nearly correct of the suggested answers:

    1. Excess reserves of the member banks of the Federal Reserve System are currently about _______ million dollars. (100; 1,000; 1,500; 3,500; 18,700)
    2. The Federal Open Market Committee consists of _______ (5; 7; 9; 12;19) members, of which (1; 3; 5; 7; 12) are members of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and the remainder selected by ____________________ (President of the U.S.; Board of Governors; U.S. Secretary of the Treasury; directors of the Federal Reserve banks).
    3. In recent months holdings of U.S. Government securities (direct and guaranteed) by the Federal Reserve banks have totaled about _______ million dollars (25; 500; 2,500; 6,000).
    4. A member bank in downtown Chicago is at present required to hold with its Federal Reserve Bank an actual net balance equal to _______ (10; 13; 17½; 22¾; 26) per cent of its net demand deposits.
    5. If the U.S. Treasury were to shift its present deposits from member banks to the Federal Reserve banks, excess reserves of member banks would probably _______ (increase; decrease; remain unchanged) and excess reserves of the Federal Reserve banks _______ (increase; decrease; remain unchanged).
    6. The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System is authorized to decrease existing reserve requirements for reserve city member banks to a minimum level of _______ (5; 13; 17½; 20; 100) per cent against its net demand deposits.
    7. The total volume of hand-to-hand money in circulation in the U.S. (in the hands of the public and in banks’ vault cash) has recently been approximately _______ (600; 8,000; 10,000; 50,000) million dollars, of which approximately _______ (0; 5; 25; 30) per cent has consisted of gold coin.
    8. In recent years member banks have held approximately _______ (10; 25; 55; 85; 98) per cent of all demand deposits (excluding inter-bank deposits) in all commercial banks of the country.
    9. If the Federal Reserve banks sold their present holdings of U.S. Government securities to the public, excess reserves of banks in the country would probably _______ (increase; decrease; remain unchanged).
    10. In computing its demand deposits subject to legal reserve requirements, a member bank may deduct from its gross demand deposits _______ (U.S. deposits held with it; balances due from other domestic banks except Federal Reserve banks; its vault cash; balances due to other domestic banks).
    11. In giving a correct statement of the quantity theory of money, it is necessary to state among other things the assumption _______ (that wage rates remain constant; that the country is not on a paper monetary standard; that the economy to which it refers is perfectly competitive; that the theory may not be applicable in the short run).
    12. The monetary gold stock of the United States is currently approximately _______ (3.5; 7.0; 22; 25) billion dollars.
    13. Treasury purchases of imported gold will result in the greatest reduction in excessreserves of banks (not including Federal Reserve banks) when the Treasury pays for the gold by _______ (issuing new gold certificates; borrowing funds from the public; borrowing funds from commercial banks; borrowing funds from the Federal Reserve banks).
    14. Time and demand deposits (excluding interbank deposits) in all banks of the United States currently total about _______ (25; 40; 60; 75) billion dollars, of which amount approximately _______ (10; 25; 40; 60; 98) per cent is fully insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.
    15. Under present conditions the Federal Reserve banks can most effectively reduce excess reserves of member banks by _______ (raising the discount rates of the Federal Reserve banks; selling their holdings of U.S. Government securities on the open market; raising the legal reserve ratios of member banks to 100%).
  2. (75 points)
    A recent annual report of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System contained the following statement:
    “Under existing conditions the Treasury’s powers to influence member bank reserves outweigh those possessed by the Federal Reserve System.”

    1. State briefly and concisely the powers of the U.S. Treasury to influence member bank reserves; evaluate and explain their importance with reference to:

(1) Increasing member bank excess
(2) Decreasing member bank excess reserves.

    1. If the Treasury were to use certain of its powers, it could increase its cash holdings (without borrowing or taxing) by 10 billion dollars. Assume that it does so today, and that it spends the 10 billion dollars for national defense goods (in addition to the expenditures previously budgeted) during the next two years. Analyze the effects of the spending, including in your analysis statements concerning the effects on:

(1) Employment and national income.
(2) The cash position of the public.
(3) The reserve position of commercial banks.
(4) The powers of the Federal Reserve System to reduce member bank excess reserves.
(5) Relative changes in important groups of prices.

Of what help is the quantity theory of money to you in explaining the price fluctuations of (5)?

  1. (30 points)
    (If time permits)
    Defend your answers to parts e, I, m, and o of question 1.

 

 

PART II

(a) Elementary Accounting

(Answer all questions; plan to spend at least 40 minutes on question 4.)

  1. Debits and Credits
    Directions: Read the data given and select from the “Numbers To Be Used” the appropriate debit and credit to be used. Write the numbers of these accounts in the appropriate column, indicating in each case the kind of account (A-L-P-E-I).

