Category: Chicago

Categories
Berkeley Chicago Columbia Cornell Harvard Michigan Minnesota Princeton Regulations Stanford Wisconsin Yale

Harvard. Memo on Master’s degree requirements in ten other departments, 1935

 

The following memo was found in the papers of the Harvard department of economics outlining the formal requirements for the award of a master’s degree in economics for ten other departments ca. 1935.  Harvard requirements for 1934-35 have been previously posted here at Economics in the Rear-View Mirror.

____________________

REQUIREMENTS FOR A.M. IN ECONOMICS

University of Chicago
—Catalogue Vol. XXV, March 15, 1935—
No. 7, p. 293.

“The specific requirements for the Master’s degree are:

  1. A minimum of 8 courses, or their equivalent (of which at least 6 must be in Grades II and III above*). Either in his undergraduate or graduate work the candidate should cover the substantial equivalent of the requirements for the Bachelor’s degree in economics…(May be shown by examination.)
  2. A thesis involving research of at least semi-independent character.
  3. A final examination (either oral or written at discretion of the department). The examination is on the thesis and its field and on one other field chosen by the candidate.
  4. All candidates…are expected to show ability to think clearly…on abstract economic questions, and familiarity with terms and common concepts of economic science.

No language requirement for A.M. apparently.

No set time limit, but (p. 282) they seem to regard three of work in economics (either as graduate or as undergraduate) as “normal preparation” although “exceptionally capable” students may do it in less time.

* Grade II and III being respectively survey and problem courses (II), and Research, reading and seminar courses (III). Grade I includes intermediate courses.

 

Stanford University

  1. One academic year of graduate work (A “normal time” but also minimum).
  2. Thesis
  3. Examinations (general or final and at discretion of department).

 

Cornell University

  1. At least one full year of residence at Cornell.
  2. “No student may be admitted to candidacy for any of the degrees of A.M., M.S.,…, or Ph.D. whose training has not included work in a foreign language equivalent to three units of entrance in one language or two in each of two languages.
  3. A thesis or (at departmental discretion) an essay.
  4. Written or oral (at departmental discretion) final examination.

He must show a knowledge of:

Three special fields, such as: in Economic Theory and History:

(1) Good general knowledge of history of economic thought, including classical school and contemporary.
(2) Familiarity with economic analysis and controversial area of economic thought.
(3) A background knowledge of social and intellectual history.

or in Monetary Theory:

One requirement:
(1) A detailed understanding of the theory and history of money; monetary system of the United States, theory and history of banking; banking system of United States, foreign exchange, monetary aspects of cyclical fluctuations.

No specific course requirements as far as I can see.

 

University of Minnesota

  1. At least one full academic year’s work (in residence).
  2. Thesis required.
  3. Nine credit hours each quarter of graduate courses for three quarters.
  4. He must have done in three years (undergraduate) work in his major subject if it is open to freshmen, or two years otherwise.
  5. A reading knowledge of a foreign language to be determined by the department is necessary.
  6. An examination.

 

University of Michigan

  1. Residence requirement: One semester and one summer session, or three summer sessions; nine hours work a semester and six hours a summer session are minimum to establish residence at the respective sessions.
  2. A minimum of 24 hours of graduate work is required (i.e. necessary but not alone sufficient).
  3. Thesis may be required at discretion of department (apparently economics does not require it).

 

University of Wisconsin

  1. At least two semesters’ work, at least one of which to be at Wisconsin.
  2. An oral examination.
  3. A thesis may be required of students seeking to specialize in a definite line of study.

 

Princeton University

“After Commencement Day, 1935, the degree of M.A. will be awarded only to a student who has passed the general examination for the Doctor’s degree.” This implies a knowledge of French and German; and implies not less than two years graduate study. The examination may be written, oral, or both. One year of residence is required.

 

Yale University

  1. Two full years of resident graduate study required (but may be in less time in exceptional cases where unusual scholarship is demonstrated).
  2. Reading knowledge of either French or German.
  3. An essay is required of all candidates.
  4. (Apparently) A comprehensive written examination in field of concentration in Department of Economics (it is not specified for which degree so that it seems to apply to both M.A. and Ph.D.).

 

Columbia University

  1. “The candidate shall have registered for and attended courses aggregating not less than thirty tuition points, distributed over a period of not less than one academic year or its equivalent.”
  2. “The candidate shall have satisfied the department of his choice that he has satisfied requirements specified by the department for the degree.” (May include courses, examination, an essay, seminars, or “other work”.)

 

University of California

“There are required 20 semester units and in addition a thesis.”

“At least eight of the 20 units must be strictly graduate work.”

“The student must spend one year of residence.”

Rate of taking units:

“Graduate students in the regular session taking only upper division courses are limited to a program of 16 units” (a semester or a year? probably a semester).

“Graduate students…taking only graduate courses are limited to 12 units.” Mixtures are regulated in proportion thereto.

 

Source: Harvard University Archives. Department of Economics, Correspondence and Papers 1930-1961. (UAV 349.11) Box 13, Folder “Graduate Instruction, Degree Requirements.”

 

 

Categories
Chicago Exam Questions

Chicago. Money, Banking, and Monetary Policy Exam for A.M. and Ph.D. Friedman, Mints, Marschak, 1952

 

 

 

The committee for the Money, Banking and Monetary Policy examination for the A.M. and Ph.D. degrees for the Winter Quarter 1952 at the University of Chicago consisted of Milton Friedman (chairman), Lloyd Mints, and Jacob Marschak. The date of the examination was February 12, 1952 taken by 25 students. From Milton Friedman’s notes it appears that the committee agreed to pass ten examinees at the Ph.D. level, ten at the A.M. level and five were failed.

_________________________________

MONEY, BANKING, AND MONETARY POLICY
Written Examination for the A.M. and Ph.D. Degrees
Winter Quarter, 1952

 

Write on the first three and two other questions. Time: 4 hours.

DO NOT PLACE YOUR NAME ON YOUR PAPER. GIVE ONLY YOUR NUMBER.

 

  1. Suppose that (1) the national income is $270 billion; (2) the total wage bill is $180 billion; (3) the average annual wage is $3000, with only negligible variation among individual wages; (4) government’s demand for goods and services is $60 billion, and consumers’ demand is $200 billion. Suppose that, through joint action of employers and labor unions the wage rate is increased by 10%, and that the real volume of government demand is not changed. Indicate further conditions (such as, for example, the monetary policy, fiscal policy, technological conditions, initial level of employment, the behavior of consumers and of entrepreneurs) that you deem particularly important for a rough estimate of the effects of the rise in wages upon the levels of (present and future) consumption and of prices. Give two or three such estimates on the basis of your own hypothetical numerical specifications of those conditions.
  2. “It will be sound policy for the Treasury to borrow new funds insofar as possible from nonbank sources, to minimize the inflationary potential of the deficit.” (January 1952 Economic Report of the President, pp. 141-2.)
    Discuss the basis for and validity of this view. In your answer, distinguish between the effects of borrowing from the Federal Reserve Banks and from other banks; and justify your conclusions in detail.
  3. According to the Keynesian theory of income and employment, the change in money income equals the change in “investment,” or, more generally, the change in “autonomous expenditures” times the “multiplier.”
    (a) Explain the terms in quotation marks. How, if at all, does the value of the “multiplier” depend on the distribution of income, the stock of money, the rate of interest?
    (b) A shift from a balanced government budget to a deficit because of an increase in expenditures would generally be regarded as a corresponding increase in “autonomous expenditures,” and therefore, other things the same, as leading to an increase in money income equal to the multiplier times this amount. Can this statement, which suggests that any effect on money income of the deficit depends only on its size and the size of the multiplier, be reconciled with the quotation in question 2, which implies that “the inflationary potential of the deficit,” presumably meaning the rise in money income it produces, depends on the method of financing the deficit?
  4. It has been claimed that the British made the gold content of the pound sterling too high when they returned to gold in 1925. What would be the effects of such action? Did these effects actually appear to any significant degree? In any case, what means were available, if any, for determining the “correct” content of the pound?
  5. “The great difficulty, if not the impossibility, of reversing a downward movement [of business activity] by monetary means alone must be accepted as demonstrated by experience.” Is this statement warranted? Support your position.
  6. “Lowness of interest is generally ascribed to plenty of money. But money, however plentiful, has no other effect, if fixes, than to raise the price of labour…It is in vain…to look for the cause of the fall or rise of interest in the greater or less quantity of gold and silver, which is fixed in any nation” (David Hume, 1752).
    Discuss in light of “modern” theories of the rate of interest.