Numbers to be Used

(1) Accounts Payable (10) Notes Payable
(2) Accounts Receivable (11) Notes Receivable
(3) Bad Debts (12) Office Expense
(4) Cash (13) R. Smith, Capital
(5) Furniture and Fixtures (14) Purchases
(6) General Expense (15) Sales
(7) Interest Cost (16) Wages and Salaries
(8) Interest Income (17) Rent Expense
(9) Merchandise Inventory

 

Debit Credit
Sample: A customer pays us cash on account (4) (A) (2) (A)
1. R. Smith invested cash in a mercantile business 1.
2. Paid cash for rent of store building 2.
3. Bought fixtures for cash 3.
4. Bought merchandise on account 4.
5. Bought office supplies for cash 5.
6. Sold merchandise for cash, note, balance on account 6.
7. Gave a trade creditor a note on account 7.
8. Paid a trade creditor cash on account 8.
9. Paid note payable due a creditor, with interest 9.
10. Received cash on account from a customer 10.
11. Received payment of note due from customer, with interest 11.
12. Paid wages and salaries 12.
13. Paid miscellaneous expenses 13.
14. A customer goes bankrupt and pays only a part of his account, the rest being uncollectible 14.
15. Bought merchandise for cash, note, balance on account 15.
16. Traded merchandise for furniture and fixtures 16.

 

  1. The following statements are to be marked by circling “T” if true, or “F” if false. A statement which is in any part incorrect is to be considered false.

T or F. The declaration of cash dividends results in a current liability on the balance sheet.

T or F. For a corporation having only common stock outstanding, the book value of the common stock is equal to the result obtained by dividing the difference between the total assets and the total liabilities by the number of common shares outstanding.

T or F. Customers’ accounts with credit balances should be shown on the balance sheet as current liabilities.

T or F. If the ending raw materials inventory is valued at too low a figure (other data on the statements correct), the cost of goods sold will be too small.

T or F. If depreciation of an asset is overestimated, that asset will be overvalued on the balance sheet.

T or F. A partnership is always automatically dissolved by the death of any one of its members.

T or F. Stock-dividends declared but not yet issued are shown on the balance sheet as current liabilities.

T or F. If all the stockholders of a corporation die, the corporation ceases to exist.

T or F. Holders of cumulative preferred stock have an unconditional right to dividends that are in arrears.

T or F. If the goods in process inventory at the beginning of an accounting period is overstated (other data on the statements correct), the gross profit for that period will be too small.

T or F. A corporation with a $200,000 surplus account could have no difficulty in paying a $100,000 cash dividend to stockholders.

T or F. Patents are written off to factory expense over the period of their economic life which cannot be more than 17 years.

T or F. Capital surplus represents the amount of profits which the stockholders and directors have been willing to leave invested in the business.

T or F. Expenditures which increase the usefulness of an asset, or prolong its life, are capital expenditures.

T or F. The introduction of controlling accounts for expenses makes necessary some change in the form of the journals used by that business.

T or F. Discount on Stock may be correctly shown on the balance sheet as a deferred charge.

T or F. A sinking fund reserve is set up to prevent the use of sinking fund cash for dividend purposes.

T or F. Preferred stock is never entitled to preference in the distribution of assets in liquidation, unless specified in the stock agreement.

T or F. A firm which has incurred a loss for the year may have more cash on hand at the end of the year than it had at the beginning of that year.

T or F. The cost of repairing a second-hand machine, before it is put to use in the factory, should be charged to factory expense.

 

  1. You are given a Statement of Profit and Loss of the Northwestern Manufacturing Company for the year ended December 31, 1940. Profit is shown as $121,380 Upon investigation you find that the accountant had proceeded as follows:
    1. Inventory had been valued at Market, $180,000; Cost was $150,000.
    2. Depreciation had been calculated on new machinery (purchased January 1, 1940) at a 10% rate. The general experience of competitors indicated that the life of the equipment was five years. The cost of the machine under question was $38,000.
    3. Wages due salesman for services rendered, $8000, had been overlooked.
    4. A garage owned by the Company was destroyed by fire. The building had a book value of $30,000. The insurance company had agreed to pay $20,000. The Company had signed a release but no record had been made of the fire or agreement.
    5. Accounts Receivable were valued at Gross, $200,000.
    6. Competitors had found that about 2% of gross accounts were uncollectible. About $1000 in cash discounts applicable to 1940 were expected to be taken.

What changes would you make on the Balance Sheet and the Statement of Profit and Loss for each of the above items?

  1. List the problems associated with the valuation of fixed assets: (a) at the time of acquisition, (b) of changes subsequent to the time of acquisition. Explain the relationship between these problems and cost determination in a manufacturing enterprise. Suggest solutions which the accountant has used in the past and discuss these critically in terms of economic theory.

 

(b) Statistics

(If time permits, answer all questions; note the unequal weighting, however. Plan to spend approximately 30 minutes on question 3.)

  1. (25 points)
    In the space to the left of each of the following statements indicate whether the statement is true (T) or false (F). Do not guess; if you don’t know whether a statement is true or false, don’t market.

_____ a. In a series of positive numbers the algebraic sum of the deviations of the individual items from their arithmetic mean is positive.

_____ b. In a simple linear correlation the slopes of the two elementary regression lines are always the same.
_____ c. Fisher’s Ideal Index Number formula satisfies both the time reversal and factor reversal tests.
_____ d. A moving average of points which lie along a straight line will reproduce the line.
_____ e. The sum of the squared deviations from the median of the frequency distribution is less than the sum of the squared deviations from any other average of the same frequency distribution.
_____ f. In simple linear correlation the two elementary lines of regression are identical if the simple correlation coefficient (r) is plus one and perpendicular to each other if the simple correlation coefficient is -1.
_____ g. The time series of the population of the United States plots is a straight line on semi-log paper; therefore, we may conclude that the population of the United States has grown at a constant relative rate.
_____ h. The simple correlation coefficient (ryx) is the arithmetic mean of the two simple regression coefficients (bxy and byx).
_____ i. In every frequency distribution 68% of the cases lie within plus and minus one standard deviation from the arithmetic mean.
_____ j. If the simple linear correlation coefficient between X and Y is small, it shows that there is very little relationship of any kind between X and Y.
_____ k. The standard error of estimate for the regression of Y on X depends upon the units in which Y is measured.
_____ l. The aggregative price index with base year quantity weights is identical to the arithmetic index of price relatives weighted by values of the base year.
_____ m. The sampling distribution of means of samples (all of the same size) drawn at random from a normal universe is also normal.
_____ n. The product of the individual items of a series of numbers is unchanged if each of the items is replaced by the geometric mean.
_____ o. The ratios-to-trend method of obtaining an index of seasonal variation is valid only if the underlying trend his linear.
_____ p. If the probability of getting a tail in a single toss of a bias coin is 1/4, the probability of getting three heads in three independent tosses of the same coin is 3/4.
_____ q. The sampling distribution of means of samples (all of the same size) drawn at random from a non-normal universe is less normal than the universe itself.
_____ r. The standard deviation of the sampling distribution of means drawn at random depends upon the size of the samples.
_____ s. The simple geometric average of relative prices satisfies the time reversal test.
_____ t. If a frequency distribution is symmetric when plotted on the arithmetic scale, the geometric mean, the median, and the mode will all coincide.
_____ u. If a frequency distribution is symmetric when plotted with a logarithmic scale on the X-axis, it will be skewed when plotted on the arithmetic scale.
_____ v. The harmonic mean of a series of positive numbers is sometimes greater in the geometric mean.
_____ w. The median is less affected than the arithmetic mean by the magnitude of extreme observations.
_____ x. The probability that two independent observations drawn at random from the same normal universe will both deviate by more than one standard deviation from the arithmetic mean of the universe is approximately 0.32 (= 32%).

  1. (35 points)
    State the reasoning behind your answer to the following parts (seven in all) of question 1:

(a or n)
(b, f, or h)
(c or s)
(i)
(j)
(p or x)
(r)

In each case, if you marked the statement true demonstrate its truth; if you marked it false, revise it so that it is correct, and demonstrate that your revision is true. Use mathematics where convenient.

  1. (40 points)
    The ABC Corporation which manufactures and sells over 1,000,000 packages of cigarettes (20 cigarettes per package) per year advertises of that on the average their cigarettes will burn for 15 minutes (per cigarette).
    The XYZ Corporation, making and selling over 2,000,000 packages of cigarettes per year (20 cigarettes per package) asserts that on the average its cigarettes will burn for 16 minutes (per cigarette).
    The Honesty-in-Advertising Association samples each manufacturer’s cigarettes, taking one sample of 145 cigarettes (not packages) of each Corporation’s. The following is a tabulation of their findings:
Maker of Cigarette Mean Burning Time
(in Minutes)
Sample of [sic] Standard Deviation of Burning Time
(in Minutes)
ABC Corporation 14.5 6.0
XYZ Corporation 15.0 4.0

On the basis of the above findings,

a. Do you feel that the claims of each manufacturer are justified?

b. Do you feel that XYZ cigarettes on the average burn longer than ABC cigarettes.In answering these questions make use of whatever relevant logical techniques you have learned. State your reasoning carefully; your reasoning is even more important than your arithmetic.
Note: The square root of 52 is 7.2.

 

 

PART III

Write on either (a) or (b) and two other subjects.
One of these may be the second subject in Economic History. (Approximately 3 hours).

(a) Economic History of the United States

(Answer the first three questions and, if time remains, the fourth.
Answer in outline form so far as possible.)

  1. Briefly describe or explain.

a. colonial indentured servant;
b. growth of slavery in the colonies;
c. coinage act of 1792;
d. rise of steamboats in the Mississippi Valley;
e. tariff of 1833;
f. railroad land grants of 1862-71;
g. transportation act of 1920;
h. War Industries Board;
i. Congress of Industrial Organization;
j. wages and hours act of 1938.

  1. Enumerate the chief causes for:

a. adoption of the public land act of 1820;
b. decline of canals after 1860;
c. decline of the general price level, 1865-1896;
d. shifted to a favorable balance of commodity trade after 1873;
e. restriction of immigration after 1921;
f. distressed condition of agriculture since 1920;
g. demand for a New Deal in 1933.

  1. Compare the chief exports and imports of about 1860 with those of the post-World War period. Carefully explain the chief economic developments responsible for the changes that took place.
  2. Outline and explain the history of the merchant marine, 1789-1940.

 

(b) Economic History of Europe

(Answer two questions.)

  1. Discuss the significance of any two of the following authors for the student of modern European economic history: Buckle, Tawny, Spengler, Clapham.
  2. Compare the role of the state in industrial enterprise in France and England during the seventeenth century. Did the French or the English government do the most for the general welfare of its people by its industrial policies?
  3. Compare the influence of either the railway or the canal upon the economic development of France, England, and Germany.

(c) Labor

(Answer both questions.)

  1. Discuss:

a. the main features of the various state minimum wage laws and the federal Fair Labor Standards Act;
b. the economic theories upon which they are based;
c. the constitutional issues involved.