 

Source: Hoover Institution Archives. Papers of Milton Friedman. Box 76, Folder 9 “University of Chicago Econ 300A”. [sic, this and other money, banking and monetary policy exams have been filed with material for the price theory course]

Categories
Chicago Curriculum Economics Programs Regulations Yale

Ruggles-Friedman correspondence on Draft Report on Graduate Training in Economics, 1955

 

A transcription of the complete printed Report of the Panel Discussions on Graduate Training in Economics at Yale (1956) was provided in the previous posting. A copy of the draft of that report from December 1955 can be found in Milton Friedman’s file of correspondence with the chairperson of the Yale Committee responsible for the report, Richard Ruggles, along with Ruggles’ cover letter and a copy of Friedman’s response. The first couple of pages of the draft are transcribed below because they provide a little bit of the backstory for the Report as does Ruggles’ cover letter. Otherwise the only substantive change between the two versions, aside from a rearrangement of a few sections in the Report, comes from Friedman’s reservations concerning the publication of doctoral theses in a university series. These were incorporated into the final Report. 

Fun Fact: Richard Ruggles graduated from Harvard in 1939. Classmates included his later Yale colleagues James Tobin and William Parker. The composer/conductor Leonard Bernstein was also a member of that Harvard class of ’39.

________________________

Letter from Richard Ruggles to Milton Friedman
Requesting Comments on Panel Report

 

YALE UNIVERSITY
Department of Economics
New Haven, Connecticut

Richard Ruggles

December 12th 1955

Professor Milton Friedman
Department of Economics
University of Chicago
Chicago, Illinois

Dear Milton,

At long last a preliminary draft of the report on the panel discussions held at Yale last spring has been prepared. This draft is based on notes taken on the discussions in the five panel meetings, and the draft has been gone over and revised according to the interpretations they placed upon the discussions in which they participated. Although the same agenda was followed in all the panel discussions, the amount of time spent on the various topics differed considerably.

Our intended procedure is as follows. We would like all the panel participants to send in their comments on this draft. In light of these comments one or more of three possible courses of action will be taken on each specific part of the draft. If numerous comments of the same general nature are made, the draft will be revised to present these views in the body of the text. This revision may consist either of replacing present sections or adding alternative views. In cases where only one or two individuals disagree on a particular point in the text, this disagreement may be handled by appropriate foontoe references. In instances where an individual panel member feels it desirable, he may write a section embodying his views and this will be appended to the report as a supplementary statement. It is not the object of this report to come out with an appearance of any greater degree of consensus than actually exists.

There appears to be widespread interest in the results of this inquiry. Numerous requests for copies of the final report have already been received. We had expected to publish the report here at Yale, but in view of the very great interest that has been shown, the committee has instructed me to ask the panel members whether or not they would approve of having the report published in an economic journal such as the American Economic Review. I would therefore appreciate it if, when you send in your comments about the panel report, you could also let me know whether or not you would approve of such publication.

Sincerely yours

[signed] Richard

ssk
enc.

________________________

Introduction to Draft Report of the Panel Discussions on Graduate Training in Economics

Confidential Preliminary Draft;
Not for Distribution

REPORT OF THE PANEL DISCUSSIONS ON GRADUATE TRAINING IN ECONOMICS

The program of graduate training in economics at Yale, and generally elsewhere in the United States, is the result of an evolutionary development. The changes that have occurred over the last two or three decades have taken the form of specific improvements in already existing programs. Although this approach can be expected to improve a graduate training program, it will in all probability lead to an end result quite different from, and not necessarily superior to, that which would result from a comprehensive reshaping of the program to meet the changed requirements, new objectives, and shifting substance in the field itself. Any minor change in an existing program must necessarily tie in with those parts of the program which remain unchanged; because the system as a whole has not been subjected to an overall redesign, it will be found necessary to modify any partial revisions so that consistency, equity, and flexibility will all be preserved.

Revision by such minor steps has a number of advantages. The degree of risk involved is minimized. Also, the changes undertaken can be expected to be within the capabilities of the organization which puts them into force. Finally, if changes are undertaken by small stages the existing program will usually be flexible enough to incorporate them without disruption.

A major reorganization involving the setting up of an entirely new program, on the other hand, faces many problems arising from lack of experience. Because such a system is new, it is often impossible to judge whether it can be carried out with the resources available. Finally, the implementation of the new system completely different in structural form may require flexibility on the part of those responsible for carrying it out that cannot be achieved quickly.

Thus it is no accident that change is usually of an evolutionary nature, but the possibility of setting up a completely new system should not be ignored. Evolutionary development, if not subjected to periodic overall review, can easily proceed in a direction which turns out to be sterile and unsuited to the needs of the society. Because evolutionary development is piecemeal, it tends unconsciously to take the underlying assumptions of the system for granted, and not to question the overall objectives and goals in relation to the requirements which must be met. Even if a comprehensive reorganization is never undertaken, it should be considered periodically. Even a complete failure in the attempt may breed new insights and suggest new directions that an orderly evolution should take. It was with these considerations in mind that the Department of Economics at Yale undertook to review the problem of graduate training in economics.

The monograph on graduate training published by the American Economic Association was extremely instructive with respect to the current status of economics training in the country, and the possible standards and improvements in such standards that might be established. The monograph, however, did not attempt to explore any major changes in the system itself.

Participation in an overall review should not be restricted to those who are administering the present system. Individuals concerned primarily with the substance of the field often have ideas that should receive consideration. Similarly, those who make use of the people who are trained, who may themselves be very little concerned either with substance or with training methods, will have valuable contributions to make concerning the areas of strength or weakness in the products of the training.

A considerable period of time was therefore invested in searching out new ideas from people in charge of administering programs, people interested in specialized areas of economics, people in business, and people in government and international organizations. During the fall and early winter of 1954-55, a great many interviews were conducted with representatives of these groups. These people were encouraged to discuss any portions of the overall problem they thought important, and no set questionnaire was used to elicit their responses. This procedure had two advantages. First, the influence of the preconceptions of the interviewers was kept to a minimum, and second, the interviews provided a sort of ink-blot test which was useful in assessing the kinds of problem that generally worried people in the different groups.

The material gathered from these interviews naturally lacked order and did not readily fit into any single comprehensive organization, but it was extremely useful in providing a basis for an agenda for a more orderly and comprehensive discussion. Such an agenda, together with a brief discussion of the various ideas expressed by individuals in the interviews, was therefore drawn up, and on the basis of this agenda a series of six panel discussions were held at Yale in the spring of 1955. The topics chosen for panel discussion covered only a few selected problems of graduate training in economics. In view of the limited time available for panel discussion, it was thought preferable to focus on a relatively small number of major issues. The choice of problems to be included was based on (1) their relative importance in suggesting possible new directions for graduate education, and (2) the amount of controversy they generated among the people with whom they were discussed.

The following report presents the results of the discussions of this agenda by the six panels.

[…]

________________________

Carbon copy of Milton Friedman’s Response to Ruggles

9 January 1956

Mr. Richard Ruggles
Department of Economics
Yale University
New Haven, Connecticut

Dear Dick:

Your report of the panel discussions strikes me as an excellent statement though my recollection of the discussions themselves are so vague that I would hardly feel competent to testify to the accuracy of the summary of the views expressed at the particular discussion that I participated in.

I find myself in substantial agreement with almost the whole of your report, the one point about which I have real doubts is the bottom half of page 15. While there are clearly some advantages to having a publication in the form of an annual series, it seems to me that most important of all that the better theses or redrafts of them will be worth publication in the regular professional journals and this would be much preferable. I feel that an entirely University series will not offer any substantial incentive to high quality but may well have the opposite effect.

Aside from this one point, the questions I have about the report are on a different level. My major question is whether you want to present the report as an observer’s summary of the panel discussions on the one hand or as the conclusions which the Yale committee drew from the panel discussions on the other. The present draft has more of the flavor of the first yet it seems to me that you would do better to do the second, making it explicit that the report records the judgment of the particular people in the Yale committee but is based on the discussions with the panels. This would seem to me to have two very great advantages. In the first place it avoids committing any of the panel members or giving the impression that they are responsible for or in agreement with what was said. In the second place it makes it easier to be firm and to avoid wishy-washy statements.

This choice ties in very much with the question you ask about publication. If the report takes the second form suggested, there is no need to ask panel members whether they approve of publication but only whether they are willing to have their names listed as having been participants. If the report takes the first form, I am at a loss to know what my approval signifies. I think it would be useful to publish the report. I agree generally with it but I would not want to be listed in the capacity of a co-author or as one who lists himself as fully responsible for it.

My second main question about the present report is whether it would not gain greatly by being less hypothetical and arid. What I have in mind is that there are no references at all in the report as to what is happening at any other institution except in the vaguest terms. Yet almost every suggestion that is made is now in effect in one or more institutions. The report, I think, would gain greatly in effectiveness and persuasiveness if it referred to the experiments or named institutions as evidence of the feasibility of the various changes and of their desirability. The outstanding example, it seems to me, is materially the suggestions with respect to the thesis which is here put forward as if it were an untried suggestion, whereas our experience—and for all I know that of other institutions—gives very relevant evidence on both its feasibility and desirability.

I hope you will pardon me for commenting so fully on questions not really covered in your letter. I am sure that the report of your committee will have an important influence on the course of graduate training in economics.

Sincerely yours,

Milton Friedman

MF:pan

Source: Hoover Institution Archives. Milton Friedman Papers, Box 32, Folder 16 “Correspondence: Ruggles, Richard”.

Image Source:  Richard Ruggles, noted economic statistician, dies. Yale Bulletin & Calendar Vol. 29, No. 23 (March 23, 2001).

 

 

Categories
Chicago Courses Suggested Reading Syllabus

Chicago. Hayek’s Seminar “Equality and Justice”, 1950-51

 

When Friedrich Hayek came to the University of Chicago in 1950, he organized a faculty seminar to run for two consecutive quarters on the subject “Equality and Justice”. A draft of his letter announcing the seminar as well as its schedule and suggested bibliography are transcribed below. I have added in brackets any handwritten additions found in this material that otherwise was typed.

_____________________

Hayek’s Seminar Announcement to Colleagues

To

Walter J. Blum ✓

Ronald S. Crane ✓

Aaron Director ✓

Milton Friedman ✓

Robert M. Hutchins ✓

Harry Kalven Jr. ✓

Wilber C. Katz ✓

Frank H. Knight ✓

Edward H. Levi ✓

Hans J. Morgenthau ✓

Charner M. Perry ✓

Max Rheinstein ✓

Leo Strauss ✓

W. Allen Wallis ✓

 [handwritten additions]

Peter H. von Blanckenhagen [sp?] ✓

Daniel J. Boorstin ✓

John U. Nef ✓

Robert Redfield ✓

Edw. Shils

Yves R. Simon ✓

James R. Smith ✓

Abram L. Harris

 

October 23, 1950

            The first meeting of the seminar on “Equality and Justice”, which I shall be conducting for the Committee on Social Thought, will be held on Wednesday, October 25, at S.S.302. For the following few weeks the seminar will be held on alternate Wednesdays at the same time and place (alternating with Mr. T.S. Elliot’s seminar) and from November 22 on each Wednesday during the Fall, Winter, and Spring quarters.

A provisional program for the discussions of the seminar is enclosed.

It is my hope that the seminar can be conducted with the participation of members of all the various departments concerned, particularly a number of lawyers, economists, and philosophers, and that the discussion will be to some extent a iscussion among faculty members in front of the students, though of course without excluding the students from active participation. My belated arrival in Chicago has unfortunately made it impossible for me to discuss this plan with all those I had hoped personally to invite, and I can thus only at this very late moment inform you of the plan and say that I very much hope that you will be sufficiently interested to take part and that I shall be greatly honored by your presence.

(F.A.Hayek)

_____________________

COMMITTEE ON SOCIAL THOUGHT
Seminar
on
Equality and Justice

Provisional Outline of Program (Oct. 18, 1950)

1) Oct. 25

 Introduction: The problems and outline of program [Hayek]

A. Historical

2) Nov. 8

 The Classical and Scholastic Tradition: Commutative and Distributive Justice [Simons]

3) Nov. 22

[3a) Nov. 29]

 The Egalitarianism of the American and French Revolutions [Boorstin & Simon]
[Rousseau, Kant & the Utilitarians (Bentham & J. S. Mill)]

B. Systemic

(a) Ethical (The Morals of Equality)

4)

 The Meanings of Equality [Hayek]

5)

 Value Judgments and the Analysis of Conflicts of Value Tests of Moral Rules [What is the Test of a desirable Society? Shils]

6)

 Does Justice Presuppose Abstract Principles? The “feeling of right” and the Logic of the Law

(b) Legal (The practice of equality)

7)

 Equality before the law, the Rule of Law (Government of Laws not of Men), Certainty of the Law

8)

 Safeguards: Rights of Men, Division of Powers, Due Process

9)

 The Continental Tradition of the “Rechtsstaat” [, “Verwaltungsrecht”, Common Law, Case Law, (illegible phrase)     Rheinstein]

10)

 Natural Justice and Positive Law [Strauss]

(c) Economic (The Effects of Equality)

11)

 “Equality of Opportunity,” “Equal Starting Point” [Equality & Education]

12)

[12a]

 Equality and Incentives, “Equal Pay for Equal Work”
[Equal Bargaining Power]
“Equalising Wages”
[(I.L.O.) F.E.P.C., “Parity”, Whole Produce of Labour, Equality and Progress, Technological Change, Capital Formation]

13)

 “Just Price” [Knight]

14)

 Equality and the Family, Inheritance, Effects of Property on Inequality, “Unearned Income”

15)

 Progressive Taxation

16)

 Equality and Trade Unionism (Corporativism) [Director]

17)

 The Contribution of Welfare Economics [Friedman]

18)

 International Aspects of Equality, esp. Migration.