  1. Discuss the issues involved as regards structure, membership, aims and methods in the following struggles:

a. The A. F. of L. versus the Knights of Labor.
b. The I.W.W. versus the A. F. of L.
c. Shop committees (or so-called employee representation plans or as sometimes termed “company” and “independent” unions) versus so-called “outside” unions.
d. The C.I.O versus the A.F. of L.

 

(d) Government Finance

(Answer all questions.)

  1. (35 points)

Mark each of the following propositions “True” or “False” and explain briefly (on separate paper):
The exemption, under federal personal-income tax, of interest on the obligations of state and local governments
_____ a. Involves a kind of federal subsidy or grant which is not commendable in terms of the basis on which the different states share relatively.
_____ b. Probably involve serious inequity as among large income receivers of similar income circumstances.
_____ c. Lowers the rate of interest which state and local governments must pay on their new borrowings.
_____ d. Probably serves to retard or delay recovery from severe depressions.
_____ e. Imposes indirectly a significant burden upon persons of small income in their capacity as savers.

  1. (25 points)
    It is often argued that income taxes, while having great merit in other respects, are ill-suited for a predominant place in revenue systems because their revenue-yield fluctuates so widely between years of prosperity and depression. Are such wide fluctuations a fault or virtue in a federal tax? Discuss.
  2. (25 points)
    In spite of its excellent cumulative features, the federal gifts tax leaves large opportunities for avoidance of estates tax through the distribution of property by gift. Explain “cumulative features”; and indicate the relevant facts about the law which have to do with the avoidance opportunities.

 

(e) Transportation

(Answer all questions. Note weighting of questions.)

  1. (10 points)
    In the following statements, underline the figure, or concept, that most nearly accords with accuracy.

    1. Operating expenses of a railroad may be expected to vary in accordance with:
      tons of freight carried; passenger-miles; train-Miles; car-mile; miles of track
    2. The standard gauge of American railroads is:
      3 ft. 6 in.; 4 ft.; 4 ft. 8 in.; 5 ft. 2 in.; 5 ft. 5 in.
    3. The average freight traffic density of American railroads is:
      100,000; 500,000; 1,000,000; 1,500,000; 5,000,000; 10,000,000
    4. The Interstate Commerce Commission was given power to prescribe actual railroad rates in:
      1906; 1903; 1887; 1911; 1920
    5. The carrying capacity of ocean ships is customarily expressed by:
      gross registered tons; deadweight tons; net registered tons; displacement tons; cargo tons of 40 cu. ft.
    6. The regulation of the rates of waterway common carriers in interstate commerce was authorized by Congress in:
      1900; 1916; 1920; 1933
  2. (15 points)
    The following diagram represents two railroad roots and 6 stations, the figures indicating the mileage between each pair of stations. The East and West Railroad serves all these points.

Indicate which of the rate situations stated below are departures from the provisions of the 4th Section of the Interstate Commerce Act:

a. A rate of 50¢ on commodity “X” from A to E, and 75¢ from E to B.

b. A rate of 25¢ on commodity “X” from A to B, and 20¢ from A to C.

c. A rate of 40¢ on commodity “X” from A to D, and 60¢ on commodity “Y” from A to C.

d. A rate of 45¢ on commodity “X” from A to C, and 50¢ on the same commodity from C to E.

e. A rate of 75¢ on commodity “X” from A to F via C, and 50¢ from A to F via E on the same commodity.

  1. (10 points)
    Draw up definitions of “common carrier” and “contract carrier” for the purpose of establishing a system of regulation of water carriers in interstate commerce of the United States.
  2. (20 points)
    The following diagram represents the line of a single railroad with 8 stations. The numbers represent the distances between stations:

Suppose that the rate structure on traffic between these points is represented by the 1st and 5th class rates, and commodity rates on furniture, and steel products, such as sheets, bars, rods.

From A
to
All rates are cents per 100 lbs.
1st Class 5th Class Furniture Iron and Steel
B 25 20 10 16
C 31 22 12 20
D 20 19 10 17
E 37 25 13 22
F 48 30 17 29
G 50 33 20 31
H 50 36 20 31

Assume neither water nor highway competition. What departures from principles of rate-making do you detect in this rate structure?

  1. (15 point)
    The Omnibus Transportation Bill which passed in the House of Representatives last Summer, inter alia, contain the following provisions: “In order that the public at large may enjoy the benefit and economy afforded by each type of transportation, the Commission shall permit each type of carrier or carriers to reduce rates so long as such rates maintain a compensatory return to the carrier or carriers after taking into consideration overhead and all other elements entering into the cost to the carrier or carriers for the service rendered…”Should such a provision be finally adopted into the law and seriously enforced by the Commission, what effect presumably would it have on the freight rate structures, and on the distribution of commodities? Why?
  1. (10 point)
    In which of the following cases is a certificate of public convenience and necessity required? Check the affirmative cases.

    1. A railroad desires to refund a maturing issue of bonds.
    2. Two motor highway common carriers wish to consolidate properties and operations.
    3. John Smith wishes to inaugurate a highway service between Chicago and St. Louis. He has a contract with a St. Louis manufacturer to haul enamel ware to Chicago; and this will take all his facilities northbound. But he desires to secure return loads and will haul any traffic that is offered.
    4. A railroad is about to acquire a new Diesel stream-lined train.
    5. A water common carrier, finding operations entirely unprofitable, decides to abandon operations.
  2. (10 points)
    A common carrier subject to the jurisdiction of the Interstate Commerce Commission files a tariff containing new schedules of rates, embodying a number of changes. Which of the following statements most accurately describes the Commission procedure in dealing with the tariff.