[Property and Inheritance]

[1) Reward & Merit]

_____________________

COMMITTEE ON SOCIAL THOUGHT
SEMINAR ON “EQUALITY AND JUSTICE”
(1950-51)

Bibliography

Lord Acton, The History of Liberty, 1904.
C. Bouglé, Les idées égalitaires, 1899.
E. F. Carrit, “Liberty and Equality,” Law Quarterly Review, 56, 1940.
F. S. Cohen, Ethical Systems and Legal Ideals, 1933.
A. V. Dicey, Relation between Law and Public Opinion, 1904.
F. D. Graham, Social Goals and Economic Institutions, 1945.
J. B. S. Haldane, The Inequality of Man.
F. A. Hayek, The Road to Serfdom, 1944 (esp. Chapt. VI).
“          Individualism and Economic Order, 1948 (First Essay)
“          “Scientism and the Study of Society,” Economica, 1942-44.
A. Huxley, Proper Studies, (Essay on Equality).
F. H. Knight, The Ethics of Competition, 1936.
“          Freedom and Reform, 1948.
J. S. Mill, Liberty, 1859.
“          Utilitarianism. 1863. (Chapt. on Justice).
Roscoe Pound, Spirit of the Common Law, 1921.
H. Sidgwick, Elements of Politics.
H. C. Simons, Economic Policy for a Free Society, 1948.
T. V. Smith, The American Philosophy of Equality, 1927.
J. F. Stephen, Liberty, Equality and Fraternity, 1874.
J. Stone, The Province and Function of Law, 1950.
R. H. Tawney, Equality, 1931.
A. de Tocqueville, Democracy in America, 1835.
“          Ancient Regime and the Revolution, 1856.
A. T. Williams, The Concept of Equality in the Writings of Rousseau, Bentham and Kant, 1907.
D. M. Wright, Democracy and Progress, 1948.

_____________________

COMMITTEE ON SOCIAL THOUGHT
Seminar on “Equality and Justice”
(Wednesday 8-10 p.m., SS 302)

PART II: Winter Quarter 1951

Provisional Date

Jan. 3

1. THE MEANINGS OF EQUALITY
D. Thompson, Equality, Cambridge University Press, 1949
R. H. Tawney, Equality, 3rd ed. London (Allen & Unwin) 1938
H. Rashdall, The Theory of Good and Evil, Oxford 1907, vol. I, ch. VIII
E. Brunner, Justice and the Social Order, New York (Harper) 1945
C. Bouglé, Les idées égalitaires, Paris 1899
G. Roffenstein, “Das soziologische Problem der Gleichheit”, Schmoller’s Jahrbuch, XLV, 1921

Jan. 17

2. VALUE JUDGMENTS AND SCIENCE. ANALYSIS OF CONFLICTS OF VALUE. TESTS OF DESIRABILITY OF SOCIAL SYSTEMS.
Max Weber, On the Methodology of the Social Sciences, ed. E. Shils, 1949.
Jan. 24

3. PRINCIPLES AND MORAL JUDGMENT. MORAL SENSE AND THE “FEELING OF JUSTICE”
J. H. Muirhead, Rule and End in Morals, Oxford 1932
J. Bonar, Moral Sense, London (Allen & Unwin) 1930
E. Riezler, Das Rechtsgefühl, Berlin (Walter de Gruyter) 1921
G. Ryle, “Knowing how and knowing that”, Proceed. Aristot. Soc., N.S. 46, 1945
Jan. 31 4. THE ETHICS OF SOCIALISM AND OF LIBERALISM
J. A. Hobson, Economics and Ethics (D. C. Heath) 1929
W. B. Gallie, “Liberal Morality and Socialist Morality”, Philosophy, XXIV, 1949
F. Tönnies, “Ethik und Sozialismus”, Archiv für Sozialwissenschaft, 1905
K. Pearson, The Moral Basis of Socialism. London 1885
Feb. 7 5. NATURAL JUSTICE AND POSITIVE LAW. CONCEPTS OF LAW AND JUSTICE
M. R. Cohen, Law and Social Order, 1933
J. Maritain, The Rights of Man and Natural Law, New York 1943
F. R. Bienenfeld, Rediscovery of Justice 1947
L. Duguit, Manuel de Droit Constitutionel, 1923
G. del Vecchio, La Guistizia, 1924 (trsl. Die Gerechtigkeit, Basel 1940)
F. S. Cohen, Ethical Systems and Legal Ideas, 1933
Feb. 21 6. THE “RULE OF LAW” (“RECHTSSTAAT”, “ETAT DU DROIT”, “STATO DI DIRITTO”) EQUALITY BEFORE THE LAW. GENERALITY OF THE LAW (“RELEVANT DISTINCTIONS”). CERTAINTY OF THE LAW
J. Stone, The Province and Function of Law, Harvard Univ. Press 1950
W. I. Jennings, The Law and the Constitution, 3rd ed. 1943
W. Friedman, Legal Theory, 2nd ed. London 1949
F. A. Hayek, The Road to Serfdom, 1944
A. V. Dicey, Law of the Constitution, 7th ed. 1908
R. Gneist, Der Rechsstaat, Berlin 1872
F. Darmstaedter, Grenzen der Wirksamkeit des Rechtsstaates, 1930
F. Battaglia, “Stato Etico e Stato di Diritto”, Rivista Internationale di Filosofia di Diritto, XVII
G. Leibholz, Die Gleichheit vor dem Gesetz, Berlin 1925
C. A. Emge, “Sicherheit und Gerechtigkeit”, Abh. d. preuss. Akad. d. Wissenschaften, Phil.-Hist. Klasse, 1940, No. 9
H. W. R. Wadem, “The Concept of Legal Certainty”, Modern Law Review, IV, 1941
Feb. 28 LAW AND THE COURTS: DIVISION OF POWERS, APPLICATION AND CREATION OF THE LAW. DUE PROCESS
Literature as under 5 and 6
Mar. 7 8. ADMINISTRATION AND DISCRETION
J. Dickinson, Administrative Justice and the Supremacy of the Law, Harvard University Press, 1927
W. Robson, Justice and Administrative Law
J. Roland Pennock, Administration and the Rule of Law, New York, Farrar & Rinehart 1941

 

Source:  Hoover Institution Archives. Papers of Friedrich A. von Hayek. Box 112, Folder 16.

Image Source: University of Chicago Photographic Archive, apf1-02719, Special Collections Research Center, University of Chicago Library.

Categories
Chicago Courses Suggested Reading Syllabus

Chicago. Henry Simons’ last course. Fiscal Policy, 1946

Simons

 

 

Henry Simons’ course “Economics of Fiscal Policy” was introduced into the Chicago public finance offerings in the Winter Quarter of 1934-35 and was taught by him in all but two years before his suicide that happened immediately after the Spring Quarter of 1946 had concluded.

From Norman M. Kaplan’s student notes for Simon’s last course I have transcribed the list of course readings and the rough outline of the course discussed in the first two sessions.

________________________

Course Announcement

[Economics] 361. Economics of Fiscal Policy.—A study of fiscal practices with reference to (1) booms and depressions (budget-balancing), (2) distribution of income (inequality), and (3) composition of the national income (incidence). The latter weeks will be devoted to study of particular kinds of taxes, especial attention being given to problems of income taxation. Prerequisite: Economics 209 and 230 or equivalent. Spring: MWF 11; (joint meetings with Law 510e for a part of the Quarter, additional hours to be arranged); Simons.