    1. The tariff is passed around among the 11 commissioners, each of whom examines it for possible violations of the first four sections, and the 6 Section of the Act. If the majority of prove it, the tariff is accepted.
    2. The Commission refers it to the standing rate committees of the carriers for determination of the lawfulness of the rates contained therein.
    3. The tariff is received by the Terrace Bureau of the Commission, and checked by its rate clerks for conformance to the provisions of the sixth Section of the Act. If conforming thereto, it is accepted and is permitted to become effective.
    4. The tariff is returned to the carriers with the statement, that since the burden of proof rests upon the carriers to justify the new rates, they must prove that the rates are lawful under the Act before the tariff can be allowed to become effective.
  3. (10 points)
    An ocean steamship line quotes a rate of $10 W/M on automobiles, New York to Liverpool. What would be the ocean freight on an automobile so shipped, weighing 4,000 pounds boxed, and measuring 120 in. by 60 in. by 50 in.?

Source:  University of Chicago Archives. Department of Economics, Records. Box 39, Folder 28.

Image Source: Element from the Social Science Research Building. University of Chicago Photographic Archive, apf2-07449, Special Collections Research Center, University of Chicago Library.

Categories
Chicago Fields Suggested Reading Syllabus

Chicago. Industrial Organization Reading List. Stigler, 1973

 

While the asterisks in the following reading list probably indicate the subset of required course readings, the  list in its entirety may be considered George Stigler’s universe of readings relevant for a graduate student intending to take a comprehensive examination in the field of industrial organization at Chicago. An autobiographical note by George Stigler from 1982 is included at the Nobel Prize website.

_________________

READING LIST
INDUSTRIAL ORGANIZATION
George J. Stigler

Spring, 1973
Business 305
Economics 380

  1. The Definition and Empirical Determination of Competition and Monopoly
    1. Analytical literature

A. P. Lerner, “The Concept of Monopoly”, Review of Economic Studies, Vol. 1

F. H. Knight, Risk, Uncertainty and Profit, p. 76 ff.

G. J. Stigler, “Perfect Competition, Historically Contemplated”, Journal of Political Economy, 1957 (reprinted in Essays in the History of Economics).

*G. J. Stigler, The Organization of Industry, Ch. 2, 3, 4.

*G. Rosenbluth, “Measure of Concentration”, in Business Concentration and Price Policy.

E. F. Fama and A. B. Laffer, “The Number of Firms and Competition”, AER, Sept. 1972.

T. Scitovsky, “Economic Theory and Measurement of Concentration”, in Business Concentration and Price Policy.

M. O. Finkelstein and Richard Friedberg, “The Application of an Entropy Theory of Concentration”, Yale Law Review, March 1967.

H. Demsetz, “Why Regulate Utilities?”, Journal of Law and Economics, April 1968.

    1. Statistical studies

*A. C. Harberger, “Monopoly and Resource Allocation”, American Economic Review, May 1954.

G. Rosenbluth, Concentration in Canadian Manufacturing Industries.

R. Evely and I. M. D. Little, Concentration in British Industry, Ch. 1, pp. 104 ff., 160 ff.

P. Pashigian, “Market Concentration in the United States and Great Britain”, Journal of Law and Economics, October 1968.

Ralph C. Nelson, Concentration in the Manufacturing Industries of the United States, Ch. I-IV.

Carl Eis, “The 1919-1930 Merger Movement in American Industry”, Journal of Law and Economics, October 1969.

F. L. Pryor, “An International Comparison of Concentration Ratios,” Review of Economics and Statistics, May 1972.

M. Gort, “Analysis of Stability and Change in Market Shares”, Journal of Political Economy, 1963.

R. W. Kilpatrick, “A Choice Among Alternative Measures of Industrial Concentration”, Review of Economics and Statistics, May 1967.

*Irvin Grossack, “the Concept and Measurement of Permanent Industrial Concentration, Journal of Political Economy, July/Aug 1972.

  1. Determinants of the Firm-Size Structure
    1. The Economies of Scale

J. McConnell, “Corporate Earnings by Size of Firm”. Survey of Current Business, May 1945.

J. Johnston, Statistical Cost Functions, esp. pp. 110 ff., Ch. 6.

J. Haldi and D. Whitcomb, “Economies of Scale in Industrial Plants”, Journal of Political Economy, 1967.

J. S. Bain, Barriers to New Competition.

*J. S. Bain, “Economies of Scale…” in Readings in Industrial Organization and Public Policy.

*G. J. Stigler, The Economies of Scale, The Organization of Industry, Ch. 7.

P. E. Hart, “The Size and Growth of Firms”,Economica, February 1962.

*F. Modigliani, “New Developments on the Oligopoly Front”, Journal of Political Economy, June 1958.

D. Osborne, “The Role of Entry in Oligopoly Theory”, Journal of Political Economy, 1964.

L. Weiss, “The Survivor Technique and the Extent of Suboptimal Capacity”, Journal of Political Economy, June 1964.

T. Saving, “Estimation of Optimum Size of Plant by the Survivor Method”, Quarterly Journal of Economics, Nov. 1961.

L. Telser, Competition, Collusion and Game Theory, Ch. 8.

    1. Mergers

A. S. Dewing, “A Statistical Test of the Success of Consolidations”, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 1921.

G. J. Stigler, “Monopoly and Oligopoly by Merger”, The Organization of Industry, Ch. 8.

F. T. C., Report on Corporate Mergers and Acquisitions.

*J. Markham, “Survey of the Evidence and Findings on Mergers”, in Business Concentration.

J. F. Weston, The Role of Mergers in the Growth of Large Firms.

G. J. Stigler, “The Statistics of Monopoly and Merger”, Journal of Political Economy, 1956.

*Ralph Nelson, Merger Movements in American Industry.

H. G. Manne, “Mergers and the Market for Corporate Control”, Journal of Political Economy, April 1965.

  1. The Effects of Concentration
    1. Collusion

*D. H. MacGregor, Industrial Combination, Part II, Ch. 1.

W. Fellner, Competition Among the Few.

W. Nicholls, Imperfect Competition Within Agricultural Industries, pp. 120-130.

F. Machlup, Economics of Sellers’ Competition, Ch. 13.

*G. J. Stigler, The Organization of Industry, Ch. 5.

W. Nutter, “Duopoly, Oligopoly, and Emerging Competition”, Southern Economic Journal, 1964.

Lester Telser, Competition, Collusion and Game Theory, Ch. 5.

    1. Price Discrimination

N. I. C. B., Public Regulation of Competitive Practices, pp. 63-85.

J. P. Miller, Unfair Competition, Ch. 7-9.

J. Robinson, Economics of Imperfect Competition, Bk. V.

F. Machlup, The Basing Point System.

G. J. Stigler, A Theory of Uniform Delivered Prices, The Organization of Industry, Ch. 14.

    1. Price Rigidity

*G. Means, Industrial Prices and Their Relative Inflexibility.

Sweezy and Stigler, articles on the kinked oligopoly demand curve in American Economic Association, Readings in Price Theory.

A. C. Neal, Industrial Concentration and Price Inflexibility.

*Stigler, Administered Prices and Oligopolistic Inflation, The Organization of Industry, Ch. 19.

*Stigler & Kindahl, The Behavior of Industrial Prices, Ch. 1, 4, 5.

Government Price Statistics (Joint Economic Committee, 1961, also, National Bureau of Economic Research), Staff Papers No. 8 and 9.

R. Selden and C. dePodwin, “Business Pricing Policies and Inflation”, Journal of Political Economy, 1963.

L. Weiss, “Business Pricing Policies and Inflation Reconsidered,” Journal of Political Economy, 1966.

    1. Profits

*J. S. Bain, “Relation of Profit Rate to Industry Concentration”, Quarterly Journal of Economics, August 1951.

N. R. Collins and Lee E. Preston, Concentration and Price-Cost Margins in Manufacturing Industries.

G. J. Stigler, Capital and Rates of Return in Manufacturing Industries, Ch. 3.

Y. Brozen, “The Antitrust Task Force Deconcentration Recommendation”, Journal of Law and Economics, October, 1970.

S. I. Ornstein, “Concentration and Profits”, Journal of Business, Oct. 1972.

  1. Topics in Industry Behavior
    1. Advertising

E. Chamberlin, Theory of Monopolistic Competition, Ch. 6-7.

L. Telser, “Advertising and Cigarettes”, Journal of Political Economy, October 1962.

*N. Kaldor, “Economic Aspects of Advertising”, Review of Economic Studies, 1950.

*L. Telser, “Advertising and Competition”, Journal of Political Economy, December 1964.

*G. J. Stigler, “The Economics of Information,” The Organization of Industry, Ch. 16.

J. Peterman, “The Clorox Case and the Television Rate Structure”, Journal of Law and Economics, Oct. 1968.

W. S. Comanor and T. A. Wilson, “Advertising Market Structure and Performance”, Review of Economics and Statistics, 1967.

Phillip Nelson, “Information and Consumer Behavior,” Journal of Political Economy, April 1970.

    1. The Nature of the Firm and Vertical Integration

*R. Coase, “The Nature of the Firm”, Readings in Price Theory.

H. Demsetz, “The Exchange and Enforcement of Property Rights”, Journal of Law and Economics, October 1964.

A. Smith, Wealth of Nations, Bk. I, Ch. 3.

Marshall, Principles of Economics, Bk. IV, Ch. 10-13.

A. Young, “Increasing Returns and Economic Progress”, Economic Journal, 1928 (and in Clemence’s Readings in Economic Analysis, 2 vols.)

G. J. Stigler, “Division of Labor is Limited by the Extent of the Market,” The Organization of industry, Ch. 12.

*M. Adelman, “Concept and Measurement of Vertical Integration”, in Business Concentration and Price Policy.

M. Gort, Diversification and Integration in American Industry.

    1. Conglomerate Mergers

C. Edwards, “Conglomerate Progress as a Source of Power”, in Business Concentration and Price Policy.

J. Lorie and P. Halpern, “Conglomerates: The Rhetoric and the Evidence”, Journal of law and Economics, April 1970.

FTC, Economic Report on Corporate Mergers (1969).

    1. Schumpeter’s Theory

*Schumpeter, Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy, Ch. 7-8.