Source: University of Chicago. Announcements: The College and the Divisions, Sessions of 1945-1946. Vol. XLV, No. 7 (June 15, 1945), p. 219.

________________________

 

Readings and Course Outline According to Kaplan Notes

March 27 [1946]

  1. Readings:

Hansen & Perloff, State and Local Finance in the National Economy (preferred). Chs. 9, 10, 11, 12 first, then parts I & II.

or Hansen, Fiscal Policy and Business Cycles

McGill, The Impact of Federal Tax (Latter part of course)

Simons, Personal Income Taxation (Latter part of course)

“Rules vs. Authority in Monetary Policy”, Simons

“On Debt Policy”, Simons

“The Beveridge Program, an Unsympathetic Interpretation” [optional], Simons

Public Finance and Full Employment, Fed. Res. Board publication on series of post-war studies. (Important for 1st part of course, especially 1st 2 papers, then Robinson and final paper.)

Part II of Groves, Financing Government, for those using this as a survey course.

Read portions of Beveridge book which have to do with fiscal policy, part I, part IV, appendices B & C. esp. sec. 4 of B and Append. C.

 

March 29 [1946]

  1. Topical Sequence of course

A. First part: monetary fiscal budgetary policy (Last part of Hansen, Fed. Res. Bd., Rules vs. Authority, Beveridge stuff[?])

B. Then justice, incidence, etc. of taxation

1. Justice of taxation Ch. 1 of Simons Personal Income Taxation 

2. Incidence of taxation Brown, Econ. of Taxation

 

Source: University of Chicago Archives. Norman M. Kaplan Papers, Box 1, Folder 6.

Image Source: University of Chicago Photographic Archive, apf1-07613, Special Collections Research Center, University of Chicago Library.

Categories
Chicago Exam Questions

Chicago. Final Examinations for International Economics. Metzler, 1947-48

 

The University of Chicago’s intermediate economics course “International Economic Relations”, Economics 270, dropped its international trade component to go full international macro (i.e. exchange rates and balance of payments) with Lloyd A. Metzler’s appointment. The course description for 1947-48 did not reflect the change in emphasis (the updated description is found below in the course description for 1948-49)  but it is clear from the examination questions for both the summer quarters of 1947 and 1948 transcribed for this posting that the  syllabus for the Autumn quarter of 1949 must have been essentially the same for those earlier courses.

_______________________________

[Course Description, 1948-1949]

[Economics] 270. INTERNATIONAL ECONOMICS. The nature of international payments and receipts; foreign trade and the banking system. The gold standard in the interwar period. The breakdown of the gold standard and the period of fluctuating exchange rates. Exchange controls, clearing agreements and payments agreements. The second world war and the foreign exchange markets. The position of the International Monetary Fund and the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development in the present world economy. Prereq: Econ 209, 230 [Intermediate Economic Theory, Introduction to Money and Banking, respectively], or equiv. Sum: TuThS 11; Win: MWF 9:30; Metzler.

 

Source: University of Chicago. Announcements, Volume XLVIII, Number 4: The College and the Divisions, Sessions of 1948-1949, May 25, 1948, p. 249.

_____________________

 

Econ. 270
Exam Summer 1947

Answer one question from each part

I

  1. Discuss the role played by either long-term or short-term capital movements in the U. S. balance of payments during the inter-war period.
  2. Discuss the origin of the Sterling area, indication [sic] what distinguished this area from other currency systems, and how the system operated before the war.
  3. Distinguish between intended and unintended neutralization of gold movements, and indicate what bearing neutralization had on the operation of the gold standard in the inter-war years.

II

  1. Show how the German exchange clearing system led to bilateral trade, and discuss the disadvantages of bilateralism.
  2. Present a program of your own for international currency reform, and show how your program would solve some of the problems of the interwar period.
  3. Evaluate a system of flexible exchange rates as a means of adjusting balance of payments.

 

Economics 270
Summer 1948

Answer two questions, including I

  1. About two weeks ago, the New Zealand government announced an appreciation of its currency, from £N.Z. 1.25 = £1.00 sterling to £N.Y. 1.00 = £1.00 sterling. Bearing in mind the following information, discuss the probable reasons for and probable consequences of this move.

1937

 1946 Dec. 1947

May 1948
Gold Holdings (millions of dollars)

23

 23 23

23
Foreign exchange Holdings (millions of dollars)

127

 365 300

348
Currency and Deposits (millions of N.Z. pounds)

47

 168 175

187
Cost of Living Index

100

 123 133

135
Wholesale Prices:

Home goods

100

 132 156

156

Import-type goods

100

 171 191

194
Index of Export Prices

100

 141 193

199
Total value of trade (millions of N.Z. [pounds]

Exports

65

 98 128*

—

Imports

56

 72 128*

—

*all of 1947

  1. “The balance of payments on current accounts determines the amount of the net change in a country’s claims against other countries. The capital accounts simply show the form in which these claims are held.” Discuss carefully, using any numerical examples you deem appropriate.
  2. Write a brief essay on the relation of currency values to the prospects for European recovery.

 

 

Source: Duke University. David M. Rubenstein Rare Book & Manuscript Library. Lloyd Appleton Metzler Papers, Box 9, Folder “Course Exams 270-271”.

Source Image: “From family album, taken while Lloyd Metzler was a student at Harvard.”
“Lloyd A. Metzler” by Margiemetz – Own work. Licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0 via Commons.

Categories
Bibliography Chicago Courses

Chicago. Mathematical Economics. Henry Schultz’s Reading List, 1935

 

 

For an earlier posting I transcribed a core list of references for the course on mathematical economics, Economics 402, taught by Henry Schultz at the University of Chicago during the Spring quarter, 1932. That list was found in the papers of Albert G. Hart in the Columbia University archives. A virtually identical core list of references was found in George Stigler’s papers at the University of Chicago archives in a folder labeled “1935 Univ. of Chicago Class notes”. Only a few handwritten additions differ between the two copies.

The “Stigler edition” of the Economics 402 list of references probably comes from the 1935 autumn quarter. There are two reasons to think this besides simply trusting the accuracy of the folder’s label. Stigler’s preliminary examinations for the doctorate must have been taken in May 1935 according to a mimeographed copy of the examination schedules located in this same folder. Mathematical economics was considered a specialized field at the time and was unlikely to have been the subject of the preliminary examination in theory;  further, one of the handwritten additions was a reference to an August 1935 paper by Henry Schultz. 

The value-added of today’s transcription of the “Stigler edition” compared to the earlier “Hart edition“ is that I have gone to great lengths to provide links to the overwhelming majority of items below. The links to jstor.org are free only to those with access to a research library’s e-resource, but a surprising amount of the stuff is out there and downloadable for free. The posting with the “Hart edition” also includes Schultz’s reference lists for Cost Theory and the Theory of Monopolistic Competition that were not found in the Stigler papers.

I suspect that Stigler only audited Economics 402 because we find only about five pages of his own notes for the course in that folder. In comparison for Schultz’s other course, Theory and Measurement of Demand (Economics 405), one finds about forty pages of notes.