E. Mansfield, “Size of Firm, Market Structure, and innovation”, Journal of Political Economy, 1963.

A. Plant, “Economic Theory Concerning Patents for Invention”, Economica, 1934.

*John McGee, “Patent Exploitation”, Journal of Law and Economics, Oct. 1966.

P. Swan, “Market Structure and Technological Progress”, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 1970.

  1. Large Number Industries
    1. Cartels

G. J. Stigler, The Theory of Price, (1966), Ch. 13.

Clair Wilcox, Public Policies Toward Business(3rd) Ch. 30.

C. Edwards, Economic and Political Aspects of International Cartels.

    1. Trade Associations

*Mancur Olson, The Logic of Collective Action, esp. pp. 125-167.

T. N. E. C. Monograph No. 18, Trade Association Survey.

    1. Retailing: Resale Price Maintenance

W. Bowman, “Prerequisites and Effects of Resale Price Maintenance”, University of Chicago Law Journal, 1955.

F. T. C., Resale Price Maintenance.

*L. Telser, “Resale Price Maintenance”, Journal of Law and Economics, October 1960.

B. Yamey, The Economics of Resale Price Maintenance.

  1. Anti-trust Policy
    1. History

J. D. Clark, Federal Trust Policy.

W. H. Taft, The Anti-trust Act and the Supreme Court.

H. B. Thorelli, The Federal Antitrust Policy.

Robert Bork, “Legislative Intent and the Policy of the Sherman Act”, Journal of Law and Economics, October 1966.

R. Posner, “A Statistical Study of Antitrust Enforcement”, Journal of Law and Economics, 1970.

G. Stigler, “The Economic Effects of the Antitrust Laws,” Journal of Law and Economics, Oct. 1966.

    1. Major dissolutions

E. Jones, Trust Problem in the United States, Ch. 18.

Hale, “Trust Dissolution”, Columbia Law Review, 1940.

W. S. Stevens, Industrial Combinations and Trusts, Ch. 14-15.

S. Whitney, Antitrust Policies, 2 vols.

    1. Law of Conspiracy

U. S. v. Trenton Potteries, 273 U.S. 392 (1927).

F. T. C. v. Cement Institute, 68 Sup. Ct. 793 (1948).

Report of Attorney-General’s National Committee on the Anti-trust Laws.

 

Source: University of Chicago Archives. George Stigler Papers, Box 2, Folder “1970’s: course notes + related: Industrial org. + microeconomics”.

Image Source: George Stigler (November 1977). University of Chicago Photographic Archive, apf3-00844, Special Collections Research Center, University of Chicago Library.

 

Categories
Chicago Problem Sets

Chicago. Unions and wages problem set. Murphy, 2008

 

 

The following problem was assigned by Kevin Murphy in Economics 301 at the University of Chicago during the Autumn quarter of 2008. Marshall Steinbaum, Friend of Economics in the Rear-view Mirror and Research Director at the Roosevelt Institute), provided a copy to share here with the history of economics community. 

Marshall Steinbaum writes:

Gary Becker and Kevin Murphy would each give one lecture per week. Every weekly problem set had two questions, one assigned by Becker and one by Murphy. This one on unions was Murphy’s, as indeed were all the ones with a vaguely macro cast to them. It was odd how he both denigrated macro in lectures and assigned a whole shadow macro curriculum.

The problem below can be profitably read in light of the contemporary discussion of monopsony power and unions (e.g. Kate Bahn, “Understanding the importance of monopsony power in the U.S. labor market,” Equitable Growth, July 5, 2018)

_____________________

Links to 1947 Harvard syllabi on unions

Looking back in the rear-view mirror a half-century earlier, it is interesting to note the depth of coverage of unions in the graduate labor sequence at Harvard taught by John Dunlop:

Economics 81a Labor Organization and Collective Bargaining

Economics 81b  Labor and Public Policy

_____________________

Problem by Kevin Murphy on unions (2008)

Consider the impact of unions on wages. Consider a simple economy with a fixed supply of labor, L, which is supplied inelastically. Assume that there is a union that sets wages for workers covered by the union contract so as to maximize the income of its members. Assume that there are three inputs to production, L1, Land K. All workers are identical and can provide either type 1 or type 2 labor. Capital is supplied in a competitive market. Assume that all prices are denominated in terms of the output good Y.

  1. If the production function has the form Y=F(K,G(L1,L2)), where both F() and G() are CRS, how would a union that can set wages for L1and Ldesire to set wages? Might the union want to set wages at the competitive level? Would the union want to set equal wages for the two types of labor? Why or why not?
  2. How would your answer to A change if the production function was Y=H(K,L1,L2), where H was CRS?
  3. What would happen in parts A and B if the supply of capital was perfectly elastic? Why?
  4. Now assume that markets are initially competitive which results in competitive prices and usage for each type of labor and capital. Assume that those working as type 2 workers form a union so that they can increase their incomes. In particular assume that the newly formed union seeks to maximize the incomes of its initial members. Under the assumption of part A, how would the union set the wage for type 2 labor? What effect would this have on overall labor income? Could it make workers as a whole worse off? If so when and why?
  5. Now assume that there is only one type of labor so that Y=F(L,K) with F() having CRS. Assume that the union is free to set the real wage picks a wage that will maximize the current income of workers and that the demand for labor is inelastic at the steady state wage rate. Assume that the capital stock is fixed initially but that capital is accumulated via investment as in the neo-classical growth model. If we start at the steady state of the neoclassical growth model, what will happen to wages, capital and employment over time? Why?