There is one problem with one row in the table of references that I have highlighted in boldface blue. The dates given for the Journal of the American Statistical Association are not associated with papers written by Henry L. Moore nor do any of the papers in the issues noted appear to have papers of particular interest for mathematical economics expect perhaps that by Karl G. Karsten: The Theory of Quadrature in Economics. JASA March, 1924 [Link to jstor.org]. Henry L. Moore’s list of publications only shows a single March 1922 publication in JASA, but many papers in QJE.

___________________

 

Course Announcements, 1935-36, 1932-33 

  1. Mathematical Economics.— Prerequisite: Economics 301 [Price and Distribution Theory], a reading knowledge of French, and consent of the instructor. Registration for a course or a double course. Autumn, SCHULTZ.

Source: University of Chicago. Announcements, The College and the Divisions for the Sessions of 1935-36, p. 297

 

  1. Mathematical Economics.—A study of economic theory from the point of view of assumptions, range of problems, methods and tools, and validity and utility of results under present conditions. Consideration is given to the problem of “circular reasoning” in price theory, to the advantages and limitations of the mathematical approach, and to the possibility of developing a “statistical complement” to pure theory. Special attention is paid to the problem of price determination and to the mathematical theory of production. Readings will be assigned on special topics in the works of Cournot, Jevons, Walras, Pareto, Marshall, Moore, and others; and the class meetings will be devoted chiefly to discussion. Opportunity for investigation of particular problems is offered the student. Prerequisite: Economics 301 [Price and Distribution Theory], a reading knowledge of French, and consent of the instructor. Registration may be made for one or more courses each quarter. Summer, Autumn, SCHULTZ.

Source: University of Chicago. Announcements, Arts, Literature and Science, vol. XXXII, February 25, 1932, no. 12 (for the sessions of 1932-33), p. 355.

________________________________

 

[Autumn Quarter 1935]
REFERENCES FOR ECON. 402

Mathematical Economics
By
Henry Schultz
University of Chicago

Amoroso, Luigi Lezioni di Economia Matematica
Le Equazioni Differenziali della Dinamica Economica—in Giornale degli Economisti, February, 1929. [Link to jstor.org]
La Curva Statica di Offerta—Giornale degli Economisti, January, 1930. [Link to jstor.org]  [English translation: Link to jstor.org]
Annals of the American Academy of Political & Social Science July, 1892 (Paper by Walras) [Link to jstor.org]
Auspitz, Rudolf
Lieben, Richard		 Recherches sur la théorie du prix [Volume I, Volume II]
Bentham, Jeremy Principles of Morals and Legislation [Volume I, Volume II]
Bertolasi, Ellen Quittner Die Stellung der Lausanner Schule in der Grenznutzenlehre—in Arch. f. Sozialw. u. Sozialpol., 64. Band, Heft 1, August, 1930, pp. 16-44.
Black, J. D. [Introduction to] Production Economics [New York, 1926]
Bonar, James Philosophy and Political Economy
Bousquet, G. H. Essai sur l’évolution de la Pensée économique [1927]
Précis de sociologie d’àpres Vilfredo Pareto [Paris, 1925]
Vilfredo Pareto: Sa vie et son oeuvre
Boven, Pierre Les applications mathématiques à l’économie politique [Lausanne, 1912].
Bowley, A. L. Mathematical Groundwork of Economics
Bridgman, P. W. The Logic of Modern Physics
Cassel, Gustav Theory of Social Economy
Fundamental Thoughts on Economics
Cournot, A. A. The Mathematical Theory of Wealth
Théorie des richesses
Cunynghame, H. Geometrical Political Economy
Del Vecchio, Gustavo La Dinamica Economica Di H. L. Moore—in Giornale degli Economisti, Anno XLV, Giugno, 1930, VIII, No. 6, pp. 545-554. [link to jstor.org]
Dicey Law and Opinion in England
Edgeworth, F. Y. Mathematical Psychics
Papers relating to Political Economy [Volume  I; Volume II; Volume III.]
Evans, G. C. Mathematical Introduction to Economics
Fisher, Irving Mathematical Investigations in the Theory of Value and Prices,—in Transactions of the Connecticut Academy of Arts & Sciences (9-10) pp. 1-125.
[Ricci, Umberto] Elasticità dei bisogni, della domanda e dell’offerta. Giornale degli Economisti Aug. & Oct., 1924.

Link to Part I in jstor.org; link to Part II in jstor.org.
Halévy, Élie La formation du radicalism philosophique
[Vol. I. La Jeunesse de Bentham, 1901; Vol. II. L’Évolution de la Doctrine Utilitaire de 1789 a 1815, 1901; Vol. III. Le Radialisme Philosophique, 1904.]
Hobson, E. W. The Domain of Natural Science
Jevons, W. S. Theory of Political Economy [Third edition]
Journal of the American Statistical Association Dec. 1923; March & Dec. 1924; Dec. 1926
(Papers by H. L. Moore)
Journal of Political Economy
Oct. & Dec. 1925; April 1927		 Schultz, Henry. The Statistical Law of Demand as Illustrated by the Demand for Sugar, Part I. J.P.E. (Oct., 1925), pp. 481-504. [Link to jstor.org]

Schultz, Henry. The Statistical Law of Demand as Illustrated by the Demand for Sugar, Part II. J.P.E. (Dec., 1925, pp. 577-631. [Link to jstor.org]
Appendix I: Comments on Professor Lehfeldt’s Method of Deriving the Elasticity of Demand for Wheat [Link to jstor.org].
Appendix II: Tables [Link to jstor.org].

Ezekiel, Mordecai. A Statistical Examination of Factors Related to Lamb Prices. J.P.E. (Apr., 1927), pp. 233-260. [Link to jstor.org]
Marshall, Alfred Principles of Economics [Eight edition]
Industry and Trade
Money, Credit and Commerce
Moore, Henry L. Laws of Wages
Economic Cycles
Forecasting the Yield & the Price of Cotton
Generating Economic Cycles
Synthetic Economics
Moret, Jacques L’emploi des mathématiques en économie politique
Nichol, A. J. Partial Monopoly and Price Leadership (Privately published)

[cf. “A Re-appraisal of Cournot’s Theory of Duopoly Price”, Journal of Political Economy (Feb. 1934), pp. 80-105. Link to jstor.org]
Pantaleoni, M. Pure Economics
Pareto, Vilfredo Manuel d’économie politique
Cours d’économie politique [Volume 1, Volume 2]
Anwendung der Mathematik auf National Ökonomie, —in Encycl. Mathematisch, Wissenschaft, I G 2, pp. 1094-1170
Économie mathématique, —in Encyclopédie des sciences mathématique, Tome I, vol. 4 (Fascicule 4, pp. 590-640)
The New Theories of Economics, —in Journ. Polit.Econ., Sept. 1897 [Link to jstor.org]
Traité de sociologie générale [Volume I; Volume II]
Pearson, Karl Grammar of Science
Pietri-Tonelli, Alfonso Traité d’économie rationelle
[H. Gamier translation from 3rd Italian edition. Paris, 1927]
Pigou, Alfred [sic, Arthur] Economics of Welfare
[4th edition, 1920.  ]
Planck, Max A Survey of Physics
Poincaré, Henri Foundations of Science
Political Science Quarterly
(Paper by Mitchell)		 Vol. XXXIII, June, 1918, No. 2, pp. 164-5 [Part II of “Bentham’s Felicific Calculus”. Link to jstor.org]
Quarterly Journal of Economics
Jan. 1898; Aug. 1925; Nov. 1926; March[sic] 1927		 Irving Fisher. “Cournot and Mathematical Economics (Jan., 1898), pp. 119-138. [Link to jstor.org]. And “Appendix: Notes on Cournot’s Mathematics”, pp. 238-244. [Link to jstor.org]

Holbrook Working “The Statistical Determination of Demand Curves” (August, 1925), pp. 503-543. [Link to jstor.org]

Henry Ludwell Moore. “A Theory of Economic Oscillations” (Nov., 1926), pp. 1-29. [Link to jstor.org]

E. J. Working. “What Do Statistical ‘Demand Curves’ Show?” (Feb., 1927, pp. 212-235. [Link to jstor.org]
Revue d’histoire des doctrines économique et sociales 1910 (Article by Antonelli on Léon Walras) [Link to jstor.org]
Revue d’histoire économique et sociale
(1924), pp. 225-43		 G. H. Bousquet. “Vilfredo Pareto — Le Développement et la Signification Historique de son Œuvre”, Vol. 12, No. 2.  [Link to jstor.org]
Revue de metaphysique et de morale (13) 1905 (Section on Cournot) [pp. 291-543]
Ricci, Umberto Die statistischen Gesetze des Gleichgewichtes nach Henry Schultz—in Zeitschrift für Nationalökonomie, January, 1931
Schultz, Henry [Handwritten addition] Interrelation of Demand, Income and Price J.P.E. Aug. 1935 [Link to jstor.org]

Statistical Laws of Demand and Supply […with Special Application to Sugar. University of Chicago Press, 1938]
Marginal Productivity and the General Pricing Process, —Journ. Polit. Econ., Oct. 1929.  [Link to jstor.org]
Der Sinn der statistischen Nachfragekurven
[Vol 10 of Frankfurter Gesellschaft für Konjunkturforschung, 1939[Handwritten addition] Interrelations of Demand J.P. E. Aug. 1933 [Link to jstor.org]
Vinci, Felice “Sui Fondamenti della Dinamica Economica”, Rivista Italiana di Statistica, Anno II, No. 3, Luglio-Settembre, 1930—VIII, pp. 222-268
Walras, Léon Économie politique appliquée
Économie sociale
Éléments d’économie politique
Wicksteed, Philip The Alphabet of Economic Science
Common Sense of Political Economy
Stephen, Leslie The [English] Utilitarians
[Vol. I. Jeremy Bentham; Vol. II. James Mill; Vol. III. John Stuart Mill (1900). ]
Zawadzki, Wl. Les mathématiques appliquées à l’économie politique
Zeuthen, F. L. Problems of Monopoly and Economic Welfare

________________________________

Specific References to Pareto by Schultz

A ten-page handout prepared by Schultz for Economics 402 “General Laws of Individual Demand and Supply (after Pareto)” includes much more specific references to Pareto’s works, the first of which is a new item.

Vilfredo Pareto

  • Giornale degli Economisti, 1892, pp. 119-157, 1893, pp. 279-321.

[Considerazioni Sui Principii Fondamentali Dell’Economia Politica Pura

jstor link to May 1892, Volume 4, pp. 389-420;
jstor link to June 1892, Volume 4, pp. 485-512;
jstor.org link to August 1892, Volume 5, pp. 119-157;
jstor.org link to January 1893, Volume 6, pp. 1-37;
jstor.org link to October 1893, Volume 7, pp. 279-321.

English translation: Considerations on the Fundamental Principles of Pure Political Economy (edited by Roberto Marchionatti and Fiorenzo Mornati), London: Routledge, 2007.

 

Source: University of Chicago Archives. Papers of George Stigler. Addenda, Box 33. Folder “1935 University of Chicago Class Notes”.

Image Source: Henry Schultz (detail from group picture of the Cowles Commission’s 4th Annual Research Conference on Economics and Statistics at Colorado Springs, July 20, 1938)

Categories
Chicago Economists

Chicago. Simons urges the recruitment of Milton Friedman, 1945

Simons

 

 

The atomic bomb dropped on Nagasaki was less than two weeks history and the declaration of the surrender of Imperial Japan only five days old. Nothing says “back to business as usual” at the university better than active lobbying on behalf of one’s preferred candidate for an upcoming vacancy, as we see in the following memo for the 33 year old Milton Friedman written by Henry C. Simons to the Chicago economics department chair, Simeon E. Leland. The copy of this memo comes from the President’s Office at the University of Chicago. Simons’ grand strategy was to seamlessly replace the triad Lange-Knight-Mints with his own dream team of Friedman-Stigler-Hart. He feared that outsiders to the department might be tempted to appoint some convex combination of New Dealer Rexford Tugwell and trust-bustin’ George W. Stocking Sr., economists of the institutional persuasion who were swimming on the edges of the mainstream of the time.

Economics in the Rear-view Mirror also has transcribed excerpts from an earlier 77 page (!) memorandum (10 April, 1945) to President Robert M. Hutchins from Simeon E. Leland entitled “Postwar Plans of the Department of Economics–A Wide Variety of Observations and Suggestions All Intended To Be Helpful in Improving the State of the University”.

____________________________

 

Henry C. Simons Urges his Department Chair to Recruit Milton Friedman

August 20, 1945

To: Simeon E. Leland           Economics

From: Henry C. Simons        Economics

 

If Lange is leaving, we should go after Milton Friedman immediately.

It is a hard choice between Friedman and Stigler. We should tell the administration that we want them both (they would work together excellently, each improving what the other did), Friedman to replace Lange, Stigler to replace Knight and to be with us well ahead of Knight’s retirement. We might also say that we want Hart to replace Mints at Mints’s retirement, and also to be with us in advance, but are happy to have him financed by C.E.D. [Committee for Economic Development] for the present.

Yntema evidently is thinking of getting Friedman shortly. We should exploit this possibility. Milton has now a great yen for a University post and would probably turn down an offer from C.E.D., even at much financial sacrifice, if a good academic post were the alternative (as it might be, at Minnesota or elsewhere). He is rather footloose—not anxious to go back either to the Treasury or to the National Bureau. We should grab him now, offering temporary joint appointment with C.E.D. and full-time, permanent appointment when he is through with C.E.D.

Friedman is young, flexible, and available potentially for a wide variety of assignments. He is a first-rate economic theorist, economic statistician, and mathematical economist, and is intensely interested over the whole range of economic policy. He has been outstanding in every organization where he has worked—here with Henry Schultz, at the National Bureau, at the Treasury, and now recently in the Army project at Columbia. Moreover, he is one of those rare cases of able young men who have enjoyed large experience and responsibility in Washington without being at all disqualified thereby for academic work.

The obvious long-term arrangement is a joint appointment with the Cowles Commission. Marschak would, I’m sure, like to have him; and Milton would like to settle into a major project of empirical research, e.g., on enterprise size and productional efficiency. Bartky may be expected strongly to support the appointment, for its strengthening of the University in statistics. The School of Business could well use Milton, to give its few advanced courses in statistics, if Yntema continues to price himself out of the University. Moreover, Milton probably would be delighted to work partly in the Law School, and be extremely useful there. In the Department, he would be available for statistics, mathematical economics, pure economic theory, taxation, and almost any field where we might need additional courses.

If University officers want outside testimony, they could get it from Randolph Paul or Roy Blough (as regards the Treasury), from Arthur F. Burns (National Bureau), from Abraham Wald, Allen Wallis, and Barky (as regards war research), and from Bunn at Wisconsin (as regards possible usefulness to the Law School)—not to mention George Stigler, Harold Groves, Wesley Mitchell, Simon Kuznets, Erwin Griswold, et al.