Source: Transcribed from a personal copy of Marshall Steinbaum made available to Economics in the Rear-view Mirror.

_____________________

Marshall Steinbaum added

“In this case, I believe the point is that when the union causes labor to be paid in excess of its marginal product, the rate of return on capital is driven lower than the capitalists’ rate of time preference, causing them to cease to supply capital. As the capital stock depreciates away, the labor share remains high even as the wage level declines, causing a downward spiral rather than re-equilibration at a lower level of capital and output.

These problem sets were never explicitly tied to real-world events, but the sense I got was that this was intended to be a theory of the declining manufacturing sector in the United States and Western Europe.”

Source: Personal communication.

Image Source:  Kevin Murphy in “Chicago Schooled” by Michael Fitzgerald, University of Chicago Magazine (September-October, 2009).

Categories
Chicago Curriculum Regulations

Chicago. Intradepartmental discussion, graduate microtheory prerequisite. 1928.

 

Within an academic year there is often a natural ordering for a two-semester or three-quarter course sequence that allows the later courses to build on the course(s) that preceded it. With the growing depth of economic theory by the 1920s at the latest, more than a single course year was understood to be required to get up to research speed. We can add to this the further complicating fact of graduate programs being fed from a variety of undergraduate programs. It then becomes necessary to get excruciatingly explicit about the course content of prerequisites. 

The memos transcribed below make it clear that a “stiff” sophomore-level “value and distribution theory” course as taught in the College at the University of Chicago would constitute the minimum preparation to begin the study of neo-classical economics à la Viner in 1928. It is also noteworthy that the “powwow” of Chicago economists named in L. C. Marshall’s first memo below appeared to consider the course on “Contemporary Continental Economic Thought” a different species altogether, not requiring even intermediate microeconomic theory as a prerequisite.

________________

Economic Theory Course Numbers and Titles

General Survey Course [undergraduate]

102, 103, 104. The Economic Order I, II, III. Professor [Leon Carroll] Marshall and Others.

Intermediate Course [undergraduate]

201. Intermediate Economic Theory. Professor [Paul Howard] Douglas, Associate Professor[Lewis Carlyle] Sorrel and Assistant Professor [Garfield V.] Cox

[Graduate Theory Core]

301, 302, 303. Introduction to the Graduate Study of Economic Theory

301. Neo-Classical Economics. Professor [Jacob] Viner
302. History of Economic Thought. Professor [Frank Hyneman] Knight
303. Modern Tendencies in Economics. Professor [Jacob] Viner

309. Contemporary Continental Economic Thought. Mr. [Paul Howard] Palyi

 

Source:  University of Chicago, Annual Register with Announcements for the Year 1927-1928, pp. 162-163.

________________

3 Memos: Marshall to Viner to Marshall to Viner

The University of Chicago
Department of Economics

January 13, 1928

Memorandum

To: J. Viner
From L. C. Marshall

Before Knight left us we had a long powwow about the theory situation as it seemed to have developed through the autumn quarter. [Frank Hyneman] Knight, [Lionel D.] Edie, [Theodore Otte] Yntema, [Henry] Schultz, [William Homer] Spencer and myself participated.

Here are the results of the conference:

1) It was agreed that neither 201 nor 301 should be regarded prerequisite to 309.

2) It was agreed that a person taking 301 could not wisely take 309.

3) It was agreed that 201 could not properly be made prerequisite for 301 since most of the students taking 301 do not come up through our own organization.

Do you see any difficulties with this arrangement?

[signed]
L. C. Marshall

LCM:GS

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

The University of Chicago
The Department of Economics

Memorandum to L. C. Marshall from J. Viner. Jan. 20, 1928

(1) I do not know enough about the purposes and scope of 309 to be able to express an intelligent opinion.

(2) Do. [ditto]

(3) I do not see why 201 or its equivalent should not be demanded as a prerequisite for 301, any stiff undergraduate course in price and distribution being regarded as the equivalent of 201. For undergraduates wanting to take 301 as undergraduates it seems to me clear that 201 should be insisted upon as a prerequisite.

J.V.

*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *

[Memorandum to] Mr. Jacob Viner [from] Mr. L. C. Marshall. Feb. 9, [192]8

In reply to your note of January 20 in which you say “I do not see why 201 or its equivalent should not be demanded as a prerequisite for 301, any stiff undergraduate course in price and distribution being regarded as the equivalent of 201. For undergraduates wanting to take 301 as undergraduates it seems to me clear that 201 should be insisted upon as a prerequisite.”

I judge that this means that no substantial difference of opinion exists between you and the group that talked the matter over. Apparently you would regard a sophomore course in the principles of economics (the usual thing in American colleges) as being an equivalent of 201 for purposes of stating the prerequisite for 301. This being true, what would you think of stating the prerequisite thus:

Prerequisite: a good undergraduate course in value and distribution.

It seems wise specifically to mention value and distribution for the expression “principles of economics” has no one meaning as far as undergraduate instruction is concerned.

LCM:GS

 

Source:  University of Chicago Archives. Department of Economics. Records.Box 35, Folder 14 “Economics Department. Records & Addenda”.

Image Source: University of Chicago Photographic Archive, apf1-08488, Special Collections Research Center, University of Chicago Library. The photograph is dated 14 June 1944.