Perhaps the best thing about Milton, apart from his technical abilities, is his capacity for working as part of a team. He is the gregarious kind of intellectual, anxious to try out all his ideas on his colleagues and to have them reciprocate. He would doubtless be worth his whole salary, if he neither taught nor published, simply for his contribution to other people’s work and to the Department group as a whole. But he is also intensely interested in teaching, and far too industrious not to publish extensively. Our problem would be not that of finding ways to use him but that of keeping him from trying too many tasks and, especially, of leaving him enough time for his own research.

It would, I think, be good policy and good tactics to submit a major program of appointments, including [Frank W.] Fetter, Friedman, Stigler, Hart, and an economic historian (Innis or Hamilton), in the hope of getting them all within a few years, some on joint appointments with, notably, the Cowles Commission, the Law School, the School of Business (?) and, temporarily, the C.E.D. Research Staff. Such a program would serve to protect us against administration pressure for less good appointments (e.g.,  Stocking [George Ward Stocking, Sr., Ph.D. Columbia, 1925]), and from Hutchins’s alleged complaint that, while he wanted to consider major appointments in economics, the Department simply would not make recommendations. We should, in any case, err on the side of asking for more appointments than we can immediately get. Otherwise, available funds may go largely elsewhere—e.g., into Tugwell-like, lame-duck appointments, and into Industrial Relations, Agricultural Economics, and other ancillary enterprises, at the expense of the central field of economics.

There is, I trust, substantial agreement within the Department, on the men mentioned above. This fact, if fact it is, should be made unmistakably clear to the administration.

Incidentally, if we are going to explore possibilities of an appointment in American economic history (and I’m probably alone in opposing), we should do so only in co-operation with the History Department and with (from the outset) joint plans for joint appointments.

 

HCS-w

 

Source: University of Chicago Archives. Office of the President. Hutchins Administration. Records. Box 73, Folder “Economics Dept., 1943-45”.

Image Source: University of Chicago Photographic Archive, apf1-07613, Special Collections Research Center, University of Chicago Library.

Categories
Berkeley Carnegie Institute of Technology Chicago Colorado Columbia Cornell Duke Economics Programs Economist Market Harvard Illinois Indiana Iowa Johns Hopkins M.I.T. Michigan Michigan State Minnesota North Carolina Northwestern NYU Ohio State Pennsylvania Princeton Purdue Rochester Stanford Texas Undergraduate Vanderbilt Wisconsin Yale

Size distribution of graduate and undergraduate programs in economics. U.S., 1963-65

 

 

These are the last two statistical tables from the so-called “Cartel” summary report from December 1965 of leading economics departments in the U.S. intended to provide orientation for departmental chairpersons in salary negotiations. Today’s posting gives the numbers of undergraduate and graduate majors reported by 29 departments. 

Earlier postings gave the distribution for full-professors, the distribution for associate professors, and the distribution for assistant professors across departments. Two previous postings have the actual distributions for entering salaries for new Ph.D.’s for 1964-65 and 1965-66 and the anticipated range of salary offers for new Ph.D.’s for 1966-67. Those first five reports from The Cartel provide distributions of median or average incomes or ranges of salary offers by ranks across departments. Table 6c from the summary report that gives the salary distributions by rank for 335 professors, 143 associate professors and 185 assistant professors from all 27 departments.

Refer to the first posting in this series of tables for information about the compiler Professor Francis Boddy of the University of Minnesota and a list of the 30 departments belonging to the Chairmen’s Group.

____________________

 

TABLE 7c
Graduate majors in Economics – 29 institutions:

 

1963-64 1964-65 1965-66
(Estimate)
300 and over 2 2

1

200-299

 0 0 2
150-199 3 4

5

100-149

 6 5 6
80-99 4 4

3

60-79

 5 7 5
40-59 6 4

4

20-39

 2 1 0
1-19 1 1

1
Number of departments reporting:

29

 28

27
Total number of students:

2,963

 3,057

3,118

____________________

 

TABLE 8C
Undergraduate majors in Economics – 29 institutions

 

1963-64 1964-65
300 and over 4

4

250-299

 1 1
200-249 3

2

150-199

 4 6
100-149 8

5

80-99

 1 1
60-79 2

1

40-59

 2 3
20-39 1

1

1-19

 1

1
Number of departments reporting:

27

25
Total number of students:

4,550

4,312

 

Source: Johns Hopkins University. The Ferdinand Hamburger, Jr. Archives. Department of Political Economy, Series 5, Box 6, Folder 2 “Statistical Information”.

Image Source: quick meme website.

Categories
Berkeley Carnegie Institute of Technology Chicago Colorado Columbia Cornell Duke Economist Market Harvard Illinois Indiana Iowa Johns Hopkins M.I.T. Michigan Michigan State Minnesota North Carolina Northwestern NYU Ohio State Pennsylvania Princeton Purdue Rochester Salaries Stanford Texas Vanderbilt Virginia Wisconsin Yale

Economics Professors’ Salaries by Rank (6), 1965-66

 

 

This is the sixth table from the so-called “Cartel” summary report from December 1965 of 9-10 month salaries paid in U.S. economics departments. In the previous five tables The Cartel reports median or average incomes or ranges of salary offers by ranks across departments. In this posting we have Table 6c from the summary report that gives the salary distributions by rank for 335 professors, 143 associate professors and 185 assistant professors from all 27 departments.

Earlier postings gave the distribution for full-professors, the distribution for associate professors, and the distribution for assistant professors across departments. Two previous postings have the actual distributions for entering salaries for new Ph.D.’s for 1964-65 and 1965-66 and the anticipated range of salary offers for new Ph.D.’s for 1966-67.

Refer to the first posting in this series of tables for information about the compiler Professor Francis Boddy of the University of Minnesota and a list of the 30 departments belonging to the Chairmen’s Group.

Using the BLS web CPI Inflation calculator, one can inflate nominal levels (say for December 1965, the date of the report) to April 2017 using a factor of 7.69.

 

____________________

TABLE 6c

Salaries of Economists (9-10 month, academic year, 1965-66) in 27 of the 29 Departments of Economics (The Cartel):
N = Number of Persons

MID POINT OF RANGE PROFESSORS ASSOCIATE PROFESSORS ASSISTANT PROFESSORS
26,750/and over 2
26,500 0
26,000 2
25,500 1
25,000 8
24,500 0
24,000 4
23,500 2
23,000 7
22,500 2
22,000 12
21,500 7
21,000 10
20,500 5
2,0000 22
19,500 10
19,000 13
18,500 11
18,000 24
17,500 8
17,000 19
16,500 23
16,000 27
15,500 20 1 0
15,000 21 2 1
14,500 14 2 0
14,000 22 10 0
13,500 10 12 0
13,000 10 13 1
12,500 7 18 2
12,000 6 20 1
11,500 3 21 7
11,000 3 13 9
10,500 0 18 18
10,000 0 9 35
9,750 1 9
9,500 2 28
9,250 1 11
9,000 0 24
8,750 0 8
8,500 0 13
8,250 2
8,000 15
7,750 1
N=335 N=143 N=185

 

Source: Johns Hopkins University. The Ferdinand Hamburger, Jr. Archives. Department of Political Economy, Series 5, Box 6, Folder 2 “Statistical Information”.

Image Source:  “Me and my partner” by C. J. Taylor on cover of Punch, December 25, 1889. Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Division Washington, D.C.